5 evidence-based tips to mental toughness

SmartBlogs from SmartBrief

By LaRae Quy on May 18th, 2016      

Growing up on a cattle ranch in Wyoming, I learned to survive by being scrappy enough to make-do and hungry enough to keep moving. Department stores were big buildings in places 100 miles away, and if a rattlesnake came between me and where I wanted to go, guess who came out on top?

As a kid I learned a lot about mental toughness. When I joined the FBI, I learned even more. My defensive tactics and firearms training drilled one thing into me: never choke when faced with an obstacle that looks bigger, meaner, or uglier than you.

In other words, always be game-ready so you can have the mental toughness to rebound from disappointments and missed opportunities. Our coaches trained us to have a hardiness for enduring the downside of a situation.

Entrepreneurs, leaders, and business owners have tough situations to face in today’s competitive environment. They need to be ready to meet those challenges with their best mental game.
Here are five evidence-based tips on how to develop a stronger mind:

Mental toughness tip No. 1: Set a super clear goal
Research confirms that the more specific your goal, the better you will perform. General goals are too vague so take the time at the very beginning to think it through so it will become more clear to you.
The goal must be real and important for you to achieve. Do not speculate—that will do nothing but waste your time and valuable energy.
Tips:

• Define your need and really mean it.
• Describe in detail exactly what you want.
• List what you want—it will help you visualize your success.
• Define what will interfere in achieving your goal.
• Determine the starting point.
• Establish a time frame for achieving your goal.
• Break down the tasks necessary for completion.
• Tell others what you plan to do.

Mental toughness tip No. 2: Learn to be OK with pain
We all know we are most motivated just before a deadline — our pulse quickens and our focus narrows. We can use the same principles of neurobiology to help us be mentally tough when it comes to meeting our goals.

Handling tough negotiations, dealing with competitors, and climbing the corporate ladder are not easy achievements, but if you are pursuing something that holds both value and meaning for you, you will embrace the discomfort that comes from pushing yourself past self-limiting barriers.
Whether it’s physical, psychological, or emotional discomfort, pushing past the pain of exertion will require you to suck it up. Leaders who have mental toughness are able to function when they hit their pain threshold because their minds are trained to ease their way through it.
My defensive tactics coach used to shout out, “No pain, no gain!” It captures the idea that we need to move past the point of comfort to achieve professional excellence.
Tips:

• When you feel you are starting to hit the wall, stay in the moment and concentrate on the task in front of you. When you focus and concentrate on the task, it is easier to see where small steps can be taken to keep you moving through the wall you are facing. If you lose your concentration, all you will see is the wall! Your mind takes over and tells you that the task is impossible, so you crumble and wilt.
• Craft your goals as a target you are moving toward. Athletes are rarely thinking how far they are from the starting line but rather how much closer they are to the finish line.

Mental toughness tip No. 3: Get competitive
As badly as I hate to admit this, I was passed in a 6K run by a woman pushing a baby carriage. My pride took a real nosedive at that sorry moment, but it prompted a real competitive spirit within me.
I made sure the woman never got more than a few paces ahead of me for the rest of the race. I focused my eyes on her back and kept her pace until we crossed the finish line.
Inch by inch, life’s a cinch; yard by yard, life is hard.
Tips:

1. Identify your competitors.
2. Gage where you stand against them.
3. Pick out one competitor who is slightly ahead of you in terms of talent and skill set.
4. Find the scrappiness to stay up with them, and eventually, move past.
5. Throw your lasso around the next competitor ahead of you and do the same thing.

Mental toughness tip No. 4:  Talk to yourself
The way in which we talk to ourselves can influence our behavior in both positive and negative ways.
Self-talk used by FBI agents and Navy Seals is not just a motivational message like “You can do it!” In studies published by Perspectives on Psychological Science, it was determined that the most useful mental message is the “instructional self-talk.”
This is the kind of running commentary we engage in when we’re carrying out a difficult task, especially one that’s unfamiliar to us, to keep us focused on what we are learning and what we need to do next.
Learning forces us to focus our attention on the task before us so we can screen out distractions. It also helps us regulate our effort so we can make better decisions about what to do, how to do it, and when.
Tips:

• Recent studies have found that self-talk is most effective when incorporated into a series of thoughts and actions.
• First, comes a thought where you set a goal for yourself and make a plan on how to get there.
• Second, your performance follows where you enact the plan to the best of your ability.
• Third, spend time in self-reflection when you carefully evaluate what you’ve done and adjust your plan to be even better next time.

Mental toughness tip No. 5: Picture it
Visualizing your success is based on solid science. When you imagine yourself doing something before you do it, you are programming your mind to think you can. By visualizing your performance repeatedly, your brain will store that information as a success.
With each success, our brain releases a neurotransmitter called dopamine. This is the chemical that becomes active when we encounter situations that are linked to rewards from the past. Dopamine enables us to not only see rewards, but to move toward those rewards.
TIPS:

• Research has suggested that we need to repeat positive mental messages to ourselves at least five times before our brain begins to see an obstacle differently.
• Visualize your success three to five times a day.
• Hold those mental messages for 20 seconds at a time.

Mental toughness is the ability to manage our emotions, thoughts, and behaviors in ways that will set us up for success. It’s truly about mind over matter.

