US Online Video Advertising Spending
Audience reactions decide?
“Audience reactions to online video advertising will ultimately shape how marketers and Web publishers use this medium, ” according to David Hallerman from eMarketer. Will ads run at all? Will anybody be watching them while running? Where will the projected $1,35 billion dollar for online video advertising in 2008 go, and how welcome will it be? Although eMarketer expects to see a steady growth ($775 million in 2007, $1,35 billion in 2008, $2,1 billion in 2009 and $3,1 billion in 2010), the uncertainties surrounding the impacts of online video ads, and, let’s admit, the purple fog cloaking the folks watching ads or brushing them aside hold back ‘growth of TV-like proportions.’
My impression is that, it is not really the “Audience reactions to online video advertising [that] will ultimately shape how marketers and Web publishers use this medium.” It is commonly known that good (i.e. funny, original and or highly customized) advertisements are truly appreciated, even nurtured with nostalgia. There are ads that grow to us, to our ‘world according to Garp.’
I think it is the Agencies reactions as opposed to Audience reactions. Besides the fear of the new (Oh my God, an audience with a mouth to open), there are simply not enough smart agencies currently on the market who could put together less uncertain, more targeted niche portfolios for their clients, bring results, and thus boost online video ad spending. It is still more comfortable to reach for the worn and smooth ring binder of TV channel lists on the shelf than opening the file of the newly researched niche sites for a particular client with a particular segment of their audience. Plus it is still more comfortable to use the old tools than having to educate the clients.
Highly irritating
But subjective musings aside, let’s go back to the eMarketer analysis: “Some research indicates that most people think Internet video advertising is highly irritating. According to the “Online Video Advertising” report from online advertising company Burst Media, 77.5% of those who watch video online find video ads intrusive, while 62.2% say they disrupt their Web surfing experience.” The way I see it, it is getting really hard to use bulk data in digital media, internet advertising, interactive experience stream, whatever names we are using. In statistical conclusions too. Were these videos relevant to the target groups rather than the general demographics? Even better, were these video ads really in line with the content itself?
BMW ad backfiring
Just one example that came to my mind suddenly: I like watching TED Talks, and I have accepted BMW sponsorship pre-roll and post-roll ads in the TED talks. But the other day, reacting to Chris Anderson’s invitation to watch a short presentation (on how William Kamkwamba as a 14-year-old had solved his parents’ energy needs in an African village with no electricity by building a windmill from used bike parts and other recycled materials based on a book illustration in the local library), I felt BMW’s ad not only intrusive but also very ironic - in light of the above mentioned Windmill/Recycling green-focused content. In the BMW’s ad, there is a wonderful waterfall in the opening scene, and then comes a robust and very aggressive BMW breaking through from behind the waterfall. Now this is what I call ‘intrusive’ as it is not customized to the content but comfortably bought in the bulk (all TED Talks, no exception). Asked in a survey? Yes, I would probably say - also for the sake of convenience and simplicity - that I do not really favor online video ads. But the truth is, there are hardly any solutions (pre/post-roll, click-to-play etc.) that build on the very content they should be in symbiosis with. ‘Highly irritating’ is not a conclusion for good. The judgement ‘Highly irritating’ says that what users get with the online content now/ at this moment/in 2006 and 2007 is highly irritating - TV spots injected into video content without much consideration. It is not a final conclusion for online video advertising in general, but a criticism of these days, and a rightful one.
In all probability, we will see a growing demand for good free content with quality customized ads (79% goes for free content, saying not willing to pay). Does it mean ‘if it is Dogs on skateboard, then skateboard ads?’ Maybe. African TED Talks with solar energy or biofuel ads? Sounds a lot better than a car ad, doesn’t it? It is not impossible, it just takes more man hours from the agencies, more online and up-to-date research, more contact with niche web sites, video content owners etc.
Video population
One more important bit: eMarketer projects that by 2011, 86.6% of the US Internet population will consume online video, up from 62.8% in 2006. As the ‘online video consumption’ is defined as ‘viewing some video on the web at least once a month’ (!), I find this percentage very underestimated, especially in light of the consumer electronic devices already in use, but coming along in bigger numbers, wider range. It may be wishful thinking, but I hope that older generations will also become more open to online video consumption, and find what they like - as more and more 50’s, 60’s, 70’s content is getting online, and more and more manufacturers realize that fewer and bigger buttons on clever gadgets have their potential buyers too.