Thursday

More snake oil
from DoubleClick

Untangling twisted logic of an internet reach study

By Paul Benjou

   I’ve just come away from reading a press release by DoubleClick touting a Cross Media Reach and Frequency Study it commissioned through IMS and Nielsen/NetRatings, both VNU companies, concluding that budget shifts away from television to the Internet leads to an increase in campaign reach.
   The study focused on media shifts for three advertisers: American Airlines, Subaru and Kraft. In each case, reach factors increased across the board with a corresponding lift among identified target prospect groups. Additionally, the study incorporated MRI data to “explain consumption patterns within Gross Rating Points (GRPs)”.
   The release provided the following reach impact among light TV viewers:
    American Airlines: 34.9% to 44.1%; GRPs increased 9.2%
    Subaru: 75.4% to 78.4%; GRPs increased 3.0%
    Kraft: GRPs increased 7.0%
    The release did not note what the corresponding decreases in the overall TV viewing audience may have been and did not elaborate on the utilization of MRI data.
   My concern over a release that provides only a snapshot of results and methodology focuses on what might be construed as “pseudo-impact”. I would dig deeper into the motive behind the study and proffer the following questions as a start ….
    One, how was MRI data utilized? Data sets between MRI and ratings data are different and cannot be combined with any statistical relevance.
   Two, MRI data is based on field studies that are months behind the release of data. How was this correlated with more current Nielsen data?
   Three, TV seems to be the “bad guy” in the study. What were the pre and post rating levels and R/F data? Did new levels fall below effective standards?
   Four, what are the comparative attentiveness levels between the media and between message creative. Is a banner worth as much as a :30 commercial? What creative units are we utilizing in each media?
   Five, if reaching light TV viewers is the objective, how do magazines compare?
   My point is simply this: Let’s all stop beating the bushes to find excuses to utilize the internet. This kind of study does nothing to encourage increased utilization and may, in fact, harm the evolution process.
   Hopefully, no one will remember what this release or study was about six months from today, with the exception of the few marketers who were convinced to believe that it provides “proof of performance.”
    It does no such thing. It encourages the application of twisted logic.

-Paul Benjou is director of client services at AdWare and a longtime editorial advisor to Media Life.

Printer-Friendly Version | Send to a Friend
Cover Page | Contact Us