By Ann-Christine Diaz
For the third year, creative networking site Working Not Working has released an annual list of the top 50 companies creatives would "kill to work for full-time." Derived from a survey of Working Not Working members, this year's lineup included 25 companies that made the list for the third time in a row. Those included Airbnb, Google, Apple, 72andSunny, Barton F. Graf, Disney, Droga5, BBDO, Pentagram, Nike and Wieden & Kennedy. Thirteen companies appeared on the list for the first time this year. Among them were Adam & Eve/DDB, Anomaly, Deutsch, Snapchat, Spotify and Stinkdigital. See the full list above and on Working Not Working's blog. According to Working Not Working co-founder Justin Gignac, this year's survey saw the continuing trend of creatives wanting to work more in tech, media and publishing over traditional agencies. Companies who have been in the headlines, such as Spotify and Snapchat, jumped onto the ranking as well. Mr. Gignac said the list has grown more international -- with the addition of newcomers including London-based Adam&Eve/DDB and Stranger & Stranger, Vancouver's Giant Ant, Germany's Bureau Mirko Borsche and Stockholm-based Snask and Spotify. Working Not Working's list debuted in 2014 as a lineup of companies that freelance talents would give up their freedom to work full-time for. Since then, the platform has expanded to include full-timers, so the survey has evolved to represent aspirational companies for all creatives, no matter what their current job attachment status.Although survey responses showed that the fourth most popular answer was "None/Freelance" -- suggesting it would still take a lot for un-attached creatives to give up their freedom -- 60% of those respondents cited "creative opportunity" as one reason they would consider going full time, followed by "the team" and "company's mission." Since Working Not Working released last year's list, its community has increased 50%, from 5,000 members to 7,500. Its talent base has expanded from ad agency creatives to other sectors, including production with the addition of directors and editors as well as VR-focused talents. For original publication, please click here.
0 Comments
By T.J. Auclair This is a piece for my fellow weak-minded golfers out there. Noise doesn't bother me on a golf course, be it music, the grounds crew doing their thing, a cart that comes to an abrupt stop during my backswing -- all good. I also don't like to blame anyone but myself for poor play or a poor shot. That said, there are certain lines I've heard from playing partners on the course that irk me. There's nothing I love more than busting chops with friends while chopping my ball around the golf course. But there are some things that I think need to be off limits and I'm not even including the wishing of "good luck" my buddy Jeff has been giving me a split second before starting my downswing since we were 14 years old. Again, this is for my fellow weak-minded golfers out there. A lot of you reading this are going to proclaim: "You're a wuss! Get over it! Block it out!" I totally get it and that's more than fair. But, please, for me and golfers like me, hear me out. Here's a list of 11 things we really, really don't want to hear on the golf course. 1. "Look out for the water hazard on the left." Thank you, playing partner, for bringing a hazard to the forefront of my brain that I hadn't even considered until you mentioned it. You've seen me hit my tee shots right all day long. Now it's going to look like there's a magnetic force pulling my ball to the complete opposite side of the course into that hazard. 2. "Put me down for a 6 there." Why do I have to "put you down" for a specific number? Can't I just put you down for the score you actually totaled on the hole? 3. "I can't believe I just shanked that shot! When's the last time you hit a shank?" Well, I'm not sure about the "last time" I hit one, but I'm pretty sure the "next time" is right around the corner since you mentioned the word. 4. "I've never seen anything better than a three-putt from the part of the green you're on." Fantastic. I'm sure I'll have no problem bucking that trend now that you put that out there. 5. "I haven't seen you hit a bad shot yet." Thanks for noticing. I'm going to dial one up for you right now. 6. "Have you been playing this entire round with just one ball? I'm impressed." The only way you -- and me -- will be more impressed is if I don't lose the ball on this next shot. 7. "All you need to do is bogey this hole to shoot your career-best score." At around the 12th hole I realized how well I was playing today and have been doing everything in my power to not think about the score and take it all one shot at a time just like the pros... Until now. Sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, I'm going to make worse than bogey on this hole. 8. "Wait until you see the lie you have in this bunker. Nasty." I'm sure I'll be able to make that discovery myself once I get there. Thanks, Feherty. 9. "Great try for birdie giving it a run like that. But man, you have a knee-knocker left for par." Yes, yes. I can see with my own two eyes that I pretty much hosed myself on an easy two-putt par. No need to poor salt on the wound. Now, let me try to pull it together and stroke this 4-footer with all that positive reassurance dancing around in my head. 10. “Don't leave this putt short." I appreciate you pointing that out. I didn't notice the downhill severity of this putt until you were kind enough to verbalize it. So, if I leave this one short you mean to tell me I'll be faced with a second severely downhill putt and that wouldn't be a good thing? Got it. 11. "Take your time." This is one of my favorites. My dad -- the man I have probably played more golf with in my life than anyone else -- has been notorious for this since I started playing at age 5. I'll be playing great (by my standards). Suddenly, I'll hit a shot or putt that has me running a little hot. Just as I address the next shot, without fail, he'll pipe up with, "Take your time, T." Boom. Kiss of death. Back away, restart the routine and inevitably screw up the next shot as I'm wondering as I play it whether or not I'm taking my time. This happens most often when I elect to finish out rather than mark my ball. And, most often again, means I still have two putts left to hit. For fun, here's a video featuring 10 of the best golf rants and tantrums: For origin of article, please click here. 10/12/2016 Amazon Strikes Licensing Deal With Bollywood Banner