Notes from the new world of media measurement

Or what I learned at CIMM

I’ve spent the last two days at the Coalition for Innovation in Media Measurement’s annual summit in New York. The first thing to note is that this was a much bigger event than previous years. This is partly due to the energy that new MD Jon Watts has put into it, but also reflects the increasing importance of new media measurement.

So why do we need change? First up, TV viewing has changed beyond all recognition, with around 30% of TV ad spend already switched to CTV. The old panel based approaches aren’t considered relevant and this has made an opening for new entrants.

So what did I learn…?

1. The multi-currency world is here

After year’s of talk of multi-currency, it’s now finally happening. The Weather Channel has switched their measurement wholesale away from Nielsen to VideoAmp, and did their first data deliveries this week. The Weather Channel might not seem by the largest network, but the fact that they’ve switched everything over is signficant. That means getting all of the agencies holding groups signed up to transaction on VideoAmp, it means getting the data into MediaOcean and all the other planning tools, and as such it paves the way for future networks to switch away from he incumbent with little friction.

I’ll be interested to see how much Weather continues to transact on an age and gender basis. Historically, that’s all the currency could offer, but they should now be able to transact on much more granular audiences. If they see revenue growth based on better sales then I think it’s accelerate the transition.

2. The TV sector really wants transparency

The shade that has historically been thrown towards Nielsen has now shifted firmly to Google. Everyone seems supportive of Nielsen One, and Nielsen even previewed an integrated measurement solution with independent vendor EDO.

Google is now the new enemy, as the industry rallies around television itself, with the Video Advertising Bureau likening digital ad fraud to the global trade in cocaine. The industry wants transparency because it believes in advertising and wants to be able to play on an even playing field with Google and Meta.

Disappointingly, there were few brands calling out for transparency, or evening talking about moving dollars away from digital. I guess that would be a step too far in a world where the audience spends so much time on YouTube and Instagram.

3. Identity is going to be the next big thing

With Apple’s ever growing privacy crusade making it harder and harder to connect the dots digitally, the TV industry is working to build out it’s own identity spine so that brands can connect outcomes direct to impressions. While Google and Meta can rely on logged in users for much of the tracking, ISPs like Comcast can match the IP address back an individual, and seem determined to make this a key part of their advertising offering.

Others are getting in on the game, and CIMM has commissioned a study comparing the accuracy of different device vendors to a truth set. Results already look good enough to provide directional indicators of success, and we’ll have to wait to see if outcomes based measurement really becomes part of currency, or another front in TV’s war against digital.

4. We’ve got to have more than reach

Attention, Engagement, and Resonance were all features on the main stage. With alternative currency now mainstream, it seems like the next thing will about how to bring effectiveness measures into the transaction.

I’ve spent much of the last year working developing the Brand Effect Resonance Ratings at MarketCast and everything I can see in the data suggests that there’s something there that’s going to revolutionise the effectiveness of the advertising. Some content simply works better for advertising, and with the right metrics in place, advertisers are going to be able to get more bang for their buck, and content owners are going to able to invest more in the premium content we all know and love.

Seems like a win-win for the industry to me.