Thursday, January 8, 2026

VAB Pushes Broader Guarantees Based on Households, Persons 2+

 

VAB Pushes Broader Guarantees Based on Households, Persons 2+

TV advertising trade association the Video Advertising Bureau (VAB) is recommending a shift to broader viewership guarantees, amid concerns over data stability for niche audiences, driven by declining linear TV ratings.

The VAB is guiding brands and TV networks to agree to audience guarantees based either on households or persons two years and older -- and dropping specific demographic-age guarantees such as 18-49 and 25-54.

The VAB says this guidance should go into effect immediately for current, near-term scatter market deals -- as well as the upcoming TV upfront marketplace that begins in early June and continues through the summer.

Brands begin to secure inventory through upfront advertising deals for the TV season starting in September and running though August of the following year.

“With 2026 buyers and sellers having such precision targeting insights refined so deeply on behaviors and identity that so surpass partial age/sex groupings, those aggregations seem outmoded and artificial,” says Sean Cunningham, chief executive office/president of the VAB.

Although making guarantees across wider audiences provides stability, Cunningham adds that brands can then use all the advanced targeting that comes with their first-party focused too

In addition, the VAB says, this will help evaluating with more of an apples-to-apples comparisons when brands make more cross platforms media buys.

This recommended change is occurring as linear TV networks -- broadcast and cable -- continue to lose audiences to alternative digital media channels, especially streaming platforms.

For some time now, Cunningham has been highly critical of Nielsen, pushing the measurement company to update its process to reflect new digitally focused fragmented viewing habits, especially coming from streaming, to offer more granular, transparent data for advertisers.

Late last year, he heavily criticized Nielsen's newly installed Big Data + Panel TV measurement system which started up for the TV season in September 2025 for its "deep instability" and "high variability".

WBD Rejects Paramount's Deal - Again








WBD Rejects Paramount's Deal - Again

Warner Bros. Discovery has again put the kibosh on Paramount Skydance's effort to buy the company.

"Paramount's latest offer remains inferior to our merger agreement with Netflix across multiple key areas," said Samuel DiPiazza, Jr., chair of the Warner Bros. Discovery Board of Directors, in a release.

Di Piazza says there is insufficient value to WBD shareholders -- as well as lack of protection for shareholders -- if the $30-per-share-in-cash offer is not completed.

WBD reiterated that Netflix's offer of $27.75 in cash and stock for WBD’s studios and streaming business is still a superior value without any significant risks, adding that the Paramount deal contains an “extraordinary amount of debt financing” that as a leveraged buyout, would in effect encumber the company with $87 billion in gross debt.


The company also is concerned that the long period needed to complete the deal -- estimated to be 12 to 18 months -- would affect ongoing programming and sports licensing deals.

By comparison, Netflix is in a strong financial position, with a market capitalization of $400 billion.

After WBD's initial rejection of Paramount’s offer, the company added a personal guarantee from billionaire Larry Ellison, the father of Paramount chief executive David Ellison, for $40.4 billion of equity financing.

The key, says Richard Greenfield, media analyst of Lightshed Partners, is what value WBD gives to its cable TV networks, previously intended to be spun off under the name Discovery Global.

Paramount's deal includes cable TV networks, while Netflix's does not.

“It is crystal clear that the WBD Board sees tremendous value in splitting the company up as soon as possible,” writes Greenfield. “Taking the Paramount offer would force WBD to abandon its plans to split the company.”

In addition to high expected value in a spinoff, Greenfield believes other higher value could be gained for Discovery Global by just a sale to another company.

“We firmly believe Discovery Global is for sale,” he says. ”Bidders have already approached WBD as part of its strategic review process.”

He believes that Paramount “not only needs to raise its bid substantially above $30/share (one or two dollars incremental is likely irrelevant), it also needs to change the composition of its bid to absorb the billions of costs associated with abandoning the Netflix bid and shift the financing from mostly debt to mostly cash.”

