Media-Manifesto, 12 theses for the future media planning!


Published on

This year, the webguerillas celebrate its 10th agency anniversary.

Ten years of agency work, consisting of intensive, every day‘s involvement with media and contacts of the Web 2.0 branch.

Ten years of cumulative experience, leading to the insight that high-quality contacts via blogposts, Twitter Retweets or Facebook fans have not been properly appraised in media planning up to now.

Therefore we thought about new models and measured quantities for media usage.
The result: the Media-Manifesto!

This Media-Manifesto is an initial proposition for a fundamental change in media planning.
With the Media-Manifesto we have summarized 12 theses for the future media planning.

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Media-Manifesto, 12 theses for the future media planning!

  1. 1. Preamble Webguerillas celebrates it’s tenth With this „Media Manifesto“, birthday in 2010. A major milestone for webguerillas is laying down an initial the company and at the same time an interdisciplinary marker for the future of ideal opportunity to pause and take a media measurement. For the concepts to look back over the past decade. What be implemented, a cross-sectoral strikes one immediately is the fact that consensus is required. It is against this the media industry has been struggling to background that the following initial keep pace with the speed of change in it’s ideas are presented, offering a basis for sector during recent years. Conventional discussion about a fundamentally media planning and media placement different media planning which takes with their numerous currencies and better account of actual media usage. metrics have now reached an impasse and are covering less and less of today’s media usage. Above all, the impact on young people, with their affinity for the internet David Eicher and in particular for social media Munich, February 2010 platforms, is simply inadequate. 2
  2. 2. 1. Communities versus „traditional“ content websites up to now in the future • Websites of the „traditional“ media: • Social communities establish Web 2.0 innovation leaders in the Web 1.0 • Highest coverage in the net sector • Development of new, innovative • Highest coverage in the net advertising concepts away from • Business model centered on „traditional“ advertising business „traditional“ display/banner • User networking as a key asset advertising • Web 2.0 as a virtual extension • Editorial/published content as a of real life key asset • Very little interaction/ networking among users In terms of popularity among users, social communities are now clearly outstripping the „traditional“ content sites and portals. There are fundamental differences in the mode of operation of these Web 2.0 offerings as compared with conventional sites. The consequence: traditional advertising methods and media currencies are losing ground. 3
  3. 3. 2. Advertising „pull“ instead of advertising „push“ up to now in the future • Large number of advertising • A small number of high-quality contacts as parameters for success contacts generate their own dynamism • Traditional „push“ mechanism in the Web (advertising „pull“) (sender-receiver-principle) • Qualitative „pull“ mechanism • Predominantly quantitative planning • Creativity and humor as parameters and measurement for success • Danger of negative response • Major „activation“ potential, increased on the part of consumers user retention • No involvement/no interaction with • Dialog between brand and user the consumer • Contact with the user evolves into a relationship with the user The challenge for the future will be to animate and activate consumers and to incorporate their personal networks into campaigns. This does not necessarily require a high degree of previous advertising pressure („push“) in the Web. 4
  4. 4. 3. Fan club instead of target group up to now in the future • Definition of supposedly • Metrics for attachment to a brand homogeneous social groups • Account is taken of the breakup of (on the basis of socio-demographic traditional milieu structures characteristics) • Networking and community building • In many cases no account is taken of as parameters for success social trends, such as the breakup • Metrics which take due account of of traditional milieus willingness to recommend and also • Very little information about brand multiplier/opinion former effects in loyalty the Web • No account taken of multiplier/ opinion former effects Now that Germany’s Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg has outed himself as an AC/DC fan, it is obvious that the traditional target group is a thing of the past. What is needed is a method which clearly identifies (potential) fans of a brand. 5