Top 10 Latino Creative Devices

By Roberto Siewczynski, Op-Ed Contributor Thursday, May 19, 2016

As we were presenting work to a client a question came up: “Where is the Latino relevance in the execution?” Frequently, when presenting creative work for the Hispanic market, there is tension in trying to show something that is unique to Latinos in the work, and the question of whether or not you really need it. A lot of this stems from the perspective that Latino consumers behave differently than the general market consumer and therefore require something different when it comes to brand communications that Hispanics will connect with. Enter the “Hispanic creative device.” Once I asked my executive creative director what is a “creative device” or as they say in Spanish “un recurso.” He responded, “Something that helps us have a hook to engage the consumer with our work.” After further discussion, I learned it could be a word, a setting, a sport, a celebrity, a glass of water. Literally, anything. In this case, it just “has to be Hispanic.” This seems to help clients justify the need for creative that is divergent to the general market. What happens though is that over time if you are looking for a unique cultural “device,” you start seeing these devices pop up over and over in creative work across many categories. I could say they are overused, but in some cases, even if they are clichés or stereotypical, I have seen these devices work and perform in the marketplace. It is what it is. Rather than get into a dissertation about whether this is good or bad, I decided to put a list together of some of the more common devices I frequently see in work targeted towards Latinos. So here they are, whether you call them stereotypes, clichés, devices or nuances. If you work in the advertising/marketing business, it’s very likely to have run across these when marketing to Latinos. Abuelita en la Cocina: How many more commercials do we need to see with Grandma in the kitchen or living room giving advice to her daughter while her granddaughter listens intently? Birthday with Piñata party: Whether you are selling insurance or cars, I have seen this scene frequently creep in, whether it’s the focus of the execution or blurred out in the background so that you can see what it is in an impressionist sort of way. Luchadores (Mexican wrestlers): Okay! Yes, they are colorful, fun to watch and are very typical of Mexican culture but do you really need a luchador to sell cars or beer or cellular services? Sometimes you do, I guess; once a year maybe? Loteria: From agency websites to financial services to beer, how many more times do we need to see the loteria board game treatment to represent a product, scene or print ad? Novela Setting: Regardless if it’s a radio ad for fruit or TV ad for spring fashion, yes, Latinos love their novelas but do they really need to listen at your product pitch in this setting that often? Papel Picado: Hmm…I guess that’s the only type of decorations Latinos buy. Okay, I have seen some awesome work using this and it’s a great merchandising tactic for in-store. La Quinceañera: Yes, we have a Sweet 16 a year before; it’s important, frequent and insightful. Even MTV did a few sweet 16 episodes on this and there is whole industry (similar to Indian weddings) to support this celebration. El Partido de Fútbol: Guys or couples sitting in front of the TV or in the soccer stadium or at a bar, watching the ever-present soccer game (wearing their seleccion jersey) is something that keeps popping up in almost every category, especially during World Cup years. Dia de los Muertos: The general market has Halloween, what can we do that is Hispanic? In come the Calaca designs and Catrinas. Mind you, this is “not just a Latino thing anymore”; check out what HEB did last year. The Big Parrillada: Yes, Latinos have extended families and like to invite all friends and neighbors for an outdoor BBQ. Look for the ever-present smoke and grill in everything from soft drinks to Wal-Mart ads. Are these good devices? Yes. Are they bad devices? Yes. It’s not just what you say but also how you say it that matters, so it’s not just how you use these devices but also when you use them that matters.

Critic's Notebook: Why Being Critical of Broadcast Television Matters

The Hollywood Reporter

May 19, 2016 4:59pm PT by Tim Goodman

Not a job I'd want, but an industry worth covering critically.  Getty Images; ISTOCK       

Despite the sad state of affairs that the upfronts couldn't truly mask, some smart moves might be happening with the networks.

Now that the cavalcade of audacious dreaming is over — aka the network upfronts — what does it all mean?

No, really, that's an actual question. Other than broadcast networks presenting their new shows and selling them and spinning and maybe even lying in the process, what is the take-away from this last week of circus-hoopla? What happens now to this most interesting of businesses?
The short answer is probably "more of the same, only worse than before."

Of course that will only make even more people think I'm a cynical buzz-kill out to ruin everyone's good fun — conclusions they might have reached  or, for that matter, a lot of stuff I've written for the past decade.
But here's a truism for you: The most fascinating thing right now in all of television — and believe me, there are so many intriguing take-aways throughout the industry — is monitoring the state of network television.

And there are not that many left doing it, at least not critically.
Why? Because it's not sexy. Netflix, Amazon, Hulu — all the streaming services are the sexy of today. FX, HBO, Showtime, AMC, Starz — all the cable channels attracting the most talented creators and visionaries remain sexy and interesting. But broadcast networks are not even yesterday's sexy thing. They are a thing you carbon-date.

Writing about the state of broadcast television — and by that I mean covering it critically, not cheerleading for its stars or fan-boying up its soapy dramas or gif-girling on its best comedies — is not going to win you a lot of friends because, seriously, most of the news and much of the content coming out of it is not very good.

But I'd argue that it's important and, if you like failure-analysis, intriguing. Still, it's not super exciting and it's almost impossible to be upbeat about the industry if you've been paying actual attention, but it's valuable nonetheless. Broadcast network television is the foundation of all of television — the ur-business of the industry, the IBM before the Apple. Right now its vaults hold the largest percentage of accrued culture in the medium.

Also, right now broadcast television is one feisty-ass entity. From CBS' Leslie Moonves boasting that ad money is leaving digital and coming back to broadcast to every entertainment president arguing that breakout hits still confirm networks are where the most eyeballs are — and that's worth paying for, everybody's aggressively on point. If you work in broadcast television right now, your talking points memo is that reports of your death are very premature.
And yet, whoa.
 No amount of spin can counter the diminished ratings (the ones that have people using words like "end times" after reporting them on Twitter), the yearly lack of breakout hits and how difficult it is to actually maintain what generously might be considered a hit not only from the start to the end of the season (where the show might be better called "on the bubble") but from season to season, where further drops are often forthcoming.

I've detailed a lot of the issues the networks face — a lengthy list — and watched while some improvements have come (shorter seasons; anthologies, etc.) and some dumb decisions continue (shell-game shifting of times and days, particularly with new series, etc.).

This latest upfronts overload of hype brought some good and bad into focus. For starters, if network sales teams can get Madison Avenue to pay the same rates as before on diminished ratings returns — I'm very dubious that this is the case — then godspeed. It's not my money. The entire television industry, not just broadcast, has been very good at shifting the discussion away from both overnight ratings and Nielsen-only ratings to other quantifiable metrics that have nudged dollars out of pockets, so that alone is an amazing achievement.

But beating back digital ad buying (whether its hammering home accuracy and accountability or ad effectiveness) is a minor victory. Streaming services Amazon, Netflix and even part of Hulu, with its no-ad premium offer, are not competing for network ad dollars; neither is HBO, Showtime or Starz. Ad-supported cable (and the influx of cable channels producing very good content) remains broadcast's biggest financial issue. Given that many niche channels are producing ratings equal to or better than network offerings means the frontline of the dollar wars is and remains with cable.
No, the bigger-picture issue confronting the broadcast networks, one I think they appeared to uniformly address in this upfronts, is the choice/time conundrum that's central to virtually everyone's life. Meaning, people are now overwhelmed with choice in television and they don't have the time to watch all of the choices they are given.

Choice/time is the main driver for reduced ratings across the board. That's irrefutable. Poor quality is also part of that, but plenty of bad shows get good ratings. Systemic network issues like trust — viewers know that networks cancel series at an alarming percentage and thus wait or don't opt in at all — are also in play. (Netflix drops entire seasons, which is an advantage, and both Amazon and Hulu are new enough to not have bad reputations around mid-run cancellations). But mostly too many choices and not enough time is the culprit here.