Dharma Productions for IndiaRead NowBy Nyay Bhushan The upcoming launch of Amazon's Prime Video Service in the country will offer catalog and future titles from leading filmmaker Karan Johar's banner. Amazon has set its eyes on Bollywood ahead of the planned India launch of its Prime Video service, unveiling a licensing deal Monday with leading filmmaker Karan Johar's Dharma Productions banner. The pact covers catalog and upcoming titles, such as romantic drama Ae Dil Hai Mushkil.Directed by Johar, the film stars actor Ranbir Kapoor and actresses Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Anushka Sharma. It will be released theatrically on Oct. 28 during the Diwali festival frame. Other upcoming titles include OK Jaanu and Badrinath Ki Dulhaniya, while Prime Video subscribers will also have access to Dharma's catalog, such as hit romantic drama Kal Ho Naa Ho, starring Shah Rukh Khan, Agneepath, Student of the Year and Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani, among others. Also included are recent titles such as Brothers, Kapoor and Sons, Shaandaar and Gori Tere Pyar Mein. “We are excited to have Dharma Productions’ library and future slate of titles for the upcoming launch of Prime Video” in the country, Amazon Video India director and country Nitesh Kripalani said. “We know our Prime members are going to love the broad selection of films and stories - everything from soulful romance to heartfelt and funny family stories - that Dharma does so well.” Dharma Productions CEO Apoorva Mehta added that “the time couldn’t be more right for us to mark our presence” on digital platforms and that partnering with Amazon “will go a long way in ensuring that our content will not only be seamlessly streamed, but will also see a huge demand from users of Prime Video." The companies didn't disclose financial details and didn't say if Amazon could also use the licensed content in other markets. For origin of article, please click here. By Saqib Shah Facebook Live has been conspicuously missing from the desktop version of the platform since its launch at the start of the year. Popular demand, however, has forced the social network to expand the livestreaming feature. In fact, Facebook has already quietly begun rolling out desktop Live video to select users. The company confirmed the news in a statement to SocialTimes: “We’re starting to roll out the ability for people to broadcast live on Facebook from their desktop or laptop.” The wider launch of the feature reportedly comes on the back of requests from vloggers, journalists, and general fans of Live video. Facebook claims the desktop version is currently only available to a “small percentage” of users with more set to receive the feature “in the coming months.” The company added that Facebook Live video on desktop supports both peripheral cameras, in addition to built-in cameras on laptops. Additionally, Search Engine Journalspotted a video of a lucky user who already has access to the feature. Delilah Taylor shared a Facebook Live clip recorded from her desktop in which she discusses the random appearance of a “Live Video” button within the status composer. “When I first clicked live video it didn’t do anything,” Taylor says in the video. “You’ve got to put in a comment and then you hit next, and when you hit next it will bring up a secondary screen, which kind of looks like a Google Hangout screen, and you can adjust your camera and microphone … Then you hit ‘Go Live.’” The process of naming your broadcast before going live — what Taylor describes as “putting in a comment — has always been part of the streaming process on Facebook Live for mobile. Taylor does make reference to one major difference from the mobile version: the ability for broadcasters to type comments during the livestream. The expansion of Live video doesn’t come as too much of a surprise considering Facebook began rolling it out on its Windows 10 app in May, consequently allowing users to broadcast from a Windows desktop or laptop. However, launching the feature on its desktop site will help introduce it to an even larger audience. Origin of article can be found here. 9/22/2016 Why Netflix’s goal of 50% original content may be bad news for your binge watchingRead NowBy Mike Murphy Binge-watching your favorite show might become a bit more difficult in the coming years, as Netflix Inc. moves toward its goal of creating half of the content the streaming service offers. Netflix Chief Financial Officer David Wells announced the 50% goal Tuesday at Goldman Sachs’ Communacopia conference. “We’ve been on a multiyear transition and evolution toward more of our own content,” Wells said, and “it will take us a couple more years” to reach that target. “We’re a third to halfway to where we want to be. … We’ve got a ways to go.” This year, Netflix NFLX, +0.66% said it will produce 31 series, with 600 hours of original programming — up from 450 in 2015 — and it will spend about $6 billion on original content in 2017. It has also started producing movies, such as Adam Sandler’s “The Do-Over” earlier this year and 2015’s “Beasts of No Nation.” Producing that much of its own content could be good for Netflix’s bottom line, eventually. Though likely resulting in higher — though one-time — costs for the near term to actually create the shows, the move could save significant money down the road, as Netflix will be able to get out of the licensing deals it currently must pay for outside programming. With more streaming services vying for the same content, the cost of licensing deals is soaring. In July, Netflix reached a five-year deal to stream shows from The CW Network eight days after they air, which could end up costing as much as $1 billion, according to a report by Variety. “You have supply and demand settling out,” Wells said Tuesday. “We would love to provide as many of those stories as possible to the consumer.” But while Netflix subscribers may be getting more original shows like “Stranger Things” and “Narcos,” they may be seeing significantly fewer second-run shows like “The West Wing” and “Sons of Anarchy.” Netflix has already started winnowing outside content from its lineup. A report earlier this year by AllFlicks found that Netflix’s catalog of movies and TV shows has dropped by 31% over the past two and a half years, slashing more than 2,500 titles. Many more titles are likely to drop off Netflix in the next few years as licensing deals expire. That means it’ll only get harder to catch up on movies and network TV shows. While streaming rivals