ANA

Hidden Fees.

41
Shares
Share with your friends










Submit

Hidden FeesSo the ANA just dropped the other shoe.  But it looks like it’s falling right on the toes of the marketers themselves.

Last month in this space I posted “End of Days,” about the scathing 58-page report the ANA commissioned and released on the bad behavior and lack of transparency across ad agencies.  Now comes the second phase of the report, with a title that had to be written by a committee:  “Media Transparency: Prescriptions, Principles, and Processes for Advertisers.”  Since the name of the report sounds like such a snooze, let me sum it all up quickly:

#caveatemptor – let the buyer beware.

This week’s Drift is proudly underwritten by AppNexus. The AppNexus Publisher Suite helps maximize monetization for Publishers today with tomorrow’s technology through integrated, intelligent, and open ad serving and programmatic selling solutions.

The inescapable conclusion here is that it’s up to the marketers themselves to police what they’re paying for and what they’re getting.  As AdExchanger put it so succinctly, “While advertisers believe their agencies are obliged to act in their best interests, agencies largely see their duties within the scope of a contract.” In other words, you can forget all that “partner” bullshit: the agency is running a business and does not infer a fiduciary responsibility to the customer.

The inclusion and emphasis on “fiduciary” is mine, and it’s an intentional bridge to the currently-broken relationship between consumers and financial advisers.  In case you missed it, national treasure John Oliver served up a breathtaking analysis of the hidden fees that are loaded into the typical investor relationship on HBO’s “Last Week Tonight.”  Most consumers wrongly infer that their financial analyst (or financial adviser or financial consultant or wealth manager or…there are a bunch of these) has a fiduciary duty to act in the investors best interests.  But when you read the fine print, only a very select and legally explicit subset of these advisers do.  It’s up to the consumer to ask hard questions, never assume anything, and ultimately take responsibility for what they are buying.

And so it is with marketers.  Who is going to help those marketers buy, inspect and verify the true and valuable audiences in which they’re investing their shareholders money…now that’s another story.  Will it be the same agencies and buying groups they savaged just four weeks ago?  Or is there an opportunity for publishers, technology and service companies to step into the void?  The answer may characterize what the buying of media looks like for at least the next decade.

41
Shares
Share with your friends










Submit

End of Days.

107
Shares
Share with your friends










Submit

End of DaysThe leading advertiser organization in the world – the ANA — just issued a 58-page report accusing its ad agency “partners” of everything from shady buying practices to kickbacks to conflict of interest.  The ad agencies’ own trade group – the 4As – has naturally cried foul, arguing that they should have been fully involved in the investigation all along (not unlike having the defense team sit on a grand jury).  But the whole food fight about whether the report was fair or accurate or should have named names just distracts us from the big truth at its core:  The entire premise of the media agency has timed out.

It’s being argued by agency defenders that the ANA’s motive is money and control;  that advertisers are trying to squeeze even more blood from the empty stone of agency margins, and that advertiser procurement practices and policies have been destructive to the advertiser/agency ‘partnership.’  That may well be true, but think about this:  would the ANA have even considered such a drastic and destructive step if advertisers hadn’t already pretty much given up on the media agency?  The media agency problem isn’t the K2 report.  The problem is relevance and time.  The problem is rust.

This week’s Drift is proudly underwritten by Krux. Krux helps more than 180 of the world’s leading media companies and marketers grow revenue and deepen consumer engagement through more relevant, more valuable content, commerce, and media experiences. Industry analysts have repeatedly named Krux a leader and visionary in the data management space, citing its agility, innovation, and independence. Download the reports today to learn more.

The simple truth is that the media agency is a transactional intermediary in an age where transactions have already been digitized and power and control have shifted from the intermediary to the transacting parties.  Travel booking once exclusively belonged to the travel agent; now it’s almost exclusively a direct transaction between the traveler and the carrier or hotel.  There are a hundred more examples of intermediaries being marginalized.  And the media agency position today has the unmistakable feel of a late stage disintegration.

Marketers, publishers, media companies and technologists are all innovating; often for the better, sometimes for the worse, but always with remarkable speed.  The media agency is increasingly seen as a high-priced toll collector who’s adding time and cost but not value to the trip.  A good friend of mine who’s been on the inside of the agency/client relationship argues that the media agency will now and forever more be in a state of perpetual review… yet another sign that the jig is up.

Group M’s Rob Norman writes persuasively about how his company is in a state of massive reinvention; that its investments and partnerships make it a fundamentally different kind of company and change the value equation.  Rob may well be right:  the ultimate spawn of WPP/GroupM/Xaxis may well be successful.  It just won’t be a media agency.  All that’s left for that model are more reviews, continued assault on margins and less relevance.

And rust.

107
Shares
Share with your friends










Submit

More on Myths and Measurement.

11
Shares
Share with your friends










Submit

OK, so last week’s post (“The Myth of Digital Measurement“) proved two things beyond any doubt:  (1) people who care about digital measurement apparently read The Drift, and (2) many of them didn’t care for the flurry of hyperbole and metaphor I loosed on the topic. So it seems fitting to revisit the subject and add a little depth and perspective.

First, long-time collaborator and measurement gladiator Rex Briggs led of his reply post with “Yes, Doug, you are nuts.”  And it only went downhill from there.  It seems the very association of measurement and mythology is something of a third rail in quant circles. (Who knew?)   Clearly digital measurement, in and of itself, is not a myth.  It’s there, we keep score based on it, and lots of smart people have put lots of time into it.  It’s the idea that a uniform approach to measurement — in and of itself — will make the difference that’s mythical.

The Drift is proudly underwritten this week by PubMatic,which empowers publishers with one holistic platform to sell advertising more intelligently.

Which brings me to my next round of calls and e-mails.  In discussions with the Interactive Advertising Bureau late last week, I got schooled on the “Making Measurement Make Sense” (3MS) initiative, on which the IAB is collaborating with the ANA and the 4As.  The whole thing is based on a set of guiding principles and — you guessed it — is aimed at creating a uniform approach to measurement.  I’ll let you follow the links here to learn more about this initiative (and also extend a standing invitation to the IAB to guest-blog on the subject here).  But I’m going to take the opportunity now to both more fully explain the nuance of my position while also underscoring some of its core principles.

First, is it a good thing that the IAB, ANA and 4As are getting together on this?  Unequivocally yes.  At a time when online video numbers keep breaking the ceiling and digital companies are lining up behind audience measurement, creating  a lingua franca that makes traditional buyers more comfortable certainly can only help.  While I’m still not on the “holy grail of a unified GRP” bandwagon, I don’t believe that’s what this initiative is about.  I also don’t think it even has to completely “succeed” in order for digital media’s position to improve.  So put me on Team IAB on this one, and let’s drive a stake through the heart of click-base attribution once and for all.

However….

Let’s remember that first and foremost The Drift is written for sellers and sales leaders.  And my advice to them in this matter is also unequivocal:  If you wait around for the rising tide of uniform measurement to raise your boat, you will be left high and dry.  It is still your job to innovate, push the boundaries of value creation and account for it all through an impressionistic mix of sources and approaches.  The 3MS initiative may help reset the baseline for how we count stuff, but the seller — and to some extent the agency and client — will continue to measure value in a much more interpretive way.

I also believe I’m hardly alone in thinking this way. It’s why all the great digital measurement players — including Marketing Evolution, Rex Briggs’ firm — are all developing a broad range of tools and talents to help tackle the larger job of value description.  And that’s a job that — like digital media itself — is permanently dynamic.

11
Shares
Share with your friends










Submit