 

May 20, 2016

 

PRX stands for Public Radio Exchange. It’s an online marketplace for distribution, review, and licensing of public radio programming. The nonprofit has distributed radio programs including This American Life, The Moth Radio Hour, and Reveal. As podcasting grew in popularity, PRX built mobile listening apps for its exploding user base. And, over the past year, PRX has been working on a project it says will reimagine the way listeners spend their time with audio content. The new company is called RadioPublic and it is building a mobile listening platform for on-demand radio and podcasts.

A Public Benefit Corporation, RadioPublic has secured funding from some very recognizable names, including Project11, The New York Times, Graham Holdings Company, UP2398, Knight Foundation Enterprise Fund, Matter Ventures, American Public Media, McClatchy, and Homebrew.

Jake Shapiro, founding chief executive of PRX, will lead the new venture as CEO. Shapiro tells Poynter, “We believe RadioPublic can be radio rethought. We think that there’s something extraordinarily powerful and simple and beautiful and coherent about radio that needs to be transformed for how people are using and accessing information.” The idea behind RadioPublic is to provide a one-stop shop for all kinds of audio, including news, entertainment, and storytelling.

When RadioPublic’s first mobile apps launch later this year, listeners will have access to podcasts as well as PRX’s full catalog, including The Moth Radio Hour, 99% Invisible, Reveal, the Radiotopia podcast network, and the Remix story channel. RadioPublic will also integrate with PRX’s ad product, Dovetail, which powers Serial and other signature shows. Shapiro said, ““We are at a clear inflection point in the shift to on-demand radio through mobile devices and the connected car and home. PRX has been public media’s engine for talent and technology from podcasting’s earliest days, and now together we’re rethinking radio and transforming the way listeners connect with the shows they love. ”

Shapiro also tells Poynter that audio storytelling defies the trend of consumers taking in their news on social media. “Listeners want to consume audio in a native app that allows them to listen to podcasts and other radio when they’re in the car, out of sync with their data connection, or otherwise on the go. He and his team see vast and largely untapped potential in the current base of audio consumers. Having billions of radios, essentially, in people’s pockets, is an enormous channel for distribution that is still, in many ways, up for grabs.”

New York Times Executive VP of Product and Technology, and editor of Innovation and Strategy Kinsey Wilson said, “News and entertainment radio is at a moment of profound transition as broadcast and podcast listening moves to simple on-demand digital listening. And The Times sees opportunity there.”

eMarketer reports the U.S. media and entertainment industries will spend a combined $7.34 billion on paid online and mobile media advertising this year. The firm is projecting that number to balloon to $11.52 billion in four years. The media category is expected to spend $4 billion in 2016, up from $3.45 billion in 2015. And entertainment advertisers will spend $3.29 billion on digital ads in 2016.

eMarketer says, “As digital consumption of news and entertainment increases, advertisers in these sectors are spending larger portions of their advertising and promotional budgets on online and mobile channels, as explored in a new eMarketer report, “The US Media and Entertainment Industries 2016: Digital Ad Spending Forecast and Trends.”

Fox Television Network, Fox News Network Highest in Commercial Clutter

               

• by Wayne Friedman, Yesterday, 1:24 PM                                           

Fox Television Network and the Fox News Channel run the most commercials time per hour among the respective broadcast and cable network categories.
With results from iSpot.tv, the Fox Television Network averaged 15 minutes and 4 minutes in the first quarter of 2015 -- virtually flat (0.16% higher) versus the fourth-quarter period and the highest of all broadcast networks. These results include local TV ad time and exclude promotional time.

Fox News Channel was at 16:52 -- the most of any cable network (and all networks overall). It was down 3% from the previous quarter. Fox News has been posting soaring viewership due to the Presidential election news/campaigns.

After Fox, CBS is the next-largest broadcast network with commercial time -- 14:23, down 0.7%. ABC is next at 13:51, up 0.05%. NBC had the biggest change, up a strong 9% to 13:46 versus the fourth quarter of 2015. CW has the lightest advertising load at 10:43, down 6.4% from the fourth quarter 2015.

Total broadcast advertising commercial time -- national and local advertising -- on networks was virtually flat in the first quarter versus the fourth quarter of 2015. The five top English-language networks inched up 0.7%, averaging 13 hours and 13 minutes, excluding any promotional time.
Although cable networks have announced efforts to cut back on advertising time, generally, they still have more commercial time than broadcast networks.

Seventeen cable networks tally total hourly average advertising time higher than 14 minutes, with four Viacom networks in the top five -- Spike (16:43), MTV (16:21), BET (16:16), and Comedy Central (16:14). Turner networks were next: TBS (15:31) and truTV (15:17).
Some of the least commercial cluttered networks, according to iSpot.tv -- ESPN (8:33), AMC (9:43), FX (11:09); Cartoon Network (11:46); National Geographic (12:28); and TNT (12:39).

Why You Should Geo-Target For Your Advertisers

By Gabriel Barnes -

May 12, 2016

                   

 

 

 

 

(by Gabriel Barnes) When looking to pinpoint an audience based on geography, the terms geo-fencing or geo-targeting are often used. These terms are often incorrectly used interchangeably, creating confusion, so let’s clarify what they mean.

Geo-targeting is a broad term for the method of pinpointing an audience based on their location — ranging from as wide as the state to as granular as an address. Any and all advertising types can use geo-targeting to define a location applicable to each campaign.

Geo-fencing refers to a more specific application of geo-targeting, where a virtual barrier is created around a defined area, usually determined by a geo-targeting strategy. A geo-fence can be as broad as a state or as hyperlocal as a city block, and the smaller the geo-fence, the more granular the targeting. Geo-fencing is almost always used alongside other targeting elements, including demographics, search history, etc.

Both of these tools are finding their way into the hands of radio groups across the country, and with much success. Picture the following scenario:
Station X and Station Y are both pitching the same local Mercedes dealership on running a digital marketing campaign with their stations.

Station X educates the dealership on the value of advertising on the station website. The AE provides the dealership with the usual information about the station, including demographics, and analytics for its website. To the dealership it sounds very intriguing, because the average household income of the station’s visitors makes for a perfect prospect. However, in the back of his mind, the dealer feels like much of the site traffic wouldn’t be great prospects, and he is weary of having to “pay” for non-qualified traffic.