From Inertia to Action: Marketing's AI Reckoning and the Road Ahead

 

From Inertia to Action: Marketing's AI Reckoning and the Road Ahead

If 2025 had a soundtrack, it would have been a long unresolved chord, tension without release, motion without movement. On paper, it looked like a breakthrough year. AI promised acceleration, markets hinted at recovery, and brand leaders felt early sparks of momentum. But somewhere along the way, the industry sunk into quicksand.

After three decades in this business, I thought I’d seen it all: the commercial internet boom, ecommerce, mobile, social media, streaming wars. Each disruption forced adaptation—testing new channels, hiring digital-first partners, failing fast. We didn’t always swing right, but at least we swung. In 2025, that spirit stalled.

Marketers Did a Lot of Thinking and Not a Lot of Doing
As I spoke with colleagues, one word defined the year: inertia. The C-suite spent more time scenario planning than executing. AI fears, tariffs, and macro uncertainty became excuses for indecision. Budgets froze. Briefs languished. RFP timelines stretched from three months to nine. Media budgets were revised endlessly as every dollar demanded legal justification.


AI: Disruption or Distraction?
AI wasn’t catastrophic, but it was paralyzing. It became scapegoat, savior, and boogeyman. The truth? AI didn’t break marketing. It exposed deeper issues: lack of skill development, obsession with short-term savings, and vanity metrics that never reflected real impact. Clients noticed. Trust wavered. Agencies scrambled to prove value beyond dashboards.

The Great Measurement Meltdown
AI quietly rewrote the rules. Search visibility destabilized. Organic and paid channels reshuffled. Attribution—the industry’s security blanket—frayed. The scaffolding built for incremental ROI proved flimsy. Yet chaos brought clarity. Studies like the World Advertising Research Center’s “The Multiplier Effect” reminded us: User-centric storytelling matters; trust is infrastructure; brand health outlasts channel hacks. Affiliate content blurred lines, Reddit rewired influence, and neglected narratives showed fragility.

Fear is Not a Marketing Strategy
2025 felt heavy. Holding companies preached consolidation while cutting jobs. Creatives questioned their worth. Media planners wondered if platforms would erase “hands on keyboards.” Both client and agency teams reassessed careers and priorities.

The dust hasn’t settled. We don’t know what the next five years hold—but maybe this reckoning was overdue. Many admitted the year forced uncomfortable soul-searching, the kind that precedes progress.

So, was 2025 a loss? No, it was a wake-up call. Automation won’t solve an identity crisis. Measurement was humbled. Legacy models cracked. Brands rediscovered connection. If 2024 was AI hype, 2025 was the hangover: messy, revealing, necessary.

2026: The Year of AI Action
The fear fog is lifting. Marketers can’t sit still. The mandate: Make AI-driven marketing effective now. Reinvent performance marketing—balance brand and demand, measure full-funnel, prove impact. Integrate AI into that mindset. New roles will emerge to manage AI like media once was. Storytelling will democratize as AI enables premium creative for all. Pricing will shift to outcomes, not usage. Performance marketing evolves from ROI to orchestrating results across human and machine contributors. The brands that thrive will embrace complexity, leverage AI for efficiency, and double down on creativity.

Answer Engine Optimization for Brands Marketing to Moms: Schema Is Essential

 

Commentary

Answer Engine Optimization for Brands Marketing to Moms: Schema Is Essential

If your brand sells to moms, your content is already competing in a different arena than it was even a year ago. Search is no longer just about ranking. It’s about being chosen as the answer by large language models and highlighted in AI search results.

For brands marketing to moms, answer engine optimization (AEO) is quickly becoming one of the most important levers you can control.

The brands winning right now are not just producing content. They are structuring it, so machines understand it clearly and trust it.

The most overlooked tool in that equation is schema.  Schema is structured data that tells search engines and AI systems what your content is, not just what it says. When you use schema correctly, you remove the guesswork for large language models (LLMs).

LLMs seek out credible, well-organized content for AI search responses, and schema increases the likelihood that moms searching will find you and your product.

