2015 is the year native and programmatic collide – what it will mean for publishers?

This is an article I wrote for Media Briefing (see it in situ here).  It also got picked up by the AOP (here) and NewsWorks (here) as it referenced their conferences.  Doug McCabe’s research, showcased at the NewsWorks’ Shift conference, provided the perfect frame within which to discuss the points made at the AOP conference.  I was invited to the AOP conference because I’d help storyboard the presentation they used to reveal the results of their native advertising research.

At the recent Newsworks conference Doug McCabe, CEO of Enders said the digital advertising industry has divided. One half undervalues content and context; the other puts them on a pedestal.

On one side is the automated buying of vast audiences at speed and low cost. McCabe believes programmatic has “limitations of measurement [that] help push marketing towards a transaction tool and away from the strengths and advantages of media context that CMOs seek”.

As curators and aggregators are more efficient at driving traffic than premium content businesses, there is “an unintended disincentive” to invest in content sites.

He sees agencies expanding programmatic, believing there to be only teething problems. Their clients, his research tells him, feel more serious questions go unanswered. Is the environment appropriate, does it devalue the ad? Who sees it (target, non-target, humans, robots)? “It’s blind buying which I don’t like,” said Matthew Holmes, media manager at William Hill.

On the flip side is native advertising. It values content and context. McCabe explains: “Of course there is a contradiction here. Many brands are rapidly moving into or expanding their content commitments. Many agencies are acquiring and building content creation expertise. Every media business has developed or is considering its creative content function. The potency of media brands is evidently paramount.”

McCabe says native is on the rise because consumers are much more aware of and responsive to advertising on content sites – “they drive more valuable behaviour”. As evidence, he quotes AOP research.

Last week the AOP held a native advertising forum. Jamie Toward, head of content at MEC, and Francis Turner, MD of Adyoulike gave their own reasons for native’s growth. Toward points to rejection of interruption advertising on digital platforms. Turner says traditional ads on small mobile screens work less well than on desktop, accelerating the move to native.

Both agree that native prompts valuable behaviours in consumers. Toward says native greatly outperforms benchmarks for views, CTRs, dwell time, consideration and recommendation (negative Net Promoter Scores can be made positive). Turner quotes an average dwell time of 2 minutes 20 seconds for native on mobile.

The AOP revealed their research:

Teaser ads linking to native content from the home page of premium content websites are 31% more likely to be clicked on than traditional display
Native advertising widens the purchase funnel. At the Discovery Stage it widens by 33% (i.e. native is 33% more effective than traditional display), at the Trust Stage it widens it by 32%, at Word of Mouth by 29% and at Purchase by 20%
Native in the context of premium content websites creates 32% more trust than traditional ads but the same native execution sitting in social media streams creates only 1% more trust than a traditional ad
So, native thrives on content and context, programmatic overlooks it. The two are about to collide.

Turner predicts a ‘collision’ in 2015. It will be enabled by the ratification of the IAB’s OpenRTB 2.3 standards that incorporate guidelines for native creative within an RTB environment. It accounts for metadata like headline, content URL, description text and images. In short, more native will soon flow through more exchanges.

Initially, Turner says, it will affect native video content (usually repurposed TV ads) and traffic driving elements. He believes the programmatic delivery of significant sponsored content onto publisher websites will occur around year-end.

Toward acknowledged there would be a difference in quality between native created by publishers for their environments and that created for multiple sites at scale. The latter will look and feel different – created for native advertising delivery units, not the publisher’s page.

In fact, he’d like the industry to adopt new language to distinguish between pure and scalable forms of native. Tim Cain, MD of the AOP explains: “In purist terms native must reflect the indigenous characteristics of the media brand to provide the right context for the consumer and in turn receive the most valued attention, otherwise it is really branded content and as such a scalable solution lends itself to programmatic delivery as any ad type.”

CTRs will likely be lower for the scalable versions but, as they will be delivered at scale, there will be more clicks in total.

What of context and engagement measures? Toward says it is “hard to measure an idea or editorial quality” but “we find it easy to find countable things in delivery of content”. There has been talk of an ‘Attention Index’ but he can’t see the industry agreeing how to compile and weight it (“not a fight I want to have”).

Instead he foresees “hybrid deals put in place with a more traditional horse trade around the creative – and the delivery bit dealt with programmatically”. MEC are placing their programmatic people “closer to the guys who know what a good [content] idea looks like”.

If that becomes usual the primary metrics are certain to be the “countable things in delivery of content”. Clients are after a single customer view, says Toward, requiring standard metrics for all advertising. Measures specifically designed for the strengths of native will be secondary.

Publishers won’t be at ease with programmatically bought native content on their sites; it isn’t environment specific, bought at a premium, created by their own new native departments or flatteringly measured. Clare Chamberlain, head of brand and creative solutions at Bauer, warned of ‘immunising’ audiences against commercial messages. “Very high risk”, she said, adding, “Can we get to a point where programmatic and native are not contradictions in terms? My take is, in principal, no”.

Advertisers might also be wary of this next step for programmatic. Remember William Hill’s Matthew Holmes calling it “blind buying”? When that quote was aired Toward said “I’m not sure what he’s on about”. However, he had talked earlier about a ‘fog’ making it increasingly difficult to see “who is serving the final step to the customer”, causing advertisers to worry about brand protection and agencies to fret about auditors. Remember also McCabe saying a divide has opened between agencies who see only teething problems and advertisers who see bigger hurdles.

There’s hand holding to be done. Advertisers and publishers need to see the benefits more evidently. They probably require appropriate metrics that value context as well as delivery. They won’t be easy to establish but, without them, agencies might see more than just teething problems by year-end.

This entry was posted in Media and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to 2015 is the year native and programmatic collide – what it will mean for publishers?

  1. Pingback: Will 2015 Be the Year Native and Programmatic Collide?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s