On the other hand, Station Y educates the dealer on the value of location-based advertising. The dealer is unaware of the concept, so the AE explains that the dealer can create virtual fences around all of his dealership’s competitors and show its Mercedes ads to anyone within range of those competitors.

Also, the dealer can draw a fence around his own dealership, add an additional targeting layer — household income — and show ads only to individuals who are inside that “fence” and meet the income criteria. The AE informs the dealer that there is a potentially smaller “prospect pool” than Station X’s website, but the smaller pool consists of highly qualified prospects, because ads are only shown to those who meet the requirements — resulting in a higher ROI.

Although this is a hypothetical scenario, who would you choose to do business with?
As “big data” continues to be dissected and businesses begin to have a very clear understanding of the who, what, when, and where of their revenue, the ability to strategically target areas that will drive traffic to stores or to websites will be invaluable. If you are still thinking you can pitch your “digital marketing” products — i.e., your website and some Facebook posts by your on-air personalities — you will continue to lose out to those who have the means to deliver geographically targeted ads.

So what can your station do now to get involved in geotargeting and geo-fencing for your advertisers? Here are three things I recommend:

1. Do your own research. There are numerous businesses that offer geo-fencing or geo-targeting services, so be sure to compare. You can start by searching for “best geotargeting companies” or “geo-fencing solutions.” Be sure to be clear on whether you are looking to help an advertiser with being found on search engines or help them with branding through targeted display advertising.
2. Categorize your advertiser database. Identify business categories that have many competitors in close proximity to each other. Car dealerships, for example, are everywhere, but the average person couldn’t list half of the dealerships within 10 miles of them. We know that most people do their shopping close to their home base and that the businesses they frequent tend to be located on streets or in areas that they drive most often. Helping advertisers target people who are nearby and who might be unaware of the business will increase site and foot traffic.
3. Offer location-based advertising as part of a radio buy. Inform your advertisers that you can deliver custom online ads or messages based on their location — something a radio commercial can’t do. Due to demographics and other factors, a display for one location might need to be completely different from that designed for another area.

As always, it’s important to have a strategy in place before beginning something new. The beauty of this particular concept is that it doesn’t require any kind of upfront technology investment on the part of a broadcast station. It’s a matter of incorporating it into the rate card and then making an infrastructure investment.

So take some time to research the benefits of geotargeting and geo-fencing to increase your revenues. Who knows, you might be able to target competitor stations “steal” away listeners!

One Part TV, One Part Digital: How Nielsen Jiggers Total Audience

 

                 by Wayne Friedman, May 8, 2016, 9:59 AM                                            

As Nielsen pushes its “total audience” measurement system as the new currency for a hybrid TV and video advertising marketplace, some fundamental issues remain -- especially the fact that Nielsen will effectively be adding many more sources of video viewing to the measured universe, and consequently, will fragment the TV/video advertising marketplace beyond anything Madison Avenue has experienced to date.

 

Before that happens, a number of big video platforms still need to integrate Nielsen’s digital measurement software in order to become part of its universe.

 

“For Nielsen to produce true cross-platform data, their SDK [software development kit] must be installed in each publisher’s digital platform,” Alan Wurtzel, president of measurement and media development at NBCUniversal, explains about the chicken-and-egg issue impeding Nielsen’s total audience measurement effort.

 

“There have been issues getting that done,” Wurtzel says understatedly.

“Every client has differing viewing environments that they have to work through,” concedes Kelly Abcarian, senior vice president of product architecture for Nielsen’s Watch unit, which oversees media audience measurement, adding: “This is a heady task and we have had regular meetings with clients in regard to implementation and engineering of this technology in order to support the progress of a currency-quality metric.”

 

How many clients? “Dozens,” is all Abcarian will say.

She says the process is subjective to each organization and the process varies by platform.

“In some cases we have seen clients proceed through certification in a matter of days,” she notes, adding that Nielsen’s main focus has been to work with each organization to integrate its software as “smoothly” as possible.

 

That process is taking too long as far as some big customers are concerned, especially those on the “buy-side.” GroupM Managing Partner of Research and Marketplace Analysis Lyle Schwartz, for example, points out that Nielsen originally promised to release its Total Audience measurement system in time for 2016-17 upfront negotiations, which are expected to begin soon.

 

In fact, one big player -- Interpublic’s Mediabrands’ Magna Global unit -- has already announced a nine-figure “newfront” deal with Google’s YouTube, though terms like audience guarantees and measurement methods were not disclosed.

 

“It really doesn’t exist until the marketplace can analyze it and project it,” GroupM’s Schwartz says of Total Audience ratings becoming a marketplace currency. “You need months of data, you need time.”

 

Currency is exactly what Nielsen is hoping its Total Audience ratings will become, and it is its belief -- and that of many industry observers -- that Nielsen’s historic role as the official currency of the TV advertising marketplace will enable it to extend that position into the hybrid, and hyper-fragmented TV/video world.

 

It’s not alone in that pursuit, of course. comScore is also moving toward a more comprehensive measurement of total audiences, and its recent acquisition of and integration with Rentrak’s TV audience measurement data is expected to accelerate that. comScore has already made some key announcements about plans to provide even more integrated and holistic measurement of its panel’s complete media consumption -- TV, digital, you name it -- by measuring usage on every device used by those households.

 

But Nielsen’s big leverage continues to be the fact that it is the established baseline currency for the apex medium in the mix -- television.

Nielsen Total Measurement system relies on four discrete components:

1 - Measuring consumer media exposure across platform.

2 - Creating comparable measurement.

3 - Measuring advertising and content separately.

4 - Providing a ratings solution for video, audio and text.

 

Total Audience measurement will have two main outputs: “total ad ratings” (Nielsen’s current C3 and C7 TV ratings and digital ad ratings through 35 days) and “total content ratings” (TV program ratings and digital content ratings through 35 days).

 

“The traditional C3 or C7 doesn’t tell the complete story, which has been the network's’ argument for many years,” says Nielsen’s Abcarian.

 

C3 stands for average commercial minute audience plus three days of playback viewing. C7 includes up to seven days of playback. Most big agencies continue to negotiate deals based on C3, but at least one, GroupM, has publicly stated it is using C7 for its deals.

 

Nielsen national TV sample now has 40,000 households, representing about 100,000 people, using about 50,000 connected devices in their homes. Nielsen says its software will pick up data embedded on publishers platforms for phone, smartphone, PC and tablets.

 

What’s new and different? Nielsen’s preliminary Total Audience data not only shows all TV and digital viewing through 35 days, but can reveal unique episode-by-episode viewing on specific days.

