 "Second screen consumption is an opportunity for brands: Mark Henning")
Even if the consumer's eyes are not on the television commercial, second screen syncing means she still gets the brand message at the same time, but this technology is not being used widely, Mark Henning tells Devina Joshi
Millward Brown predicts 2015 will see controlled second-screen syncing become significant in media plans. While research reveals that 35 per cent of all screen time involves simultaneous use of television and another digital device, how well do you see a consumer responding to paid messages/related content on her second screen? How would cross-device supplementary storytelling work?
What we found in our research is that most of the time, the content consumed simultaneously on a person's second device is not related to the television programme at that time. But this is an area of opportunity for brands. Consumers can have something playing on the television and then, maybe, they can be given an opportunity to follow up on the mobile phone. In the most basic form, this could be putting an ad on TV and displaying the URL on the ad, so that people can go and check it out online straightaway. Or say, if there is a song played on the television screen, consumers can use apps like Shazam to recognise it.
That is in its basic form but as technology evolves, we are going to have things like audio recognition potential - as the TVC is playing, the mobile device with an audio recognition system within it will let the brand (whose TVC is on) know that the consumer is surfing Facebook, and the brand can then place synchronised ads real time on the second device. So even if the consumer's eyes are not on the TV, she is still getting the message at the same time. This can vary based on the type of content consumed by people.
The technology is there, but I don't think it is being used widely. There are some examples, though. For instance, car brand Kia, sponsors of the Australian Open 2014, ran an ad on TV which featured the person who won the 'world's fastest serve' accolade that year. He spoke of the car, and would fetch his tennis racket and serve the ball. By downloading the 'Game On' app on your phone, you could actually return his serve by swinging your smartphone, gaining points based on your performance. Here, consumers were more engaged with the brand rather than just one-way communication on TV. So I think brands will start experimenting with it but they need to be aware of permissions; you don't want to be stalking people.
With platforms like Vine and Instagram showing dominant usage on mobile devices, the concept of micro video has taken off well in the West. How big do you think this trend is likely to be for emerging markets over the next five years, and do such six-second videos have any bearing on media planning at all?
Emerging markets have a very high penetration of mobiles. In the more developed markets like the US, the UK and Australia, people first went to PCs to go online. People learnt to do things in the online environment and mobile developed on the back of that. It has been an evolution.
But in the emerging markets, the penetration of mobiles has been accelerating much faster than PCs. I think we will see a 'mobile-first' digital strategy in emerging markets. I also think things like the lessons people are learning about how to utilise micro video on those platforms will pick up quickly in some of the emerging markets. It is going to depend on the capability of those markets. If that sort of capacity is rolled out and lives up to its promise, then I think we will see a rapid expansion of mobile video, whether it is a micro video or a larger format video.
I do see mobile videos becoming part of the media plan but it needs to be thought about as a part of the whole. Often, we see different platforms being considered in their own right and strategies are being developed for Facebook or Twitter or Vine, in isolation. As brands get much more comfortable in those spaces, they will consider all their touch points in the strategy and we will look at how they fit together and what roles each of those elements are playing in what and when they are trying to communicate.
How big is content marketing for brands at present as opposed to vanilla advertising? Is it set to proliferate?
Content marketing as you know is not new, it was present even in the offline media environment. The term 'native advertising' in particular has set the buzz around content marketing at the moment, and that's growing. What we found in the early days of native advertising in the digital space is that people didn't want content to be seen as advertising and they tried to hide it. We're now seeing a much stronger balance, and content is clearly being identified as advertising, but brands are trying to make sure that it is adding some value to the consumer. There has got to be a reason in it for a consumer … she should be able to take something out of it for it to have a positive effect. I think we're going to see continued growth of native or content marketing, but it will evolve in terms of the way it is done.
Would you say some categories have an advantage?
Travel is an area that has advantage when it comes to content marketing. There could be some bright content - an advertising piece - where you read about a destination you might want to go to. Here, you are adding value to a customer. I think, like any type of communication, it's going to be more suited to certain types of brands and categories.
Targeted communication through location-based data is known to be effective. What is limiting marketers from taking this more seriously? Could it be privacy issues?