such as Amazon.com AMZN, +1.58% and Hulu will likely pick up rights to some of the content Netflix drops, they too will likely shift their focus toward more cost-effective original content in the future. And that could be bad news for fans of non-blockbuster movies and older TV shows who likely will be left with fewer — if any — streaming options. For origin of article, please click here. By Christopher Heine It's the new golden age of audio. So it's not entirely surprising that there has been a wealth of new podcasts announced in recent weeks, especially last week during the Interactive Advertising Bureau's second annual Podcast Upfronts. But a big, recent push for sports content is especially intriguing, with Sports Illustrated unveiling a trio of programs, PodcastOne debuting an action-sports play and ESPN announcing that a podcast version of its award-winning, film-style 30 for 30 TV documentaries is forthcoming in early 2017. For sports podcasts to truly make their mark, they may have to differentiate themselves from sports talk radio, ESPN's calling card. Bob Dorfman, a sports marketing expert and creative director at Baker Street Advertiser, suggested the Disney-owned brand is on the right track. "Podcasts can succeed in ways that sports talk radio can't," Dorfman said. "Although they can't match the immediacy and participatory nature of sports talk radio, they can deliver superior storytelling, deeper analysis and richer interviews." We chatted with senior producer at ESPN Films and FiveThirtyEight Jody Avirgan, who's also a WNYC radio veteran and heads up the 30 for 30 podcasts. He gave us the scoop on what sports fans and media observers can expect from ESPN's new venture. Adweek: Have your higher-ups assured you they are going to push this venture across ESPN's properties, such as SportsCenter mentions and ESPN.com homepage real estate? Jody Avirgan: That's a big part of this project, and it was very attractive to me. The entire company is behind it. How much time will your team put into each episode? These will take months. We are giving ourselves the time we need to do them right and report them. They are not spinoffs of the 30 for 30 films. They are original stories, and they are going to be fully produced. We have to do all the interviews, all the research, all the archival work. It is going to take about the same amount of work that a film does. What will be different from the films in terms of the process? There's a team here at ESPN Films that develops an idea, and then it goes to an outside production company or director. That director will take the lead on the nuts and bolts of the production, and ESPN Films will be part of the editorial process—but not the day-to-day in many ways. The fact of the matter is the podcast industry isn't there yet. There's not a dozen of podcast production houses floating around who we could go to and say, "Hey, run with it." So you guys are doing it in-house? We are going to be doing a lot of that work here, inside the building, doing the actual reporting and production. That's why we are hiring a team of five producers who have radio and documentary backgrounds. I do want to get to the point where we are collaborating with other people, maybe even collaborating with filmmakers who would have otherwise made a 30 for 30 film. How long with the 30 for 30 podcasts be? Here's what I can tell you about the format: We are going to give ourselves the space to develop it the way it needs to be developed. I can tell you it won't be like a show—it won't be like flipping a switch, and there will be weekly shows. We are going to do these in batches and seasons. To do a real good documentary that goes deep and breaks some ground and actually has some reporting in it, we are going to need at least a half an hour or 40 minutes. You know, it's not going to be two hours, and it's not going to be 15 minutes. It's going to be a nice, sizable piece of real, narrative journalism. When it comes to the focus, a lot of the 30 for 30 docs have been flashpoints in sports culture history. The Miami Hurricanes one comes to mind—it's also really about the late 1980s and early '90s. So, will the podcasts be cultural flashpoints or slivers of sports history that's completely blown out in a fashion that hadn't been previously done? That's exactly what I am thinking about right now. When I think of my favorite 30 for 30s, I tend to lean toward the ones that have a bigger resonance—the ones that aren't just about a great sports story, but the ones that are about culture, society, politics and an era, the ones that can teach us a little bit more. I think the Miami Hurricanes 30 for 30 you mention is an excellent example, as is The Two Escobars. I have a journalism background. I come from public radio, so I think there's going to be a journalist DNA to most of these podcasts. I am really excited that the 30 for 30 model means there needs to be a great, great story. Your job is to get out of the way. Do what you can to let it ride, let it go from A to B to C to D. You can start to tell the larger [stories], so the listener can have those bigger thoughts. Yeah, a lot of sports podcasting simply reuses talk-radio formats. From the way you sound, this is clearly going to be something different. Yeah, I am hoping we can pull it off. Original publishing can be found on AdWeek. By Tim Sims [Illustration by Traci Daberko] Years of being bombarded with irrelevant marketing has made one thing clear: Ads are more meaningful when tailored to consumer interests. Think back to the last decade. If you were reading your favorite news site in, say, 2007, advertisers were trying to grab your attention with a pop-up or flashing banner ad that caused you to stop what you were doing to look at it. Amazingly, that's still a media strategy for some advertisers, but interruptive display has become increasingly unpleasant for consumers and ineffective for brands. Fortunately, irrelevant ads are marching into obscurity. The rise of new formats such as native, audio and advanced TV allows brands to reach consumers in ways that tie in seamlessly with what they're already doing. This new breed of context-driven advertising actually improves the user's experience rather than distracting from it. Further, by implementing programmatic tools, marketers can reach unique audiences with ad messaging that is more relevant than ever before. Here's how brands are detracting the ad distraction: Native makes us better off More than anything else, native advertising has precipitated the shift toward