Early results show that while live, video-on-demand and DVR viewing account for the most viewing of recent episodes aired, time-shifted viewing continues to grow on digital platforms with older episodes.

 

Nielsen offered up on analysis of an undisclosed TV program looking at three episodes of a series that ran in a given week -- one original and two repeats. The original episode of the series being analyzed generated 91% of its viewing from live and DVR playback, but an earlier repeat episode re-running that same week generated 52% of its audience from VOD or digital streaming.

The net finding, says Nielsen’s Abcarian, is that older episodes of TV shows are beginning to see a shift toward more digital consumption.

 

She says it is Nielsen’s ability to analyze these detailed behaviors that gives it a leg up vs. comScore.

“We have granularity on the episode level across all platforms,” she explains, adding, “I’m not certain of anyone else is tying it altogether on an episode basis.”

 

Meanwhile, Nielsen is also offering Total Ad Ratings as a means of measuring the effectiveness of advertising campaigns, which is the bottom line for brands and agencies buying TV and digital video.

Separating advertising from program content make sense, Abcarian explains, noting: “The relationship between an ad and a program is becoming less and less -- because of dynamic ad insertion and other [advertising efforts].”

 

One of the biggest issues Nielsen has had to confront in reporting the data is accounting for the different “languages”  -- or ways of looking at -- audience exposure among its different customer types.

 

For example, Nielsen’s Abcarian says traditional TV executives speak about programming and commercials in “average minute viewing” timeframes, while digital video executives speak in “views” which have little/no relation to any time/duration.

 

“We spent a lot of time creating comparable metrics,” Abcarian says -- adding, however, that Nielsen does not plan to become the arbiter of which metric is appropriate. Over time, she says, Nielsen believes the industry will sort out a dominant marketplace metric. Meanwhile, it will focus on measuring all of it.

 

When exactly will those measurements be available to the marketplace? Abcarian says Total Audience data currently is scheduled to be released for both TV content providers and media agencies sometime in the third quarter of this year, meaning it will effectively be available after 2016-17 upfront negotiations are completed. But there’s always next year.

TV Stations To Post 12.6% Rise In 2016 Ad Revs; 13.3% Gain In Online/Digital

 

•  by Wayne Friedman, May 9, 2016, 5:36 PM

In the midst of a big election year -- and Summer Olympics to come -- U.S. TV stations are poised to see strong double-digit percentage rises in over-the-air advertising revenues in 2016.
TV station advisor BIA/Kelsey forecasts this to total $20.8 billion, up 12.1% over 2015. By way of comparison, BIA/Kelsey says local TV over-the-air revenues sank 7.2% in 2015 versus 2014.

This year, local TV stations' digital/online revenues will rise by around the same rate as-over-the air TV -- up 13.3% to $1.0 billion.

 

During the last Presidential election year -- 2012 -- local TV stations were estimated to have taken in $20.3 billion in over-the-air advertising (13.4% over 2011) and $600 million in online/digital advertising (a 20% hike over 2011).

 

BIA/Kelsey says this year, East Coast TV stations will see an 11.1% gain, versus a 7.9% decrease in 2015. Southern TV markets will rise 12.6% in 2016; after a 6.0% decline last year. Western TV stations will grow 11.9% versus a 9.6% fall in 2015.

 

Midwest markets will see the greatest climb -- up 14.6% versus a 7.2% drop a year ago. Southwest markets will rise the least -- up 8.4% in 2016. Southwest TV stations witnessed the smallest decline of any region in 2015 -- down 4.5%

 

Mark Fratrik, senior vice president and chief economist, BIA/Kelsey, stated: "The election and the economy, driven by stronger employment figures and continuing low interest rates, are helping push local TV ad revenues above expectations this year."

Data You Need To Bring in More Auto Dollars

May 9, 2016

 

 

I Just heard that one of the auto agencies that we had “saved” in late 2015 from going mostly Digital/TV at the Media Director level, just did so, cutting out their radio. The job of getting these dollars back now will not be easy due to a number of reasons, not the least of which the owner of the agency who made this decision, doesn’t want to appear foolish and will defend his decision.

This speaks to the importance of a couple of things. First, getting to the real key decision maker at the agency (the Media Director clearly didn’t have the long term juice), covering off any “red flags”, making sure they are “sold” as well as educating the key dealer contact to the point that they too are “sold”. It also speaks to the importance of having Polk auto sales data that paints a dealer-by-dealer picture of YTD 2016 and 2015 sales, enabling us to more effectively to defend Radio’s importance to the media mix if a) the dealership is outperforming other dealerships in the market and b) sales are up “X” percent. Both of which we believe is true based upon recent comments by the dealership’s GM but can’t quantify.

It would be wise for all who handle auto accounts to quickly get in front of the key decision maker’s at the dealership and agency and begin to re-sell them on the Radio medium.
Hopefully you’ll find some of the information below helpful in making the “Radio case”.
This week Tracey Scheppach, EVP Precision Video at Starcom Media Group was quoted as saying in Ad Age, discussing addressable TV ads, “The mistake many people made is we raced to the bottom of the sales funnel.”

The Internet typically is best at siphoning demand, not creating it or even getting a product into a consumer’s consideration set. The Internet “works” because it targets the very bottom of the purchasing funnel- those ready to buy. What should be a concern, is that while cost effective, it doesn’t create or increase consumer demand- it simply harvests it.

This is a point we need to continually highlight. Before I can buy your car or visit your dealership, I have to at least “consider” buying or visiting it and to “consider” buying or visiting it, I have to know something about it which means it needs to be branded in some form or fashion- not a strength of Digital. Think back to your last car purchase? How many manufacturers did you consider? Those not under consideration stood zero chance of being purchased and were probably completely ignored online. It’s all about getting into a consideration set and this is a key strength of Radio’s.
We are in the midst of running a Clip Interactive survey in a top 30 market to uncover auto insights, several of which are below and based upon over 200 consumer responses. The first insight illustrates that the Internet doesn’t set the world on fire and that dealerships and agencies might be a bit blinded by the Digital glare and in need of some traditional sunglasses (scale of 1-10):



The second insight was that while “price” is important, it is not the most important reason for choosing a dealership. Can Digital communicate “Honesty” and “Friendly” as effectively as Radio? We don’t think so:



We also need to stress Radio’s continued importance to the consumer. This slide can help make this point. It was highlighted last week and derived from USA TouchPoint data:

