The first night of iMedia’s Video Everywhere Summit was a mess – and that’s not because of the organizers. The mess was actually a welcome change to the norm at these types of things. The problem was the “norm” that the mess was illustrating. Vindico’s President, Matt Timothy, got everyone in the room to simultaneously throw “stress cubes” toward the front of the room near the beginning of his presentation. He didn’t have to ask twice and the amount of cubes that missed the garbage cans signified what the video model is for television advertising. In that model there’s not a real way to evaluate how many impressions were wasted (the many cubes on the floor) and how many hit their target (the few in the cans.) He then asked everyone to do the repeat the exercise, but this time the attendees were asked to throw them randomly around the room. This version exemplified what online video advertising impressions are like – with a lot of information going back and forth in two-way communication. The key is tapping into that information and formulating better ways to connect with people. All in, the example illustrated that there is so many ways we can slice the digital video distribution data pie, but there are too many people who are still looking for the cutter to slice it with.
Even with the additional data that can be culled from video campaigns – and the optimization that can come from that – the “norm” referred to above is that there is still a lot that is left on the table. Perhaps it’s because there is too much confusion about the data, or that clients and planners just don’t have the vision to see what’s possible. In many instances, we’re running into an issue of the chicken or the egg. We’re not trying things because the client or their agency doesn’t deliver creative executions that would effectively enable the research, or the vendors aren’t presenting examples of solutions to the challenges the clients might not even know they have.
Many brands or advertisers are still looking for the click-through as signifiers as success, but that doesn’t work completely in the realm of video. When you look at what companies like Vindico can do with the data, those who only look at click-through are just drinking the punch and not getting all they could be through digital video media. In the image above, the slide is showcasing the point that those who click-through the video (represented by gray blocks) are not interacting with the brand/content as strongly as those who visit the site within 30 days of viewing a banner (red blocks.) It’s not to say that click-throughs are bad, but they are only part of the picture. The straight click-through that might have really been an errant click while trying to close the unit result in much less interaction on the back-end. Again, this requires more knowledge on the client side and more education from the media agencies (and vendors) who are booking these media solutions.
Vindico is one of numerous video ad serving companies and they offer the support and knowledge to be able to optimize not only impressions and interaction but creative. In reality, the ad serving companies really need to become the de-facto educators for marketers and media planners about what the possibilities are. Whether through partnerships with creative vendors or just visionaries who can clearly convey what is possible, they need to be actively presenting solutions because we can’t just rely on clients or planners to package it the right way for success on their own.
The last slide of Matt’s deck had a few things of importance regarding buying video media. The one that stuck out to me was Storytelling Innovation. It makes perfect sense to me. Video is the strongest storytelling format. The digital platforms only increase those storytelling mechanics through interaction. I also see huge opportunities innovation, but am frustrated because we go back to the chicken or the egg conundrum. When I asked Matt in front of everyone to elaborate on those wonderful buzzwords – Storytelling Innovation – he did a little dance. I understand the dancing a bit because of client sensitivities in presenting specific examples. In the end, he squeezed out a little bit of the essence by talking about branching opportunities, iterative messaging and interactivity.
After the presentation, somebody came up to me and intimated that it isn’t the job of someone like Matt to provide the examples of Storytelling Innovation – that it was up to creative agencies or media planners or the clients themselves to do that. I whole-heartedly disagree. Even if there were some mapped out samples with fictitious products to prove some past successes or even dreamed ones, the examples have to be drawn out. Sadly, media planners are not built to envision those types of things and I would argue that even creatives and marketing executives don’t have a strong enough vision for matching technical capabilities with innovative storytelling.
With all of the successes that I have had in the past, I was only able to get them launched because the providers talked about possible solutions that led me to believe they could pull it off in partnership with my vendors. I was able to crystallize the stories (and the mechanics behind them) and sell them within the company because of that shared knowledge. If the providers don’t do a good enough job of laying the kernels of imagination and innovation in digital video media — hell, even just the basics of what can be tracked — we’ll all be destined to forever be collectively looking for that thing to slice the video pie with.