immersive advertising. After all, by its very definition the format "follows the natural form and function of the user experience." As recently as five years ago, the concept of "sponsored content" was alien to many marketers. But social networks like Facebook and Twitter have made native advertising increasingly mainstream for today's internet users. The success of native is directly related to how it enables marketers to deliver informative, content-focused ads at scale. Native doesn't disrupt the consumer experience. Instead, it presents content, information or promotions within the context of the platform or website the user is browsing. The ad fits seamlessly into the user experience and they have the choice whether or not to engage with it. Considering native is more organic and less disruptive, it is more palatable to consumers and effective for marketers. According to a study from Sharethrough and IPG Media Lab, people are over 50 percent more likely to pay attention to a native ad than a banner ad, with native driving greater brand affinity and purchase intent. It's no wonder that U.S. native ad revenues will top $16 billion this year, per BI Intelligence, doubling to $33.5 billion by 2020. It may seem counterintuitive, but native campaigns are increasingly being bought and sold via programmatic. These solutions marry the impact of native with the efficiency of exchange-based ad buying and the targeting capabilities available to buyers through DSP platforms. Audio ads get sound results Online marketers are also using programmatic targeting tools to bring old-school TV and radio advertising into the digital age. For example, Spotify recently made its streaming music inventory available for programmatic buying, allowing brands to target users based on attributes such as age, listening habits, location and gender. Music is attached to almost everything consumers do. Audio connects and carries mood, memories and action. This emotive quality, coupled with its position as a permanent fixture in various consumer habits, makes audio a prime opportunity to serve ads that present products as a vital part of those routines or moments. With the proliferation of smartphones, streaming audio allows people to take on-demand music and podcasts with them wherever they go, whether they're commuting to work, driving to the grocery store or running through the park. This gives marketers a unique opportunity to join their audience on their daily routines and reach consumers without interrupting their day. This kind of contextual advertising also provides advertisers with a rich data set. These insights ensure ads are relevant to the user at the moment they're heard. For example, a fast-food chain can target a user listening to a morning "rise and grind" playlist with an ad suggesting they stop by a location they're traveling past for a free coffee. Keep viewers glued to their couches Meanwhile, programmatic TV is turning one of the most interruptive advertising mediums into one that encourages viewers to stick around through the commercial breaks. In the past, everyone watching a TV show in a certain geographic region saw the same ad. Brands have been dependent on Nielsen ratings to determine the audience's demographics, but these segments are often so broad that most viewers seeing ads aren't part of the target and would never even consider purchasing. With the emerging technology of programmatic TV, brands are able to layer on their own data to find shows that are being watched by more precise groups of people. This way, they can ensure that a larger percentage of the people watching an ad for, say, a minivan are actually families in the market for a new vehicle. Though the programmatic TV market is in its infancy, it's expected to grow into a $17 billion category worldwide by 2019, according to IDC. As this technology continues to develop, marketers will only become more capable of engaging TV viewers with ads that truly speak to their needs as consumers. Digital's immersive future Across the board, digital media is shifting to a model where successful advertisers are those that deliver their message in a way that feels natural and organic to the user experience. As the era of immersive advertising gains momentum, brands and agencies must begin thinking about how they can use developing formats, platforms and targeting tools to weave their storytelling into the various routines and activities their consumers participate in. They can either create relevant, engrossing ad experiences that people want to spend time with, or watch as consumers migrate toward those provided by their rivals. Ultimately, if you subscribe to the doctrine that all media is shifting to digital and all digital media will be bought and sold programmatically, then it is an exciting future for immersive advertising. It's time to make irrelevant, interruptive banners a thing of the past. Origination of article can be found here. By Janko Roettgers So much for digital dollars: A majority of consumers has never rented or bought a digital copy of a movie or TV show, according to a new GfK study. What’s more, the average digital media collection is much smaller than physical disc collections or even VHS collections have been on average. 46 percent of consumers have ever bought or rented a digital movie or TV show, according to GfK’s recent Home Technology Monitor. In contrast, 86 percent of consumers have rented or bought a DVD or Blu-ray in the past, and 78 percent have done so with a VHS tape. Hollywood has long pushed to make digital home entertainment more attractive, with a particular emphasis on digital sales. However, these efforts don’t seem to resonate with consumers, with 70 percent of the GfK’s respondents telling saying that they have never bought a digital video. Digital locker services like Disney’s Movies Anywhere service and the competing Ultraviolet service doesn’t seem to have moved the needle on digital ownership. 37 percent of respondents said they bought physical media in the past that came with the option to access a digital version of the movie. However, two-thirds of those buyers never activated those digital copies. A closer look at consumers who do embrace digital formats also doesn’t spell good news for the studios. 33 percent of consumers who do rent digital movies do so every month, compared to 60 percent who had done so with physical media in the past. And while the average DVD collection used to contain about 87 discs, digital collections are only made up of 23 titles on average.