Schema tells LLMs that content on your web pages was written by an expert and contains real questions with real answers -- content that reflects verified experience and will help someone find a solution.


Why moms changed search first

Moms have always searched differently. They don’t browse casually. They ask specific, emotional, high-stakes questions like “Is it safe?” and “What age is best for this product?”

LLMs and AI-powered search engines are designed to answer those kinds of questions exactly. That’s why mom-focused content is disproportionately surfaced in AI results -- but only if the content is structured properly. This is where most brand blogs fall short, because they lack schema.

Not all schema types are created equal. A few do the heavy lifting for brand managers running content programs:

Blog Posting or Article schema
Every educational blog post, buying guide, or brand story should use this as a foundation. It establishes legitimacy and gives AI confidence that your content is informational, not just promotional.

FAQ Page schema
This is the single most powerful schema type for mom-focused content. Moms search in questions, and AI answers in questions. FAQ schema bridges that gap cleanly. Brands that add FAQs intentionally and mark them up correctly are far more likely to be pulled into AI-generated answers.

Product schema
If your blog includes product recommendations, usage guidance, or feature explanations, product schema helps AI understand when your content is relevant to a purchase decision. Make sure to number or bullet your information so the models can easily scan your content.

Review and Rating schema
Trust matters more to moms than to almost any other audience. Reviews signal experience and for AEO, they tell AI that your content reflects real-world usage, not just brand messaging.

How To schema
This is especially valuable for brands that publish routines, setup guides, or usage steps. If your content includes steps, it should be treated as instructional content by AI, so make sure you number each step.

Person and Organization schema
These establish authority. They connect content across your site, reinforce credibility, and help AI understand who stands behind the information.

Common mistakes brands make with schema

  1. Overusing schema on every element
  2. Stacking multiple plugins that conflict
  3. Adding review stars where no review exists
  4. Ignoring FAQ schema entirely
  5. Relying on default SEO settings without customizing for your brand

Brand managers should apply schema across content creator social posts, brand and product blogs, YouTube descriptions and mom blogger reviews.

When schema is paired with strong messaging and real insight into mom behavior, the impact compounds.  AEO allows brands to show up on Google when moms are searching for products, services and solutions.  Schema helps your content appear when moms search.

Monday, December 29, 2025

5 Truths From 2025

 

Commentary0

5 Truths From 2025

Every year we pretend the big shifts sneak up on us. They do not. They arrive slowly, argue with us for years, and then finally refuse to be ignored.

2025 was one of those years. Not because something entirely new appeared, but because several long-running arguments ended. The evidence landed, consequences became visible, and denial got harder.

These are not predictions. They are five truths that settled in during 2025, whether we were ready for them or not.

Truth 1: Attention is the real extractive industry

By 2025, it became impossible to keep pretending that social media harms are accidental. Court filings, internal documents, and youth harm litigation made the business model unmistakably clear. Platforms are not optimized for connection or creativity. They are optimized for time spent, emotional intensity, and behavioral predictability.


Once you see attention as an extractive industry, the moral fog lifts. We are no longer arguing about individual posts or parental responsibility alone. We are arguing about whether it is acceptable to build trillion-dollar businesses by systematically destabilizing focus, mood, and social trust. You cannot moderate your way out of an incentive system designed to reward harm.

Truth 2: AI did not create the crisis - it exposed it

Generative AI became the perfect villain because it arrived loudly. But 2025 made something else clear. Our information ecosystem was already brittle. AI simply removed the remaining illusions.

This was the year deception stopped feeling shocking and started feeling routine: cloned voices, fake invoices, automated scams that were just convincing enough to work. Not spectacular deepfakes, but boring fraud at scale.

AI did not break trust. It revealed how little was left to break. Trust has been eroded by years of engagement-driven amplification, algorithmic opacity, and monetized outrage.

If we focus only on AI guardrails without addressing the systems that reward speed over verification and scale over accountability, we will keep chasing the symptoms instead of the disease.