I think privacy is certainly part of it; people don't want to feel like they are being stalked. It is like anything else in the digital space - there has to be permission. The cost and the expense of doing location-based targeting is probably another area that is holding people back. Some brands that have used it well include Virgin Atlantic. It explored the use of a location-based app at Heathrow Airport, which serves as an airport guide. There is something in it for the consumer as well as the brand. Or take retailer Macy's, which had a more obvious payback for the consumer. It was like a store concierge-like situation. It used its location-enabled in-store navigator app to engage consumers, giving them directions, telling them about special offers.
Millward Brown predicts 2015 will see controlled second-screen syncing become significant in media plans. While research reveals that 35 per cent of all screen time involves simultaneous use of television and another digital device, how well do you see a consumer responding to paid messages/related content on her second screen? How would cross-device supplementary storytelling work?
What we found in our research is that most of the time, the content consumed simultaneously on a person's second device is not related to the television programme at that time. But this is an area of opportunity for brands. Consumers can have something playing on the television and then, maybe, they can be given an opportunity to follow up on the mobile phone. In the most basic form, this could be putting an ad on TV and displaying the URL on the ad, so that people can go and check it out online straightaway. Or say, if there is a song played on the television screen, consumers can use apps like Shazam to recognise it.
More From This Section
The technology is there, but I don't think it is being used widely. There are some examples, though. For instance, car brand Kia, sponsors of the Australian Open 2014, ran an ad on TV which featured the person who won the 'world's fastest serve' accolade that year. He spoke of the car, and would fetch his tennis racket and serve the ball. By downloading the 'Game On' app on your phone, you could actually return his serve by swinging your smartphone, gaining points based on your performance. Here, consumers were more engaged with the brand rather than just one-way communication on TV. So I think brands will start experimenting with it but they need to be aware of permissions; you don't want to be stalking people.
With platforms like Vine and Instagram showing dominant usage on mobile devices, the concept of micro video has taken off well in the West. How big do you think this trend is likely to be for emerging markets over the next five years, and do such six-second videos have any bearing on media planning at all?
Emerging markets have a very high penetration of mobiles. In the more developed markets like the US, the UK and Australia, people first went to PCs to go online. People learnt to do things in the online environment and mobile developed on the back of that. It has been an evolution.
But in the emerging markets, the penetration of mobiles has been accelerating much faster than PCs. I think we will see a 'mobile-first' digital strategy in emerging markets. I also think things like the lessons people are learning about how to utilise micro video on those platforms will pick up quickly in some of the emerging markets. It is going to depend on the capability of those markets. If that sort of capacity is rolled out and lives up to its promise, then I think we will see a rapid expansion of mobile video, whether it is a micro video or a larger format video.
| DIGITAL RESEARCHER |
|
I do see mobile videos becoming part of the media plan but it needs to be thought about as a part of the whole. Often, we see different platforms being considered in their own right and strategies are being developed for Facebook or Twitter or Vine, in isolation. As brands get much more comfortable in those spaces, they will consider all their touch points in the strategy and we will look at how they fit together and what roles each of those elements are playing in what and when they are trying to communicate.
How big is content marketing for brands at present as opposed to vanilla advertising? Is it set to proliferate?
Content marketing as you know is not new, it was present even in the offline media environment. The term 'native advertising' in particular has set the buzz around content marketing at the moment, and that's growing. What we found in the early days of native advertising in the digital space is that people didn't want content to be seen as advertising and they tried to hide it. We're now seeing a much stronger balance, and content is clearly being identified as advertising, but brands are trying to make sure that it is adding some value to the consumer. There has got to be a reason in it for a consumer … she should be able to take something out of it for it to have a positive effect. I think we're going to see continued growth of native or content marketing, but it will evolve in terms of the way it is done.
Would you say some categories have an advantage?
Travel is an area that has advantage when it comes to content marketing. There could be some bright content - an advertising piece - where you read about a destination you might want to go to. Here, you are adding value to a customer. I think, like any type of communication, it's going to be more suited to certain types of brands and categories.
Targeted communication through location-based data is known to be effective. What is limiting marketers from taking this more seriously? Could it be privacy issues?
I think privacy is certainly part of it; people don't want to feel like they are being stalked. It is like anything else in the digital space - there has to be permission. The cost and the expense of doing location-based targeting is probably another area that is holding people back. Some brands that have used it well include Virgin Atlantic. It explored the use of a location-based app at Heathrow Airport, which serves as an airport guide. There is something in it for the consumer as well as the brand. Or take retailer Macy's, which had a more obvious payback for the consumer. It was like a store concierge-like situation. It used its location-enabled in-store navigator app to engage consumers, giving them directions, telling them about special offers.