The flip side of this is the continuing strength of streaming services. GfK doesn’t mention Netflix by name, but the market research organization reports that 78 percent of consumers who have never bought or rented a digital video are streaming content instead. By Jako Roettgers | Senior Silicon Valley Correspondent at Variety. By George Slefo
Twitter said Wednesday that it had debuted its first live stream broadcast, featuring live game play from Wimbledon, but those hoping to see Roger Federer take on Marin Cilic wouldn't have found the match there. The stream, a chance for Twitter to test its streaming capabilities before it carries 10 NFL games in the upcoming season, was actually commentary, highlights and replays. That's because it was made possible by a deal with ESPN, which gave Twitter permission to show replays and highlights. For live matches, you still had to turn to an ESPN property. "Twitter is increasingly a place where people can find live streaming video, and that includes exciting sporting events like Wimbledon," Twitter said in a statement. "This live stream is an extremely early and incomplete test experience, and we'll be making lots of improvements before we launch it in its final form." Twitter did not sell any ads against its Wimbledon coverage, a company spokesman said. Twitter has a lot riding on the success of the NFL package, for which it paid about $10 million. The spokesman said Twitter has sold more than 60% of its NFL inventory to marketers, adding that it closed a deal with Bank of America during the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity in France. Meanwhile, Twitter is in the final stages of closing "about 10" different partnerships with media providers to stream live content on its platform, a person familiar with the talks told Ad Age. And as the presidential election nears, at least one of those partnerships will focus on politics. The source declined to identify potential partners for the streams. For marketers, not all of the live stream offerings will include the opportunity to advertise, at least not initially, the person familiar with the talks said. The company wants people to get familiar with the product and will only include advertising where it makes sense, such as sports, for example. But it does plan to make money from all its live streams eventually. To view the original story, click here. 5 Takes on the Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Video Roundtable in advance of the NewFronts By James Cooper In advance of the fourth annual Digital Content NewFronts, Adweek, in partnership with the Interactive Advertising Bureau, convened a panel of five industry thought leaders to discuss the challenges and opportunities Web- and mobile-based video pose for traditional media companies, digital native firms and brand marketers. Tamara Alesi, svp, media capability lead at DigitasLBi, Michael Zimbalist, svp, advertising products and R&D at The New York Times, Michael Klein, evp, programming and content strategy at Condé Nast Entertainment, Anna Bager, svp, gm of mobile and video at IAB, Rahul Chopra, CEO of Storyful and head of video for News Corp. and Danielle Lee, vp, commercial marketing at Vevo joined the discussion. The panel was moderated by Anna Bager, svp and general manager, video and mobile at the IAB. Anna Bager: We are honored and I'm very excited to have such a great group of people in the room to talk about what we're about to soon experience during the NewFronts. I would like to have a conversation around where the largest business opportunities are and also where the creative opportunities and challenges lie. So I want to start by asking the traditional publishers in the room who don't necessarily come from a digital video background, Michael [Zimbalist] and Michael [Klein] and Rahul. Where do you see the greatest opportunities, and do you feel that you're reaching new audiences? Michael Zimbalist: Yes, we are unquestionably reaching new audiences and taking on new capabilities and expressing the content we create in an entirely new form, so the business opportunities are the opportunities of a new business line. And the capabilities are widespread throughout the organizations, such that we can do videos as extensions of our journalism—but also commercial video for our advertisers. Michael Klein: Condé Nast Entertainment was created to take these iconic brands and content and leverage them across other platforms. So [that includes] feature films, television, but also importantly digital video where we're reaching a millennial audience, which is an extension of what we're seeing touching the brands on all other platforms. Rahul Chopra: Video has been core to our method of storytelling and also on a commercial perspective for over four years. We acquired Storyful at the end of 2013, which is really at the nexus of data and content. A couple weeks ago we launched Internet Action Force, a comedy vertical. All of this is leading us to brand-new audiences on brand-new platforms. It's just a phenomenal way to extend our brand. Bager: How are you thinking about new platforms? Klein: We've launched 17 channels based on our brands. And that content lives on our owned platforms as well as on our own portal The Scene, which is a home for digital-first premium content, not only from our brands but from brand partners. But it's also distributed widely through Yahoo, AOL, Twitter, Xbox, Roku, Apple TV. It's about getting the content to consumers on the platforms that they're using. Zimbalist: I would agree; it's about finding the consumers where they are and getting it to them where they are. So we publish on our own platform all the videos that we make, but we also distribute to other platforms. And in the cases of the videos we're making commercially for brands, those videos are owned and distributed by the brands. In many cases we've had the brands take the videos and distribute them independently on their own channels. Bager: Danielle, you're representing Vevo, a more pure-play digital video company. How are you thinking about these issues? Danielle Lee: It's