CTV: Can we start calling it TV yet?

Long-standing buying methods have put an artificial wedge between “traditional” and “connected” TV, resulting in a fragmented approach.

The industry should move on from multiple confusing definitions of connected TV (CTV) and revert back to the basics of TV campaigns — reaching mass audiences and building brands associated with prestigious, credible, trusted content. When investing media spend, our collective focus should be on the quality of the content that is being watched and less on buying mechanisms driven by preference, convenience or even agendas.

The obsession with IDs is yet another reason for this proliferation: “These platforms will take this ID, so this TV is in. But this TV platform won’t, so this one is out — we’ll have to put this in some other bucket.” Viewers don’t pick how they watch TV based on the compatibility of ID solutions; they pick how they watch TV for one reason: it’s simply how they prefer to watch it.

In European territories, it’s of utmost importance to think outside the preferred pipelines and be flexible about data application to scale campaigns to the necessary audiences. If we keep trying to buy stubbornly on our own terms, we will be forever stuck buying a slither of the full TV opportunity and neglecting all the evidence of how content is actually being consumed on TV.

At the end of the day, it’s all TV to the viewer — and the data will always tell the truth on viewer behaviour, even if it’s inconvenient. Content and reputable sources of that content will keep the quality of TV that advertisers crave for their brands intact.

It’s all TV

The biggest CTV providers in Europe include broadcasters (both broadcaster VOD and internet protocol linear), subscriber VOD (becoming advertiser-funded VOD) publishers and “YouTube used as TV”.

Compared with the declining cable industry in the US, broadcasters are still a major TV player in Europe, running “CTV” for almost 20 years now through BVOD services coupled up with traditional linear. Newer free ad-supported TV (FAST) and app expansion is happening as well, but in a much more conservative way than in the US.

Additionally, YouTube is consistently the number one TV app in most European countries — and its popularity is only growing among younger generations.

With so many entry points for a consumer to watch TV, we need to think about how all these elements fit into a TV plan, rather than splitting it up into TV platform silos.

Quality content is still key

In the UK, principles set out by Barb or Thinkbox can help us refine our CTV strategy.

While YouTube is on TV, we know that not all content found on YouTube upholds Barb’s “fit for TV” framework. When utilising YouTube as part of TV campaigns, advertisers need to select content from sources that uphold TV standards.

Whether someone watches a global superstar’s official music video premiere via Samsung TV Plus or the YouTube app on TV, that content remains the same, being enjoyed in its full TV screen glory. We can’t control how consumers watch TV so, from an advertising perspective, we can’t get hung up on which platform or service was used.

Sure, isolating this content might come at a cost — but if you were buying a luxury car, wouldn’t you want to know it’s been made with high-quality materials rather than hoping that it was?

As an industry, we need to bear in mind that, like the luxury car, cost and resource go into making premium content. If it all becomes a race to the bottom, it adds up to an unsustainable future where high-quality, trusted, brand-building TV content is eroded away and only short-term marketing rules.

The evidence of why we should continue to isolate quality for certain parts of campaigns is plain to see in research conducted by the likes of Thinkbox, Les Binet and Peter Field or Flood & Partners. The long-term equity of brands is at stake if these warnings are not taken heed of.

Brand-building and DRTV principles

With CTV, advertisers are erroneously jumping past all the well-documented principles of TV and just “making it a digital buy”. Targeting just because we can results in significant limits on what we can actually accomplish in the long term.

While IDs and attribution have their uses, we can’t forget that mass awareness is always needed for long-term brand equity.

Viewers using YouTube to consume TV today are not experiencing the same enduring brand-growing, trust-building campaign of old. With lighter broadcast viewers, they are just experiencing direct response TV (DRTV) without the bigger context.

Innovations breaking down TV tech silos

You may ask: “But what if I buy premium publisher content on YouTube and it overlaps with the rest of my campaign?”

But your TV campaign has always overlapped with your YouTube campaign.

As the TV branding campaign has always overlapped with DRTV, the same applies here, just with a different mechanism of delivery. We are simply converging the paths and meeting viewers the way they want to consume their favourite content, while maintaining standards.

Whatever the TV environment, these differing campaigns work hand in hand and make the full funnel more effective.

Campaign measurement is becoming easier to pull together, too, with new solutions available to show the reach of differing TV campaigns compared with your wider plans. AudienceProject and Nielsen, for example, are now able to dedupe versus other TV delivery endpoints (inclusive of YouTube), allowing one reach curve no matter how viewers decide to watch.

A content-led, unfragmented approach

To truly scale the TV opportunity, a new way of buying needs to be put into place.

You can apply data and target to your heart’s content at the bottom of the funnel, but only an unfragmented, content-led approach will enable mass reach and preserve the wide-reaching strengths of TV: quality, safe, transparent, trusted content to build brands for longevity.

So can we please start buying TV the way it’s now watched?

Richard Brant is senior director, advanced TV, strategy and partnerships, at Vevo