We also understand that consumers are visiting fewer showrooms and making purchasing decisions more quickly and that the traditional path to purchase it out the window, but more sales are lost due to not even being considered than all other reasons for not buying combined. Radio gets your dealership “considered”. The attached Nielsen study supports this statement.
This weekend there will be “X” number of cars sold in a market. Any car salesperson worth their weight in salt wants to have the last opportunity to have the last word with a prospect to communicate one more reason to buy from “me” and not them. Radio enables a dealership to get that last “word” before they sign elsewhere and are off the grid for 5 years. This is another area where Radio shines- enabling a dealership to differentiate itself from the others and providing reasons to buy/visit such as “honesty”, having a “great service center” and “friendliness”, beyond “price”.
The following chart was derived from the latest USA TouchPoints data. One of TouchPoints key benefits is being able to illustrate Radio’s ability to communicate a timely message when a product is being “purchased”, “considered” or “decided” upon.
This chart highlights media share of usage when a 25-64 adult consumer is “considering, purchasing or deciding” on an “automotive” product and while “automotive” includes the purchasing, considering or deciding upon which auto to purchase, this category does include auto parts and other auto related services.

Yet, it does confirm Radio’s ability to communicate a message at the “automotive” Zero Moment of Truth (ZMOT) – when an ad would be most relevant and impactful.
This chart is to be read as: Radio’s has a 33.3% share of media usage in the same half hour that an A25-64 was deciding, considering or purchasing an “automotive” product.


 In the article referenced above, Scheppach also went on to say, “Marketers can reach about 65% of consumers pretty easily with standard TV buys, but finding light TV watchers is tough and only getting harder with audience fragmentation.” Not if you use Radio.

The following slide is one we presented to an agency earlier this week that handles the Toyota Dealer Association which confirms Scheppach’s observation about TV not being able to effectively cover the “entire market”.

This chart highlights that 20% of current Toyota owners in this market view TV only 38 minutes/day (lightest viewers) and would be exposed to less than 3% of Toyota’s paid gross impressions. These same lightest TV viewers listen to Radio close to 2 hours/day.

The key takeaway-Radio effectively covers these light TV viewers.
On top of this, the least affluent of these viewers, those who comprise less than 15% of all Toyota owners (and watch TV 10 hours/day), will be exposed to 35% of Toyota’s paid gross impressions. This is not a “use Radio if there’s any extra dollars” discussion, it is a “use Radio to make your media campaign more effective” discussion. Reaching “more” with a relevant message is preferable to repeatedly “preaching to a few”, the heaviest of TV viewers.


 There are also several slides from the recent ARF study that could be helpful when meeting with dealers and their agencies. The ARF (Advertising Research Foundation) is the research equivalent of the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. The biggest marketers in the world were involved with the creation of these slides and the following conclusions:

The more mediums utilized in a media campaign, the greater the return-on-investment. These results are based upon 3,200 sophisticated econometric analyses by one of the industry’s most respected econometric firms, Analytic Partners. This is not chipmunk research. Use TV, use the Internet, but do not ignore Radio. The reasons to use Radio go far beyond Radio’s TSL and speaks to Radio’s ability to deliver a message to the light consumers of different media in different “contexts”, where other media can’t go and at key moments of receptivity.


 The slide below details the results of another much respected analytics company, Marketing Evolution, which analyzed $100 billion in ad spend over the past 5 years. Their conclusion: Digital expenditures need to be kept in perspective, that while it needs to be part of the plan, it should not the majority of the plan. Their suggested Digital allocation: 20%-30%. If a dealership is interested in maximizing sales they’d be wise to keep this finding in mind. Plus, we can help them with the Digital component of their media plan.


 The ARF study also concluded there is a point-of-diminishing returns. Truth is there is a point of diminishing returns to everything no matter how good or effective it might be at the outset. It what’s referred to as “satiation”. The first beer tastes the best, then it goes downhill from there. Sometimes too far downhill.

Same is true with media impressions. The first impression is most effective, then each successive impression gets increasingly less effective- this is a life law not just a media law. There does come a point when even if a particular medium isn’t deemed to be as effective as another one initially, it will at some point generate a greater return-on-investment due to the over-use of the initial medium. Anything “good” can become “bad” if it’s overdone; exercise, eating, work and even the use of TV or Digital.

Excessive use of any medium results in less impact per ad dollar. We had made this point to an agency earlier this week, highlighting that they placed 6,000 TV commercials in one market in Q1 2016. Media Monitors is a great way to effectively make this point. It’s difficult to understand how this might not be perceived as being too much of a good thing on TV. Our discussions with this agency and client are ongoing:

Also, why should a dealership continue to pay premium dollars for TV, which due to multi-tasking, has largely become an audio advertising medium sprinkled with occasional visual elements? The ARF study concluded that viewer’s eyes are not on the TV screen but are facing downward up to 65% of the time. This should surprise no one:

If this is “too high level” stuff for the dealers or their agencies, try positioning Radio’s role in the following manner:
– Complementary Medium: Radio not only delivers media value on its own but also reaches the light users of other media, leaving no potential customer “uncovered”. The auto business is too competitive to leave any potential customer “uncovered”.

– Resonance: Radio’s efficiency enables an advertiser to maintain “continued brand presence” as well as being a powerful memory maintenance vehicle, extending the life of any TV campaign. When it comes to marketing, out of sight really is out of mind. Radio enables a dealership to maintain critical visibility. Car buying never stops and as such nor should dealership advertising.

– Magnification: Enables a dealership to communicate “other reasons” to buy/believe beyond price (reference the Clip study above- or even better, do your own). This is often referred to as “convergent validity”- heard the messaging elsewhere so must be true. The ARF study confirmed that there is a considerable amount of positive “priming” impact between Radio and TV. Radio making the TV advertising more effective and TV making the Radio advertising more effective.

– Acceleration: The longer a campaign runs the more effective the campaign becomes. “Being there” when an auto shopper is deciding is the difference between a sale this weekend and lost business. The absent are always wrong in sales and in the auto dealership business.

– Synergy: The same number of exposures in multiple media are more effective than the same number of exposures in a single medium. Multiple media have a greater “summed” effect than any individual media.

 

The Radio Show

 

 

This year’s Radio show, co-produced by the NAB and RAB, will be held in Nashville this September so the Radio Week proclamation comes from Nashville Mayor Megan Barry. The proclamation, which you can read HERE, says “to recognize the importance of radio broadcasting to Music City’s creative and economic well-being and to welcome the 2016 Radio Show to Nashville.”