absolutely about getti ng the content to where the viewers are. And everyone loves music. So our strategy has really been about syndicating our content through other publishers—we have over 50 publishers in our network that we syndicate our players to—but also having an aggressive app development strategy. That means making the Vevo app available on multiple devices as well as connected TV. It's very much a cross-screen experience. About 75 percent of our viewers watch Vevo videos across multiple devices. Bager: So when it comes to all this content and the content production, is that all done in-house or are you partnering with new types of companies? Klein: You know we've done over 135 series to date and we work with a variety of content creators. It can be people with a camera and a dream or a large production company. It really depends on the story they want to tell and the audience mood we're trying to fulfill with it. Lee: For us music is at the core of the concept that we're creating. We're serving music fans and our mission is to thrill and entertain them. Our content strategy really has been about celebrating music fandom, so a lot about our original [content] is focused on that. Our Certified series is a great example. It showcases videos that get 100 million views and celebrates the fans that got them there. And then there's music discovery. A lot of fans come to our site and discover new artists, so telling their story is a big part of the concept—not just the official music video but also the emerging artist's journey into superstardom. Bager: So I want to turn it over to Digitas, the only agency on this panel. Tamara, what are you hearing from buyers and brands about the digital video marketplace? Tamara Alesi: Video content has always been important to us as an agency. And it's really been the year of wow. We think about the fact that our landscape has changed so dramatically, and we're able to have this amazing conversation with consumers. And you're just connecting with them in different ways—whether it's on their phone, their television, traditional computer or even in the magazine that they grabbed off the newsstand. At the end of the day, we're able to really just converse and actually move brand metrics in a way like we never have because now we're able to enable commerce as part of that. So it's no longer getting the consumer to move across the line. Now we're using content and video as a storytelling mechanism to really pull them in and be relevant, which is why I think it's working so well. Bager: Do you feel brands are more educated and aware today than they were four years ago? Alesi: Absolutely. I think the agencies are always pushing to make sure we're bringing the most relevant opportunities to the brands that are out there. But at the end of the day we have really great partnerships with everybody who I'm sitting here with now, in terms of how we're actually not just bringing ideas to the forefront but ultimately, telling a completely different type of story. And actually allowing the consumers to now be part of that story, using influencers to not just influence per se, but actually make consumers brand advocates because they want to be part of it. And I think that the opportunities will just continue to grow. There's by no means a perfect solution yet, but we continue to reinvent, we continue to have successes and we continue to learn and get better at what we're doing. Bager: So where do you all see the biggest challenges? Alesi: There is no identified process for this. It's not like developing video content for a television series because you're often working with talent that isn't actually a commercialized talent per se, but rather an everyday individual that has become a YouTube star. So how you interact with them is very different, their contracts are different. How you interact with your brand to make sure that it still feels real and it's authentic to the consumer is very different. So I think we have a long way to go, but every time we create a new series or every time we push out a new commercial I think we get better at it. Zimbalist: That's what's exciting about it too, the conversation you can have with the audience in the digital platform—it's something you just do not have in television—and they'll let you know if they love it or hate it really quickly. You referenced YouTube stars as digital influencers that have gained significant audience and engagement and are a force to be reckoned with. Digital consumers chose their celebrity and made them—it wasn't a studio pushing it down on them. You can really see that the power of programming has been given to the consumer and the TV schedule is not relevant here. Chopra: YouTube has played a part in that as well though, right? They have elevated these stars and redefined what the definition of programming is differently. Lee: It's also a testament to the millennial generation. They want to participate and they don't want to be told what to watch. Bager: When you're talking about music and YouTube, it's fairly straightforward, but what about news? Zimbalist: This phenomenon that we're referring to has created an opening that allows The New York Times, Condé Nast and The Wall Street Journal to enter the video space in a meaningful way because the distribution channels are now open and democratized for us all to take part. We've entered it in three distinct ways. One is as an adjunct to the enterprise journalism that we do, so that any important story is going have video associated with it. And those videos can accommodate prerolls and be monetized in a way we could never do with photojournalism, which was an accessory to the journalism. We've also taken a lot of our franchises and our sections and turned them into recurring series, which is another completely new entry point for us, and those also can be monetized. And then we've created this entirely new business line which is outside of our newsroom, and it's wholly run by advertising which is to produce videos for brands. Any of these videos can have a scale to worldwide audiences. Chopra: We