Truth 3: Schools moved faster than governments

While lawmakers debated, schools acted. In 2025, phone-free school policies went mainstream. These were not pilots, nor experiments, but the creation of actual rules to be followed.

The argument was practical, not ideological: Schools could not function as learning environments while competing with systems designed to hijack attention all day long.

The results were telling. Teachers reported calmer classrooms. Students reported relief, even when they resisted at first. Parents saw changes they had been told were unrealistic.

2025 showed that when institutions take attention seriously, outcomes change. When they don't do this, nothing else works.

Truth 4: Courts, not Congress, became the engine of accountability

For more than a decade, tech accountability lived in hearings and white papers. In 2025, it moved into courtrooms. Discovery orders forced platforms to turn over internal research. Judges asked questions regulators never had. Evidence entered the public record.

By mid-2025, Laura Marquez-Garrett and the Social Media Victims Law Center were representing more than 40% of personal injury cases in coordinated proceedings involving nearly 800 families, over 1,100 school districts, and multiple state attorneys general.

The legal strategy was precise: Convince courts that social media platforms are products subject to product liability standards, not platforms shielded by Section 230.

When a federal judge denied motions to dismiss school district public nuisance claims — ruling that mental health harms forcing resource diversion met the elements of the claim—the discovery process became unavoidable. What companies knew, when they knew it, and how they responded became legal questions, not PR exercises.

As Marquez-Garrett put it: "Money's great but the number one issue is fixing these products. These parents are pissed off and if you gave them the choice between a little bit of money and stopping these companies, there's no question."

Women leaders from the victims' rights movement played a central role here, insisting that harm be described in human terms and entered into the record as such. This mattered because courts deal in facts, timelines, and sworn testimony. They do not accept vague promises about future fixes.

While Congress stalled, judges quietly advanced accountability case by case. This is slow work. It is imperfect. But it is real. In 2025, transparency advanced not because of sweeping legislation, but because the legal system followed the evidence.

Truth 5: Gen Z stopped waiting to be protected

One of the most important shifts of 2025 did not come from Washington or Silicon Valley. It came from young people themselves.

Gen Z organized economically, not just culturally, with advertiser pressure campaigns, creator walkouts, and by funding conversations.

Groups like Reconnect, led by Sean Killingsworth, helped frame this shift clearly. This was not about banning technology or opting out of the digital world. It was about refusing to accept environments that profit from harm.

Young people made it clear they understand leverage, that systems change fastest when harm has a cost. And they are increasingly willing to apply that pressure themselves.

This reframes the narrative. Young people are not passive victims of technology. They are sophisticated critics of systems that exploit them, and builders of alternatives that reflect different values.

Where this leaves us

Taken together, these truths point to something larger: The crisis we are living through is not primarily about misinformation, AI, or bad actors. It is about architecture.

We built systems that reward speed over reflection, scale over responsibility, and amplification over accountability.

Predictably, those systems failed us. 2025 was the year it became harder to deny that reality.

The next phase is not about debunking lies faster or banning one more feature. It is about redesigning the spaces where belief is formed, attention is traded, and trust is either earned or destroyed. That work is slower than outrage and harder than innovation theater.

Truth did not disappear. We buried it under systems that could not support it.

Now the question is simple: Do we want systems that support truth, or don't we?

Too Fast for FAST TV? Buckle Your Seatbelts

 

Commentary

Too Fast for FAST TV? Buckle Your Seatbelts

Worried about the latest data showing the entire connected TV (CTV) ecosystem is seeing more maturation?

What does this mean for businesses that are seemingly defying that trend -- FAST networks? Very little, apparently.

With consumer pricing for all products continuing to rise -- as well as premium subscription-based streaming platforms seeing nonstop price hikes -- will we see more TV subscribers flocking to Tubi, Roku Channel, Pluto TV and scores of other free, ad-supported/streaming platforms?

Even if you are a legacy TV company, you don’t want to leave any missing advertising dollars on the floor in this marketplace.

FAST is almost solely dependent on the ad business. And this comes as some big media holding companies have trimmed their advertising forecasts in 2025.