You're Fired! -- How to Walk Away from a Bad Client

                                 

By Ditas Mauricio Havas May 05, 2016

I've been doing PR for my entire career and have worked in professional services for nearly two decades. I feel fortunate to have partnered during this time with some of the most amazing national brands across a wide range of industries, from CPG to home décor to oil and lubricants. As a result of being a client lead for many years, I have worked with some very talented folks. I have also navigated a number of difficult client relationships that make me appreciate the good ones even more.

Looking back on the difficult relationships got me thinking: When it comes to bad clients, when is enough truly enough? How do you know when to simply grin and bear it, or when it's the right time to walk away?

Thanks to baptism by retail and an overzealous work ethic, part of me has always subscribed to the philosophy of "Do What's Right for the Customer." It was my first employer's motto and it's always stuck with me. But as I've grown older and wiser, I have come to realize that, despite one's best efforts or good faith in mankind, there are still some client relationships that go south for reasons beyond your control. Of more importance, I've learned to recognize warning signs that signal it's time to make a change and ultimately accept that a relationship is no longer working.
Here are some fundamental questions to consider when you're assessing the uncertain health of any client partnership:

1. Are you repeatedly over-servicing the account? Often in our zest to keep clients happy we invest time above and beyond what is scoped. However, if this situation becomes more of a rule rather than an exception, remind yourself that you're in a business relationship and you don't work for free! If you're continually putting in double and triple the billable hours than you have agreed upon, it just doesn't make good business sense to continue.
2. Is the client demonstrating bad behavior or being unprofessional? I believe that good begets good. Are they being honest and truthful or acting in an unethical manner, such as knowingly providing you with incorrect information? Do they criticize good work? Distorting the truth, berating or being unpleasant to staff are sound reasons to walk away from any client. After all, in professional services our people are our most valuable assets; allowing them to be mistreated isn't worth any budget.
3. Are they constantly making unreasonable demands? I never balk at a big project or challenge. Anyone who works at an agency knows that some days turn into long nights. However, if your team is constantly jumping through hoops without any show of gratitude, feedback or understanding, it's high time to re-set expectations and right the ship. If every day is a fire drill and you feel the need to don your armor before every client call, ask yourself the hard question: Is this partnership worth the overall toll it's taking on your team?
4. Do they trust you? Sometimes a client isn't listening because they're juggling a lot of responsibilities; however, if they don't trust your recommendations or heed your advice, it's a no-win situation. There is nothing worse than a client that undermines your authority and expertise and shows no true signs of partnership or respect.
5. Are they paying on time? We pay our cable bills when we want to watch TV. We all pony up funds to go shopping, eat out and attend yoga classes. It's basic commerce. When clients don't uphold the financial terms of your contract (on top of demonstrating any of the above bad behaviors), recognize you're on a slippery slope. Being diligent about getting paid from the beginning will help prevent any big losses when/if the going gets tough. 

At the end of the day, as leaders we must trust our gut instincts. But as part of the process, it's important to stay connected to our staff, to stand up for what we believe is right and to be brave enough to walk away from bad revenue. We all want to grow our businesses, but we need to do so in a positive way with the right partners -- the kind that do not destroy team morale or negatively impact productivity and the fabric of our agencies. Failing to recognize unhealthy situations and becoming complacent or blinded by financial gains is sure to cause more extensive damage, which can hinder the long-term success of any business.

The opinions and points of view expressed in this commentary are exclusively the views of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of MediaVillage.com/MyersBizNet, Inc. management or associated bloggers. Photo courtesy of Graphic Stock.

Online Media Players Gun for TV’s Lost Viewers at NewFronts

Viewers at NewFronts

Todd Spangler

NY Digital Editor@xpangler  

Courtesy of iab

May 4, 2016 | 10:00AM PT

                                    

Online video is still the plucky, punkish younger cousin to TV’s rich uncle. But digital entertainment now has a firm seat at the big kids’ table on Madison Avenue.

See more.

A diverse lineup of media players will tout new projects and initiatives to try to win the business of ad buyers and brand marketers at the 2016 Digital Content NewFronts, the industry’s version of the television upfront season, which runs May 2-13 in New York. Officially in its fifth year, the IAB-managed series of presentations will feature 38 companies (up from 34 last year) along with unofficial piggybacking events hosted by CAA, UTA and others.

“In the old days, it was kind of a sideshow,” says Pete Stein, head of Fullscreen’s brand group. “Now it’s center stage.”

In addition to mainstays like YouTube, AOL and Hulu, presenters new on the NewFronts schedule this year include AwesomenessTV, Turner’s CNN, Activision Blizzard, Mashable, Hearst, Playboy, NowThisNews, Woven Digital and SheKnows Media. “I feel like we are finally at a point where the TV money is tipping to online video — that’s why it’s important for us to be there,” says AwesomenessTV CEO Brian Robbins.

Digital video has grown in stature among media buyers, who today see the segment as more critical than ever to reach younger audiences, who watch less TV. Indeed, YouTube was ranked as the most important outlet by agency and ad execs for TV and video media buying — ahead of ESPN — with Hulu, Vice Media and AOL in the top 10, according to a survey by MyersBizNet.

At YouTube’s Brandcast event May 5, the company will highlight internal research that shows its punching power relative to TV. For example, in the U.S., 44% of YouTube viewers aged 18-49 do not watch primetime broadcast TV in an average week. “We are seeing the combination of success clients are having on YouTube, and the challenges they are having in getting [gross rating points] on television,” says Tara Walpert Levy, managing director of agency solutions for Google and YouTube.

Time spent watching traditional TV by consumers 18-24 has dropped roughly 34% between 2011 and 2015, according to Nielsen figures. “Those viewers are getting content and being entertained in other ways,” says Condé Nast Entertainment president Dawn Ostroff, who will show off a slate of millennial-focused programming at the CNE presentation.

And, as the NewFronts promise to abundantly illustrate, TV will be facing even more competition for eyeballs — and ad dollars — from the online-video realm. Time Inc., which has built a 5,000-square-foot studio space at its new lower Manhattan HQ to boost video production, will unveil an over-the-top video service with longer-form, lean-back programming that company execs have said will draw from People and Entertainment Weekly.

But the NewFronts just aren’t in the same league as the TV upfronts. “Very little money moves as a result of the NewFronts,” says GroupM head of digital investment Jon Hsia. The presentations are important for advertisers to understand how to target specific audiences on digital platforms, “but there’s no season for buying digital inventory.”

