How TV companies are helping us plan in the digital world
Jim Marshall says in our modern world of joined up media channels, integration is now key. What this means in practise is that campaigns cannot begin and end with just a TV ad…
How you should plan TV has come under the spotlight recently. C4’s Jonathan Allen has suggested that the SOCI (Share of Commercial Impacts) approach is no longer relevant. And Campaign has published a survey in the last couple of weeks, which tables the view of the TV companies on the planning approach of the major media agencies under the headings of: ‘Creative Thinking’, ‘Neutrality of Planning’, ‘Integrated Planning’ and ‘Embraces Partnerships’.
Call me an old cynic but, while both the Channel 4 protestations and the Campaign survey raise some interesting issues, I suspect the overall conclusions are driven more by their own commercial interests (and personal preferences) as opposed to a genuine desire for greater purity, neutrality and creativity in planning.
Never-the-less no-one can argue that the world of media is not changing fast and old planning techniques are becoming increasingly obsolete. However the TV companies should be careful what they wish for. Why? Because the real issue is not necessary how you go about planning TV (though that is part of it) but the bigger question now is how you go about planning across media.
A couple of weeks ago I attended the IPA Effectiveness Awards. OK, the evening is probably not as much fun as the Media Week Awards – though I can only say that anecdotally because I haven’t been invited to those awards for some years.
The IPA Effectiveness awards may be a slightly ‘dryer’ event (in all ways) but I tend to think that of all the awards it really should carry the most prestige because it gets to the heart of what our industry should be all about – that’s demonstrating Effective Ad Strategies, which I still believe is more important (slightly) than socialising at award events.
Furthermore, if you are a bit of a ‘saddo’ like me and spend some time reading the submissions, it starts to become clear how the media are being selected and planned is changing.
For example, in 1990 the IPA Effectiveness winners were on average using just two media channels, in 2000 it increased to slightly over four, but in 2010 it had moved up to over nine. So not only do we now live in a multi-media, multi-channel and multi platform world of media, but this is being increasingly reflected in the way that the most effective campaigns are approaching their communication strategies.
Arguably, the current set of challenges is nothing new. In 1759, Dr Johnson said: “Advertisements are now so numerous that they are very negligently perused”. This may have been sour grapes on his part, because he (like me) hadn’t been invited to the Media Week Awards, but he had also identified that even in the 18th century it was necessary to engage and involve consumers.
In our modern world of joined up media channels integration is now key. What this means in practise is that campaigns cannot begin and end with just say a TV ad – having seen the ad, consumers want to know more about it, they want to comment on it, discuss it and get other people’s views, and they will often want to interact with it and have the opportunity of buying it.
What is new is that digital has and continues to change the whole world of media and advertising. Where previously the media were structured and utilised in a linear and often ‘siloed’ fashion, they are now merging and overlapping.
This means that the old boundaries between media are fast disappearing and, most importantly, people’s media behaviour is also changing as they are able to dip in and dip out of the chosen media on an increasingly discretionary basis.
So the challenge for the media planner today is to adopt a far more multi-media/multi-platform approach, but use and leverage them most effectively individually and in combination. The IPA Award winning entries demonstrated how this is already being done successfully.
So where does this all sit with the comments and views emanating from TV companies?
Firstly, I’m not trying to suggest that other media channels should replace TV. There is no doubt that TV is still the main ‘gateway’ into the world of multi-platform communications for advertisers. But I’m not sure some of the TV companies quite recognise the importance of the world beyond their own channels, platforms and partnership opportunities. (In fairness I know the excellent and progressive Thinkbox does recognise this and they were one of the main sponsors of the IPA Effectiveness awards).
Secondly, there is something of an irony when a TV company starts suggesting that agencies should look beyond SOCI planning, when commercial TV has been so obsessed with trading on the basis of share for so long. In fact at best it’s ironic; at worst it’s intensely irritating to be ‘lectured’ in this way.
And finally, they should all check out the IPA Effectiveness winners – there’s some good stuff in the submissions and they continue to show the effectiveness and value of TV.
(Incidentally, I have to confess that some of the themes I have expressed here have been ‘lifted’ from a book that Hamish Pringle and I have recently co-authored on UK Media. Spending Advertising Money in the Digital Age – Navigating the Media Flo is published on December 3rd and available at a very reasonable price from Amazon and better book shops.)
Writers unblocked presents: Marshall and Pringle
Learn how to understand the complex media landscape in order to build business at the launch of a new book by Aegis Media’s Jim Marshall and 23red’s Hamish Pringle, followed by an industry panel session.
30/11/2011
www.ipa.co.uk/Content/Spending-Advertising-Money-in-the-Digital-Age