NEW YORK: Marketers must set campaign expectations, agree on basic definitions and ensure they choose accredited measurement providers to help overcome ad viewability problems, according to the Advertising Research Foundation (ARF) and comScore.
Serge Matta, comScore's president/ceo, discussed this subject at the ARF's Audience Measurement 2015 conference.
And he referenced issues like the tagging of ads, along with how viewability is reported and billed, as considerations which need to be addressed.
Matta also drilled down into the definitional differences and quality indicators that marketers should tackle in this area.
"We all know the problem of 'viewability'," he continued. "If an ad is not seen, there are a lot of wasted dollars." (For more, including further recommendations for addressing this issue, read Warc's exclusive report: ARF/comScore offer best practices for "viewability".)
More specifically, Matta suggested, "billions" of dollars of ads are purchased by brands but never seen by the intended end user.
While the rapid advancement of the technological capabilities which support digital advertising led many industry specialists to assume overcoming such hurdles would be simple, that notion has been disproved.
"The question is, 'How do you fix it?' We all thought the solution was simple: if an ad wasn't seen, let's create technology that ensures that it can be seen. It can't be that hard," said Matta.
"But, guess what? It hasn't happened. And the solution is not simple."
The Media Rating Council (MRC), he further ventured, has done a "fantastic job" in accrediting media vendors.
"But the problem is that there are different standards of accreditation and not everybody is the same," he said. "We need to agree on the standards and use quality metrics."
Data sourced from Warc