For Hulu, the NewFronts song-and-dance actually is like an upfront, according to senior VP of sales Peter Naylor. Hulu positions itself as a TV network that just happens to be distributed online. “We’re the first alternative to broadcast and cable,” Naylor says. “Today’s TV media plans have reached a ceiling … and we represent a way to extend and reassemble some of those lost ratings.”

Amid the NewFronts noise are parties, but not the huge, splashy affairs of years past. Disney’s Maker Studios and Yahoo are each holding private events for brands and agencies, scaled down from their former razzle-dazzle. Yahoo is keeping a low profile in general, given its recent retrenchment on content — and possible sale.

Apart from the festivities and possible deal-making, there’s plenty of value in the NewFronts as a chance to educate the market on the power of digital influencers and content produced specifically for Internet platforms. “Everyone under the age of 30 gets what we’re doing,” says Reza Izad, head of Americas for Studio71. “People over 30 intellectualize it but still don’t fully get it.”

CBS Stations 1Q Revenue Climbs 18%

 

Increases in political, retrans and carriage of Super Bowl 50 were drivers. Looking ahead, CEO Les Moonves says “we are in a very enviable position for this year's upfront, given the ongoing strength of our primetime lineup and a robust advertising marketplace. Plus, advertising is poised for even more growth in the back half of the year as political spending ramps up.” He adds that retrans is expected to surpass $1 billion this year.  

 

By Staff

    

TVNewsCheck, May 3, 2016 4:52 PM EDT 

      

CBS Corp. on Thursday reported results for the first quarter of 2016 that included an 18% increase in revenue from CBS Television Stations compared to the first quarter a year ago.
The company said the increase reflected the broadcast of Super Bowl 50 on CBS, higher political advertising sales and growth in retransmission consent revenues.

 

The company’s Local Broadcasting segment revenue of $649 million for the first quarter of 2016 were up 9% from $596 million in the same prior-year period. (The Local Broadcasting numbers include the CBS Television Stations and CBS Radio.)

Local Broadcasting operating income for the first quarter of 2016 increased 28% to $206 million from $161 million or the same prior-year period. The increase was driven by higher revenues as well as lower expenses as a result of restructuring activities the company put in place to create efficiencies.

"CBS delivered a spectacular quarter as we continue to execute on our strategy of creating and distributing the content that audiences have to have," said Leslie Moonves, chairman-CEO, CBS Corp. "We had double-digit revenue growth, and we set records in all key profit measures, with EPS coming in above a dollar for the first time in our Company's history. Advertising was extremely strong, growing 31% overall and 49% at the CBS Television Network, where we are on track to win the season in adults 25-54 and adults 18-49, as well as in viewers for the 13^th time in 14 years.

“Looking ahead, we are in a very enviable position for this year's upfront, given the ongoing strength of our primetime lineup and a robust advertising marketplace. Plus, advertising is poised for even more growth in the back half of the year as political spending ramps up. Our high-margin, non-advertising revenue streams are also on the rise, led by retransmission consent fees and reverse compensation, which are expected to surpass $1 billion this year. At the same time, our subscription streaming services, CBS All Access and Showtime over-the-top, are reaching new and younger audiences and are beginning to make a meaningful contribution to our results.

“As we grow our company on the strength of our premium content, we are also moving forward with our initiative to separate our radio business, which will unlock value for shareholders and further diversify our revenue streams. So across the board, we are turning in record results while we position the company for long-term growth. It clearly continues to be a terrific time to be a CBS investor."

Publishers Split On Ad Blocking Response

 

 by Erik Sass, , Staff Writer @eriksass1, May 2, 2016, 1:13 PM                                            
                                                   

There is no mistaking the general sentiment about ad blocking at MediaPost’s Publishing Insider Summit in Key Largo, where panel moderator Bob Garfield compared ad-blocking software providers to the Taliban in his opening remarks.

But as the following panel agreed, vilifying the opponent -- while doubtless satisfying -- does little to address this looming problem. So what should publishers do?

Forbes has been a leader in the publisher response to ad blocking, adopting what might be termed a “carrot-and-stick” approach. According to vice-president for advertising products and strategy Ann Marinovich, Forbes ran an experiment in which half the visitors using ad blocking software were invited to turn off their ad blockers or whitelist Forbes in return for a lighter ad experience, promising faster loading times and less data usage — or otherwise not be able to see the content.

Marinovich noted that 35% of the ad blocker users who received the message chose to turn off their blockers or whitelist the site – and that the these actually proved to be some of the most engaged visitors to the site, spending more time on the site and generating more page views than visitors who weren’t using an ad blocker in the first place.

Now all users that visit Forbes with ad blockers activated are presented with the same choice, and Marinovich reported that, “Since December, we’ve reclaimed 185 million impressions” that would otherwise have been lost to ad blockers. Nor has the “ad light” strategy been to detrimental to the bottom line as, reflecting their higher engagement,  “revenue per user has been ad par or higher” than users coming without ad blockers.

However, the panel also showed that many publishers remain leery of adopting even a moderately confrontational approach to readers, and some of this hesitation stems from the very structure of the new media ecosystem, where readers are often contributors as well, and tech-savvy types more likely to use ad blockers are also among the most valuable visitors.

On that note, Patrick McCann, vice-president of data science for CafeMedia, revealed: “We have two social networks and we have to be very careful because those users are providing content for us… Many of the people using ad blockers are social influencers and we have to be very careful not to drive them away.”

The oft-repeated nostrum that publishers and advertisers need to improve the user experience ignores the fact that ad blockers, far from advocating for consumers as they claim, have a good reason to hope that things remain the same.

As Newspaper Association of America CEO David Chavern pointed out: “Not all ad-blockers are created equal… If you’re a for-profit ad blocker, you don’t want improvement in the digital ecosystem, because you make your living off of a bad ecosystem.”

Similarly, publishers may not have the privilege of rejecting intrusive or data-heavy ads, as big platforms like Facebook, Google or Apple are able to do more or less by decree. McCann noted: “We don’t have the power of Facebook going to advertisers and saying you need to give us lighter ads. The publishers are the ones taking the heavy ads, the ten megabyte ads… You can’t just walk away from that.”

Of course, publishers may choose to rely on the big tech platforms to hold advertisers to these new standards, but this would in effect mean turning over their business to the platforms, diluting the publisher’s brand and undermining their relationship with the audience – something all the panelists agreed was problematic.

Publishers can also explore alternatives to the ad-supported model, but preliminary findings on this front aren’t particularly promising: Marinovich noted that among ad block users surveyed by Forbes, 80% said they would be unwilling to pay for content.