have this amazing opportunity with these new platforms to reach an entirely new audience and tell stories with video that just previously weren't possible. Early on, the motto we had was that we want to be live when you want it, in-depth when you need it everywhere and anywhere in the world. We are pretty proud of what we were able to build—and it's still so early. Bager: I want to come back to monetization and the advertising opportunity, but first I want to ask you all what you see as truly premium content? Alesi: Premium content is the most sought-after content. That's how I would look at it and we've referred to it as the prime time of digital. It's not necessarily a time slot during the day, just the content that's most wanted. When people are looking for news, and they want video, that becomes premium. There's also a production qualification in terms of what makes something premium. But I don't think there's a black-and-white answer. Bager: What do you say, Michael? Klein: We say performance is the new premium and that means that it's engaging content, there's real consumer interest and engagement, that it's delivering on the advertiser needs for the consumer. And, ultimately, that the consumer feels there's equity in it and [it] brings them back in wanting more and repeating the sense of urgency and passion that experience gave them and that started building a relationship with the brand. That's how we look at it. Bager: What's your advice for an advertiser just entering this space with significant budgets to spend in terms of knowing what's really succeeding with viewers? Alesi: Well there's a lot of data that you need to have in place to be able to properly measure that. We have a really defined tech staff that helps us to answer those questions for our advertisers so that they know that when we're telling them this is premium and is going to deliver best for them there's confidence behind that. It's also about having the data ecosystem in place so that we can continually optimize and measure what's going on. Bager: What KPIs do advertisers care most about when it comes to digital video? What are they asking for? Alesi: The right KPIs are about engagement—the consumer engaging with that content. It's not about viewability, and it's definitely not about clicks. Are they spending time with the video? Are they consuming it? And then are they looking for more? Lee: One of the things we've started looking at are social listening tools to really understand the conversation around our videos. I think that's a really great indicator for brands to understand how content resonates with audiences. Chopra: That's one of the areas where we're actually growing Storyful. How can you find the most engaging, the most authentic, the most timely of content and get it either in the hands of publishers to leverage or brands to leverage as well? I think that adding authenticity to engagement plays a big role as well. Especially with the growth of influencers. Klein: And especially to the millennial audience. If it's not authentic, they smell it a mile away and they'll reject it. Alesi: And the more that it's shared and the more that it is engaged with, the more likely that millennial group is actually willing to talk about it—which gives it additional legs and makes it even more popular and makes it trend. Bager: So we're talking a lot about millennials. Is that the only group that you can successfully reach? Alesi: I don't think it's just about millennials. I think every consumer is now capitalizing on digital video, no matter what screen it's on. Some of the latest stats that have come out from Nielsen and comScore show that less than 50 percent of consumers in general are watching linear TV. So at the end of the day the consumers' habits, no matter the demographic of the audience, have changed dramatically. I'm really interested to see what happens with Apple's new product in the fall in terms of moving more consumers away from linear TV. No matter who the consumer is they want to get their content when they want it and they're looking for more economy in doing so. And there's a lot of solutions via Apple TV that will allow you to get that content where you want it at a better economy. Chopra: I think Pew said 35 percent of Americans are consuming digital video and music content. It's a big number for some of us, and it's a whole new audience in some ways. The age and demographics are pretty diverse. Zimbalist: There's a new type of consumer emerging who wants video as their primary means of consuming our content, and it's a segment for sure, but among that segment they watch it pretty voraciously. People who watch video on our site are watching about 30 minutes of video a month, which is probably more than the average that they're reading. So the engagement, the time, the attention that's brought through video consumption is something that's only going to get more important and is only going to deliver better for advertisers over time. Klein: Though I would say for Condé Nast Entertainment, influential millennials are who we target and that's who you can learn from in terms of habits of how they're consuming content. When I look across Condé Nast digital, we have more millennials than E! and Lifetime, Oxygen and Bravo combined engaging with our content. So there's so much to be learned there in terms of how the audience is really engaging with our content. Zimbalist: Short form, long form—it's all over the place. We have a tremendous amount of content that's one to three minutes that people watch. We have content that goes up to 10 minutes. We have content that we've premiered and turned into full-length documentaries that have been nominated for the Academy Awards. You know there's kind of like this broad spectrum, and there are viewers for all of it. Bager: So what's the advertising opportunity? How do you monetize this content? Alesi: There's no one specific format that has nailed it. I think it really depends on the type of content you're in. If you're within a YouTube-type experience where you have a millennial doing some sort of a showcase