There has been a significant amount of attention placed on the decline in NFL viewing this season. While there are many theories as to what has driven this outcome, we have reviewed data from Nielsen covering the first five weeks of the season to look at various sources of decline. Most importantly, we note that while total NFL game viewing is down by -14.6% per person this year vs. last, college football game viewing is essentially flat, and total viewing of TV from all sources is slightly up. This indicates that the decline is specific to the NFL.
Within viewing for the league’s games, we can further identify that declines are more pronounced among people in Blue Collar homes vs. people in White Collar homes, among people in lower income homes vs. higher income homes, and among homes with White heads of household vs. Black heads of household. However, we emphasize that most of the noticeable differences in segment-level declines we looked at are relatively marginal, typically not more than a few percentage points.
The trade press overflows with interesting predictions about the future of advertising.
But there's a problem.
Experts, marketing or otherwise, have an awful record of predictions. Philip Tetlock, a psychologist at the University of Pennsylvania, ran a 20-year study that analysed 82,361 forecasts from 284 experts. He found that their predictions were as likely to be wrong, as right. In his memorable phrase, the average pundit fared no better than 'a dart-throwing monkey'.
It's not just that these marketing predictions misguide us. There's also an opportunity cost. Our fixation with the future crowds out an interest in the past. Yet there is value in looking backwards to people who grappled with similar problem to ours.
So let's take a look at one current problem, turning data into insights, and look back to what we can learn from the 1940s. In particular, the experience of one man: Abraham Wald.
As the world around us changes at an incredible pace, you don't need to be a marketing genius to see that the relationships between people and brands are, changing. There has been an explosion in digital messaging, which has led to reduced attention, recall and emotional engagement. Where people once leant in to brand stories, it's now increasingly a case of talk to the hand.
At HeyHuman, we believe that this mind-set requires us to embrace science to a greater to degree as per the recent WARC article 'Creative Agencies Need to Tap Science'. But how can we do this?
With a world of information and entertainment at our fingertips, expectations of immediacy are higher than ever – but so too is the desire to connect with others. Social media is a powerful force for brand building, and one which is destined to become even more important in future.
A response to: Nissan is an Olympics brand winner
This guest blog is written by Richard Reid, who manages iris SPORT's consultancy and data offering in APAC.
The Olympic Games have closed for another four years and as is customary with all global sporting events, the marketing industry is rushing to award medals to sponsors, ambush marketers, and extended partners alike. The consensus seems to be that Nissan has taken gold this time, receiving praise for leveraging a multi-channel strategy to drive visibility and social engagement.
Recently, we undertook a project with a lovely market research agency to understand the evolving aspects of the industry and the agency's place in it. Readers of Paid Attention may remember that it contains a chapter entitled "Why all market research is wrong" but also that I didn't say market research wasn't useful. Rather, I said that people rarely know why they do what they do and don't predict their own behaviour well, so claimed responses shouldn't be taken at face value.
Programmatic is a term surrounded by noise. It goes along with persistent calls for more data, and more insight from across the industry. And along with that data, more management platforms - generally more stuff.
With this stuff has come the early association of poor-quality, irritating advertising that is so ineffective as to induce users to download ad-blockers. It feels a little out-of-control – too powerful for human hands. This is because humans, consumers, are deeply complicated and bring with them a set of constantly shifting needs and demands. In a sense, what has happened is that we've discovered our own complexities, and these show no sign of falling into line any time soon.
This is a guest post by Andrew Buckman, MD EMEA, OpenX
There was a time when inventory deals ended with a handshake that confirmed the deal was done, prices were agreed, and delivery would be assured. Then programmatic changed the game — replacing the handshake with programmatic platforms and swapping certainty for an opportunity to identify audiences, and bid in real-time.
Here at the Warc offices, we often gaze across the chasm at editorial – with their glasses and dual-monitors – and wonder what they actually do all day.
So, looking at Warc this last week, it was refreshing to see agencies confront their own chasm and bring strategy and creative together for each to consider the other’s purpose. And how Barbie has adopted a positioning that turned the all-American girl into a modern, cosmopolitan woman, leveraging the influence that comes with 99% global awareness.
In general, when talking about the significant increase in structured and unstructured human data and the technologies capturing it, we can take two angles; we can debate over why marketing should use it OR we can try to understand how marketing should use it to deliver sustainable value for brands and agencies.
Today, we see a lot of notes on why marketing should use data. We read that DMPs can help save and make us millions of dollars through frequency capping, retargeting and suppressions. We find that building advanced and ad-hoc segmentations by integrating offline and online data, we can achieve the ideal marketing mix to drive higher ROI.