vinyarb

Why is digital always the scapegoat?

Apr
05

Whenever I see articles like this, it makes me mad. Just because digital is measurable in more or less real time by the impression, doesn’t mean we need to guarantee the view of every impression before we get paid.

The article states that up to 30% of paid ads online are never seen because they occur below the fold (where users need to scroll down before being exposed to the banner).

As such, advertisers are demanding make-good impressions or not paying the full price for number of impressions booked.

If they are buying CPM, and publishers can prove that the impressions are indeed delivered, there should be no dispute.

If, one day, we have a report that says toilet flushing activity increased by 30% during commercial breaks, are advertisers going to the broadcaster and say they want to pay less because their precious TVCs were not seen by up to 30% of people who took toilet breaks? What about the other 10% who went to raid the fridge for an icy scoop of Chubby Hubby?

Why not only pay for each person who looks up to a billboard while crossing the street?

These measurement inefficiencies are everywhere, but why is digital solely taking on the bricks?

Digital advertising is already one of the most affordable in the marketing mix, and still they circle, like vultures, preying for compensation as we provide transparency.

There’s bound to be wastage in any marketing effort. Let’s all put our heads together and think of how best to engage and convert the 70% who has been exposed to the message instead.

Pissed off.

Marketing, Musings Comments Off on Why is digital always the scapegoat?

Comments

Comments are closed.