March 2011

CBS Proposes New Model for TV Planning and Buying Based on Viewer Behavior and Attitudes Instead Age and Sex

Age and sex don't matter when it comes to TV ad effectiveness, said CBS Corp. Chief Research Officer David Poltrack, who has teamed with Nielsen to create what he called a historic move to replace demographics with a new model for TV planning and buying, based on viewer behavior and attitudes.

The proposed model is a better predictor of what people buy and what makes them buy than demographics ever were, Poltrack said in a speech to the Advertising Research Foundation's Re:Think 2011 conference in New York. A growing amount of data that matches audience measurement with purchase information shows that using demographics to target commercials is "essentially invalid," he said, "resulting in a misallocation of television advertising investments." Although CBS paid for the extensive research and analysis used to create the new model, the data and analytics surrounding it will be available to all Nielsen clients, including CBS rivals, Poltrack said, "in the spirit of open source." Various parts of Nielsen pitched in, including recently acquired consulting firm Cambridge Group and Nielsen Catalina Solutions, a joint venture that combines data from Nielsen's TV, set-top box, consumer and online panels with Catalina Marketing's shopper loyalty-card purchase data. CBS is also running a series of experiments with advertisers to fine-tune the system, Poltrack said. CBS purchased Nielsen Catalina data for 20 categories in health and beauty, household, pet and food products and has studied 15 of them in depth so far. The data confirmed what other smaller studies have shown in the past, according to Mr. Poltrack: "There is no link, none, between the age of the specified demographic delivery of the campaign and the sales generated by that campaign."

Broadcast Losing Ground, Cable Gains

Broadcast ratings erosion continues to tug at the big networks -- down double-digit percentages, while cable networks are up slightly -- through roughly three-quarters of the 2010-2011 TV season.

Fox is again the leader among the big four broadcast networks in the key 18-49 audience -- making a rapid improvement from its disastrous start in the fall, when it was down double-digit percentages versus a year ago. Fox is averaging around 4.6 million adult 18-49 viewers, now down 6%; CBS is at 3.9 million, off 10%; ABC is at 3.202 also, losing 10%; and NBC is right behind ABC at 3.198, off 17%. Overall, the picture isn't a winning one for the broadcast networks. Season-to-date, the big four networks are down 11% in 18-49 viewers (to 13.5 million) and off 16% in the first quarter 2011 (to 13.4 million). Meanwhile, ad-supported cable is up 3% to a collective 18.5 rating among 18-49 viewers during the period. A year ago -- for the season -- ad-supported cable was down 1% at a 17.7 combined 18-49 viewer rating versus 2009 for the season.

Kerry Privacy Bill Could Impose 'Major' Obligations On Ad Networks

A draft of privacy legislation floated by Sens John Kerry (D-MA) and John McCain (R-AZ) would give the Federal Trade Commission authority to craft privacy regulations and to operate a Web site where consumers can opt out of online behavioral targeting.

The potential measure would generally require companies to notify consumers about the collection of their data, and also allow them to opt out of having data used by third parties, like ad networks. In addition to the obligation to notify consumers about data collection and allow opt-outs, the bill would require companies to give consumers access to data about them. Further, most companies that collect data would be required to attempt to minimize the amount of information collected and retained. The bill would apply to a broad swath of data about consumers, including not only names and phone numbers but also email addresses, if they include names, customer numbers held in cookies and unique device identifiers. In its current form, the bill requires companies to obtain users' explicit opt-in consent before collecting "sensitive" data, defined expansively as personal information that "if lost, compromised, or disclosed without authorization could result in harm to an individual."

Paying For Anything On The Internet? No One Is Really Buying -- Or Selling It -- Too Well Yet

According to Forrester Research, when European consumers were asked what Internet stuff they paid for in 2010, just 4% said video content. This is down from 6% in 2009. When it come to premium TV shows, the numbers are worse -- with just 3% paying for this content in 2010, down from 5% in 2009. But future prospects appear better. When asked in 2009 what digital content they would pay for in the future, 18% said digital video -- a percentage that dropped to17% in 2010. The percentage of consumers who said they'd pay for TV show In the future remained the same for both years:14% Forrester believes demand is there -- but TV operators are reluctant to move. This doesn't bode well for TV in the U.S. Those hungry traditional media/entertainment company executives -- Chase Carey of News Corp; Jeff Bewkes of Time Warner; and Bob Iger of Walt Disney -- are pushing for TV Everywhere efforts -- that, in effect, means, have consumers pay for content for those not already paying for it through certified video retailers.

E-government fund could be cut, group warns

Federal transparency programs that include Data.gov and USASpending.gov would have their budgets drop sharply during the next six months under the fiscal 2011 budget packages in Congress.

