Media is an investment advertisers make in an attempt to get their commercials seen.
An advertiser can look at all his different media buys as his investment portfolio.
Each investment by the advertiser offers the viewer the opportunity to involve themselves in the commercial.
Sometimes they will. Sometimes they won’t.
What determines the actual involvement per opportunity is twofold. Is the commercial relevant to that particular viewer at that particular time? And, is the commercial interesting/entertaining/enticing enough to get the viewer to want to spend time with it?
Let’s call this time spent the involvement per opportunity.
So what the advertiser really has going for him are two portfolios. An investment portfolio and an involvement portfolio.
Currently, most of the attention is on the investment portfolio. How can an advertiser get the most bang for his buck through reach and frequency?
There is little interest in the involvement portfolio – whether people actually paid any attention to the commercial when it ran.
In other words, advertisers judge their success based on opportunity rather than reality. But just like in the stock market, opportunity is no way to predict eventual results.
Today advertisers can measure the amount of view duration (involvement) their commercials receive from viewers. Is it safe to assume that the higher the involvement the better their media investments will be?
So instead of measuring how many viewers were exposed to the commercial and using that as precursor of success, why not start measuring how long viewers were involved with the commercial?
Without involving viewers in the commercial, it’s difficult to persuade them why one product is better than another.
Look at this way. An advertiser knows exactly how many impressions they will get for their $10M media investment.
What they should be asking is how much involvement did they receive for that same $10M.