From a consumer experience perspective, maturity is still a ways off. Perhaps too much advertising on FAST platforms would result in a poor user experience and could cap viewing. Analysts worry that cost per unit (CPM) pricing would then suffer some declines.

And then there is the measurement issue. Standardizing viewing metrics seems far off for brands that want to analyze comparisons for proposed media campaigns.

Until then, no worries. Why? Double-digit percentage growth in all key areas is still on track to come in 2026 and well beyond with more viewers, channel count expansion and rising ad dollars.

Mordor Intelligence estimates that the global FAST market will have compounded average growth of over 17% through the next five years, rising to $27.14 billion. This year is estimated to hit $12.26 billion.

Right now there are 1,850 active FAST channels globally, up 14% since the first quarter of this year, and over 70% higher since 2023, according to Nielsen’s Gracenote.

Viewing is much on the same trend line. Next year, hours are likely to grow 30-50% over 2025 in the U.S. in many markets, according to eMarketer.

So if FAST continues to get top speed, start placing your bets on who could be running out of gas. Soon?

This column was previously published in TV Watch on November 26, 2025.

Gatekeepers: What's Reshaping Our Industry In 2026

 

Commentary

From Media Shakeups to AI Gatekeepers: What's Reshaping Our Industry In 2026

For years we’ve talked about disruption being on the horizon, from the rise of “internet of things” to proliferation of consumer data to AI upending all aspects of marketing. But as we read the tea leaves for 2026, I believe the new year will bring seismic shifts across the media and content ecosystem. 

Specifically, I’m betting on four key shifts that will redefine the role of agencies, how brands future-proof themselves and, ultimately, what consumers will pay attention to. Here they are:

Streaming consolidation is coming, and it will reshape the media map. Let’s start with the obvious: there are too many platforms and streamers chasing too little attention. As AI accelerates the production of low-cost, throwaway content, studios and streaming investments will continue to face shrinking margins and rising competition for ad dollars. You can’t win that game with volume anymore. You win it with scale. 

Netflix acquiring Warner Bros. is just the start. In 2026, consolidation becomes unavoidable. This shift won’t just change where money flows, it will fundamentally alter how we think about planning, buying, and measuring media. Agencies who understand platform economics will thrive.


Marketing moves from influencing human behavior to influencing AI. 2026 will redefine the digital customer journey. AI browsers and ad-supported large language models (LLMs) will become the new gatekeepers of discovery, comparison, and decision-making. Consumers won’t just search for products, they’ll delegate the entire process to their AI agents. Auction dynamics, search and CX will all change. The incumbent biddable players and search giants will be forced to adapt and play ball.

Brands will need model context protocols the same way they once needed SEO strategies. If your product isn’t easily understandable, verifiable, and optimizable for an AI agent’s decision logic, you won’t even make it into the consideration set. 

Whitespace for human-led creative in an AI world.  The next era of agencies won’t be defined by project management, production scale, or the ability to deliver work fast. Those functions are already being automated. The next crop of great agencies will be the ones that monetize strategy, intellectual property, and cultural insight. They’ll scale their best thinkers with AI -- not to do more work, but to focus on deeper, more meaningful brand problems.

Human-led creative rooted in human insights, lived experience and emotional nuance that no model or AI could emulate will become a premium offering. 

The real world makes a comeback. Consumers have been slowly gravitating back toward real human interaction. We see this trend reflected in ticket sales, retail foot traffic, and community events. People are tired of scrolling. They want connection.

In 2026, experiential marketing will surge as a strategic engine for influence. Everyday people will become the new creators, driving user-generated content from authentic, unscripted moments. Brands will start measuring ROI around “people as media,” valuing the impact of thousands of imperfect but credible creators over a handful of polished influencers.

Venues, sponsorship opportunities, and brands participating IRL will be critical to winning the ground war for attention.

These shifts share a single truth: Automation has commoditized everything except human ingenuity. In 2026, the marketers that succeed won’t just adopt AI, they’ll pair it with the kind of human insights no model can replicate.