on a brand or a product, you want to be short and to the point because you own that experience. And you still need to make sure that whatever the format is that it's authentic and that it's tuning into what the consumer is looking for. Otherwise, they're going to skip it and pass through. We've been having so many conversations about viewability as of late—it's a bit ad nauseam. The conversation that we're really trying to focus on is the conversation of attention. If a consumer watches a video for the full 30 seconds and they have the opportunity to skip that video, that means they're engaged and you've made a difference. That should be the core metric because the screen itself is just not optimized to deliver that 100 percent viewability. Chopra: I heard somebody say last week that if content is king, then context is God. That's probably going a bit far. But it's true that for editorial and for commercial we're at this golden age of storytelling in some ways, and advertisers need to be thinking about it in that way as well. Bager: Discuss the need for standard video ad formats. We recently formed a video board at the IAB with the goal of creating better understanding on what works in video. Alesi: It's hard to create standards for creativity and it totally depends on the category, on the type of plan, on the type of experience that they're consuming in, and most importantly, the audience. A millennial consumer is going to be less patient with certain types of experiences where you know somebody who's Gen X or Gen Y are going to be potentially more likely to consume a longer format. So it really depends on who your audience is, but we do have to really lean on our best practices. Chopra: The three areas that we look at where there could be some standards are interactivity, commerce and leveraging social content … how you take the most authentic content that's been shared across Twitter, Facebook and YouTube and leverage it in a way that everyone is comfortable. As you look at brands getting more and more into the business of creating their own content, they're realizing very quickly how difficult it is, how expensive it is and how hard it is to get it discovered. Bager: So what advice do you have? Lee: I still think it's about tapping into the passion points of your audience and understanding what they care about and aligning your brand with that concept. So it's really about understanding your consumer. Klein: When we look at our development, it's audience first and what are their mood states that we can fulfill. Do they want to be inspired? Do they want to feel empowered? Do they want to feel creative? We actually have an audience engagement team that sits side by side with development, so that social aspect is baked into the DNA of the project—it's not "Let's pass this off to marketing." It's inherent from the start and becomes part of it. And that goes back to that authenticity piece. Bager: If you look at the types of ads that we have today— :15s, :30s, pre- and postroll—what's working best? Chopra: The interesting part is that the answer we all give today could be drastically different in about nine months. Because when Facebook and Twitter enter the space in a bigger way from a monetization perspective, they'll have the ability to change the landscape dramatically in regards to the type of ads they allow us to use. They're going to try and experiment with different things other than traditional preroll. And that will make for an interesting conversation from both our side and the brand side. Bager: So back to the NewFronts. What are your expectations? What do you think will be different this year? Will marketers be more engaged than last year? Klein: I think it's so exciting to see how much the industry has exploded in just the past 12 months. You have 33 presentations this year, up about 100 percent from last year. It demonstrates what's happening in the marketplace and how the advertising world is really embracing digital video. And competition is going to make everybody better. There's going to be a lot of content being pushed out over the two-week period. And you know we talked earlier about the definition of premium. I think you're going to see as a result of that, premium is really going to be defined—because not everybody is going to be playing at the same level. Alesi: What I love about it is it shows that we are in a constant state of reinvention. There are so many opportunities if you are a brand to see how you can engage with publishers in unique and inspiring ways. It's not the same old upfronts that we were all part of for so many years. Lee: I'd also say it's about acknowledging how we're getting smarter and what's working and what we're doubling down on. I find that brands are far more engaged this year than last year. We are having way more first-look NewFront meetings. Bager: The research shows that across the board we're consuming more media on all channels. What do you think NewFronts 2016 will be like? Chopra: A lot more about Facebook beyond just YouTube, which will be a big change. And I think continued maturity in the market. If you compared the NewFronts to when they started, or even last year, we've all grown up and matured quite a lot. YouTube is probably the best example. Their first show was not very good. Last year was very impressive and will likely be even more so this year. Zimbalist: The NewFronts, I believe—you guys [Digitas] started the NewFronts back in the day—were always conceived as a marketplace. I think it's getting to the point where it's almost becoming that, and people are really coming now ready to transact more than they had in the first couple of rounds. Which is really important and evolutionary and realizing the vision of what this started as four years ago. For more insight into the digital video advertising and creative marketplace, see video interviews at Adweek.com/video. (counterclockwise from left) Tamara Alesi, Michael Zimbalist, Michael Klein, Anna Bager, Rahul Chopra, Danielle Lee Photo: Kevin Scanlon
|
Details
CreatorA. Brent Lovell Archives
May 2017
Categories
All
|