The only caveat is that advertisers want digital content providers to support this increase by demonstrating digital’s effectiveness in sales and branding.
How in the hell, may I ask, are digital content providers supposed to do that?
And, even more importantly, why are advertisers asking for this rather than verification of what’s truly important?
TV is not online. Their purposes are very different. Which means the metrics of success must be equally as different between the two platforms.
TV advertising is intrusive. Its purpose is to create awareness and demand for a brand. That’s why TV advertising needs to intrude.
Before the Internet, the only way to see if awareness and demand was created was through sales.
But today, practically everyone first goes online to find out more about the product before buying. The reason is this. While TV is where for advertisers reach out to consumers, online is where consumers reach out to advertisers.
If you believe this to be true, then what would be the key online metric that advertisers should be most concerned about?
Time spent with the brand and/or it’s advertising.
Because the more time the advertiser can get the consumer to spend with their brand online, the greater the chances of making a sale.
Create awareness on TV. Further interest and involvement online.
The result of both of these together is a sale.
Not individually. Together.
Impressions (TV) plus involvement (Online) = sales.
Which is why the type of online data advertisers should be asking content providers for is involvement data, measured as time spent.
Plug that into the formula above.
See if the result doesn’t change.
As long as advertisers keep measuring online the same way they measure TV, online will continue to be misunderstood and misused.
And, the result of that is easily to calculate.