TV networks have been insisting for months that ads running on their online programs connect with a highly engaged audience. Now there’s some independent research to back that up. A study released yesterday by Simmons, a division of Experian Research, finds that respondents are 44 percent more engaged by ads that appear in television programs they watch online than those they view on traditional television. Many such ads are part of a single-sponsorship deal that’s common for online TV shows, and their very formats tend to force users to interact with the ads. Often an ad will appear as the user is watching an episode, and to get back to the episode the user must click the ad off. But the study also found that users are 26 percent more engaged by the content offered by online TV than off. This comes at a time when media people are mulling the effectiveness of internet advertising in the face of rising online spending. The study also looked at engagement for a number of other media, concluding that the more niche the media form, the more engagement it fosters. John Fetto, product manager at Simmons, talks to Media Life about why online TV is so engaging, why media people should be aware of it, and why Oprah fans are more engaged by her web site than her TV show.
 
What was the most interesting or surprising thing you found in this study?
 
We kind of expected niche media to be more engaging than mass media, which makes sense. People who are viewing niche content are looking for something more specific, so they’re more engaged. So it was interesting to be able to quantify the engagement.

But that’s not to say mass media is not engaging.

One of the things we found is that it’s particularly powerful when a medium reaches a large audience and is also highly engaging. An example of that would be ABC’s “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition.” It gets good ratings and it’s also very engaging.
 

Why are viewers more engaged by TV program ads they view online than ones they see on television?
 
There’re a couple of reasons. One is that TV shows you watch online, say it’s “Desperate Housewives” or “Brothers & Sisters” on ABC.com, typically attract people who are especially loyal viewers. Maybe it’s part of their routine to watch online. They don’t want to miss an episode. So we’d expect to see higher levels of engagement with the content.

The fact that we see an even higher increase in attention to the ads in those programs speaks to the format of the ads in general. They’re typically dedicated to a single sponsor, and people have to actually interact with the ad. You can’t just wait it out. You have to click or do something to continue your viewing, so you’re paying attention to the ad.

I think the combination of a single sponsor and the fact that you have to interact makes consumers take note of those ads.
 

Why, generally speaking, are people more engaged by TV programming they watch online than on television?
 
We also found in the study that programs, magazines and web sites that people visit on a regular basis are highly engaging to the user. If I visit a site once a month, I probably didn’t find it highly engaging. If I visit it a few times a week, I probably think it’s more engaging.

So the programs people view online are probably ones people are seeking out, meaning it’s probably more engaging in the first place. You’re not just going to kind of channel surf online.
 

What does this mean for media buyers and planners?
 
I think it speaks to the value of these online spots. Media companies typically charge a premium for these spots, but it provides evidence that it’s worth the cost, and that it’s justified. It’s something to consider as part of their overall media buy.
 

Was there a tie between media that respondents found engaging and ad engagement?
 
There actually is a pretty strong correlation between engagement with content in general and engagement with advertising.

We find that the highest correlation is between ad-attention receptivity and life enhancing content. So a higher score in the life enhancing dimension is going to translate most often with a higher score in ad-attention receptivity.

Life enhancing translates to: I’m constantly learning new things, and it helps me make better decisions in my life. When it comes time to view ads within that media vehicle, they are more readily absorbing information.

But we do note that each dimension has a strong correlation with ad attention receptivity. It’s just that life enhancing has the highest correlation.
 

You found that, among Oprah properties, her syndicated show actually had the lowest ad attention, compared with Oprah.com and Oprah the Magazine. Why was that?
 
I think we found that consistently across the board. We typically found that the secondary and tertiary extensions of a brand tend to be the most engaging.

The Oprah TV show is really the flagship of the brand, and she brings in all types of people. But those who visit the site or read the magazine are going to tend to be more engaged with the Oprah brand in the first place.
 

You asked respondents if they were likely to purchase products advertised on different types of media. What tied together the top responses on that? Why were those media considered trustworthy?
 
Those are very niche media, so the advertisements in those magazines are going to be very focused on the content of the magazine itself.

With GamePro magazine, the advertisers are going to be more geared toward gaming. You’re not going to see broader ads. I doubt you’d see an ad for, say, Crest. So that’s why those magazines have a very high propensity. That’s why they’re reading the magazines in the first place.