The General Services Administration is requesting $34 million for the Electronic Government Fund for fiscal 2012, the same level as fiscal 2010. But that $34 million would be reduced to $2 million for the remainder of the fiscal year under two separate pieces of fiscal 2011 budget legislation, according to the Sunlight Foundation, a transparency advocacy group. According to the White House’s IT Dashboard, Data.gov has cost $8.3 million and USASpending.gov has cost $13.3 million.
According to the GSA’s spending request for fiscal 2012, the program areas paid for by the e-government fund are:
Federal cloud computing services, including infrastructure as a service, software as a service and platform as a service.
The Citizens Engagement Platform and Web 2.0 account provide tools for public dialogue, new media and engagement, including a Citizen Services Delivery Dashboard and Challenge.gov.
Implementation of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, including USASpending.gov and several online dashboards.
The Efficient Federal Workforce initiative to support collaboration platforms, including Fedspace.gov.
Accessible and transparent government information through Data.gov.

No Sharing Allowed

[Commentary] As convenient as they are, I've long worried about the many ways in which e-book purveyors restrict readers' rights.

You can't resell the books you purchase for the Amazon Kindle, and you can't read them on most other e-readers. We also don't really own e-books in the same way we own paperbacks -- Amazon has gone as far as remotely deleting titles from users' devices.

Amazon's restrictions are misguided. They're bad for readers, they're bad for authors, they're bad for e-book stores, and they may even be bad for publishers. Of course, the ways in which our rights get chipped away as we move away from analog content is a constant worry in the digital age. I'm not the first pundit to note how terrible it is that we can no longer share, resell, or modify the books, movies, and video games that we get over the Internet. But the sharing restrictions that publishers have placed on e-books strike me as particularly stringent, a rule that underlines how we'll mourn physical media when it goes away. Under Amazon's and Barnes & Noble's sharing model, you're allowed to loan out a book just once, for two weeks, and while it's loaned out, you don't have access to it. The fact that publishers can't stomach even this milquetoast model should have us scared for a future in which physical media loses its primacy.

Google launches Think Quarterly

Google has published its first edition of Think Quarterly, a 64-page online magazine/book that comes from the company’s UK & Ireland offices. The magazine is geared toward Google partners and advertisers. The first issue is dedicated to “data” as a topic and features a series of articles written by guest authors and Google employees. Hal Varian, the company’s chief economist, writes about “data obesity” while Googler Tony Fagan writes about data in relation to search advertising.

How China and Others Are Altering Web Traffic

Google leveled new charges against China this week, claiming that the country has interfered with some citizens' access to the Internet giant's Gmail service, disguising the interference as technical glitches. Security experts say that China is most likely using invisible intermediary servers, or "transparent proxies," to intercept and relay network messages while rapidly modifying the contents of those communications. This makes it possible to block e-mail messages while making it appear as if Gmail is malfunctioning. Companies regularly use transparent proxies to filter employees' Web access. Some ISPs have also used the technique to replace regular Web advertisements with those of their own. But it's becoming increasingly common for governments to use transparent proxies to censor and track dissidents and protestors. All traffic from a certain network is forced through the proxy, allowing communications to be monitored and modified on the fly. Intercepting and relaying traffic is known as a "man in the middle" attack.

New Agendas for Media Literacy

Let's assume that media education is already embedded in the learning environment in a ubiquitous way. In the past, media educators sought consensus by isolating the theories, pedagogies, key concepts and skill sets. We debated discipline boundaries, integration strategies and the aims and purposes for media education. We worked for universal, networked access. We saw the integration of media education language into standards-based education models and policy documents as a victory for its acceptance and inclusion. At least by now, most people assume that literacy in a global, mobile, digital world implies more than access to digital tools or the simple mastery of orality and alphabetic texts. And so perhaps what we are really wrestling with here is a different animal entirely, that is, the general malaise and anxiety about the role of free public education in society and our responsibility as media literacy educators to contribute to its redesign and sustainability. In the process, I want to suggest a more open and holistic view of media education as a key support for the redesign of public education.

Defunding Public Media Would Stifle Digital Innovation

Political analysts are dismissing the House vote forbidding public radio stations to spend federal dollars on content (HR 1076) as little more than red meat for the Republican base. But even if not a single dollar ends up being stripped from public broadcasting appropriations, the current battle threatens to strangle innovation in a sector that was just gaining new media sea legs. Given the toxic tone of the debate over the last few weeks, neither public media leaders nor station staff are eager to go on the record with their concerns. But behind the scenes, they fret that the most vulnerable dollars are those funding cross-platform, mobile and participatory public media experiments.

Benton

Search