Publisher challenges in a programmatic world
Alex Kuhnel, chief operating officer, Kantar Media TGI, identifies three key issues the current programmatic landscape throws up for publishers, and offers insight into how they can be resolved.
Buying and selling display ads programmatically is continuing to grow, with a survey earlier this year showing that three quarters of marketers plan to increase programmatic brand spend in the next six to 12 months.
Despite the increasing take up, programmatic trading is still seen as uncertain territory for many. Advertisers, for example, have understandable concerns about their brand being affected adversely by a bad ad placement, as recently discussed in ‘Making programmatic marketing a safe place for brands‘.
But the existing programmatic landscape also presents various challenges for publishers…
1. Premium inventory risks being devalued
Programmatic is great for selling lower value inventory, but less attractive for premium, with publishers often saving their high-value inventory for direct sales. There are various reasons for this, including:
– Direct sales are a proven way to sell inventory.
– Cookies (used for programmatic targeting) are not infallible; they get deleted and their quality can be questionable. They can also be subject to fraudulent inventory.
– Targeting that is not based on cookies (i.e. non-programmatic) reduces the bid pressure on inventory sold using cookies, which helps to retain its value. It also removes much of the complex ad tech ecosystem (think LUMA landscape) thereby allowing the publisher to realise the true value of their quality content.
Programmatic advertising has seen a strategic shift from ad placement to tactics built around the target audience, meaning that online display advertising is increasingly driven by performance metrics alone. The perceived value of where ads are being placed programmatically is therefore becoming more critical to branding campaigns.
Whilst advertisers must be confident that their ad is displayed where it fits with their values and brand image, publishers also wish to be assured that their premium inventory is not devalued by advertising from brands seen as non-premium.
The answer is for publishers to prove to advertisers in a straightforward but compelling way the value of the match between their inventory and the desired positioning of the advertiser’s brand.
2. The value of premium inventory must be proved
As the demand for programmatic trading increases, premium inventory will inevitably be included. For publishers to realise the revenue that they generated previously via direct sales they will need to demonstrate to advertisers just how premium their most valuable inventory is, using a commonly accepted and accessible media industry insight source to do so.
Audience value is about more than traffic numbers. Content that attracts a particular premium audience has enormous bearing on the perceived commercial worth of a media brand’s inventory. Differentiation of premium inventory from that of competitors and proof of engagement with audiences is thus more important than ever.
Consequently, to find the most compelling arguments for their inventory, publishers need as broad and granular a range of consumer metrics as possible to profile their audiences. This includes product usage, attitudes, leisure activities and consumption of other media brands.
The more options a publisher has, the stronger the arguments they can present to potential advertisers.
It is key publishers use a core insight currency that is accepted by all sides in the industry. This needs to have been developed from neutral insights into consumer behaviour and media consumption and used by a wide range of players in the media value chain, including agencies, media owners and advertisers.
3. Third-party data must be combined with publisher data
There can be a perception that first-party, or publisher, data is more powerful than third party data in making a case for inventory. But, as useful as first-party data can be, it has two limitations on making a case for premium inventory by itself.
Firstly, it is by its nature bespoke to the publisher and thus it cannot be used as a common currency between the media seller and the media buyer – if the media buyer does not have access to the same metrics it is harder to make a decision based on them.
In addition, first-party data will not have the broad, comprehensive mix of online and offline consumer insights that give the publisher the creative freedom to find a range of arguments that prove engagement of premium audiences.
In contrast, as well as ensuring a broad, comprehensive mix of online and offline consumer insights a publisher requires to make a case for its premium inventory, third-party data can be used as a common currency between buyer and seller.
As programmatic trading becomes the norm, publishers have a growing need for a platform that makes it easy to draw out the key insights that demonstrate the value and relevance of their inventory to individual advertisers.
This would enable advertisers to achieve enhanced return on investment for their advertising budgets, while publishers could trade their premium inventory efficiently while generating the revenue that reflects its true market value.