  5. 5. 4. Loss of activity instead of scatter loss up to now in the future • Indicator of erroneous media • Indicator of lack of activation planning potential • Purely quantitative metric • Account taken of qualitative effects • Mass appeal is a prerequisite (creation/conceptualizion) • Broadcast mode is a basic factor • Individual appeal is a prerequisite • Dialog with the consumer is a basic factor The term „scatter loss“ is now out of date. In the digital era each consumer can be targeted individually. The decisive factor in the future will be how actively and how frequently consumers interact with brands and how committed they are to the brand in question. 6
  6. 6. 5. Cost per Thousand Dialogs instead of Cost per Thousand Contacts up to now in the future • Metric for visual contacts • Parameter for active dialog • Metric for a one-off contact with the customer • Purely quantitative metric for cost • Metric for longer-term/permanent calculation purposes contact with consumers • No account taken of the • Both a qualitative and quantitative (editing) environment metric • No account taken of the recipient’s • Inclusion of the qualitative involvement component • Consumer’s involvement is taken into account The so-called Cost per Thousand Contacts has served its purpose. It provides no indication of the activation potential of consumers. In the future this will be measured by the Cost per Thousand Dialogs – a parameter for the active dialog with customers. 7
  7. 7. 6. Gross Involvement Volume instead of Gross Rating Point up to now in the future • Metric for the average advertising • Metric for activation „push“ within the target group potential in the target group • High-percentage range can • Precise measurement of the target compensate for a low targeting group actually reached frequency (and vice versa) • Indication of the advertising impact • No indication of whether the possible targeted consumer has actually seen the ad • No indication of the advertising impact The Gross Rating Point (GRP) is a metric which indicates the average exposure that advertising receives. In the Web 2.0 era, it is being replaced increasingly by the Gross Involvement Volume (GIV). This gives a clearer indication of the actual advertising impact. 8
  8. 8. 7. „Always on“ instead of audience ratings up to now in the future • Metric for viewing ratings per • Registration of total media behavior household (as a percentage) in the net • Based on conventional linear • Also coverage of non-linear TV and TV usage parallel usage • Comparatively complex procedure • Much more realistic indication of for the panel households media usage by younger target groups • No indication of possible • Precise metrics simultaneous multiple usage of • Easy to use media possible • Measurement of an actual contact • Measurement of a contact opportunity The importance of audience ratings is constantly decreasing. Younger target groups watch TV via the internet (non-linear). At the same time, they network in communities and read the latest news. They are „always on“ – always in the Web and always accessible. 9
  9. 9. 8. Actively involved instead of passively receiving up to now in the future • Model of the passive media • Model of the active media consumer consumer in „lean back“ mode in „lean forward“ mode • No or very little possibility • Dialog (Web 2.0) as a key feature of interaction or dialog • Brand and consumer communicate • Traditional broadcast mode „on equal terms“ • No account taken of involvement In terms of media planning, much less importance is now attached to the couch potato slouched in front of the TV set. Today’s media consumer is (by and large) much more active: advertisers and media decision-makers need to completely rethink their approach. 10
  10. 10. 9. Brand content versus media content up to now in the future • Traditional media have textual and • Companies reach and retain users by interpretive sovereignty (opinion means of their own content strategies leadership) (in the net) • High level of credibility • Traditional media are losing • Clearly structured media sector credibility • Consumers as recipients of media • Bloggers are challenging the traditional media for interpretive • Comparatively weak brand sovereignity (opinion leadership) content/CP • Consumers as active media designers The traditional media landscape is gradually disappearing as brands and bloggers vie with edited content sites for users’ attention. The winner will be the one which offers clear added value. 11
  11. 11. 10. Realtime monitoring instead of coverage surveys up to now in the future • Delayed reproduction/mapping • Realtime reproduction/ of media usage mapping of media usage • Distortion of audiences as a result • No distortion of total audiences of short-term publishing promotions • Targeting establishes actual interests (competitions) • Determination of brand likes and • Risk of incorrect information and dislikes in social communities mix-ups in coverage surveys • Socio-demographic cluster formation on the basis of the survey findings The current coverage surveys are simply an anachronism in the Web 2.0 era. Their representation of media usage is inadequate. What we need is end-to-end, realtime monitoring. 12
  12. 12. 11. Global village instead of Nielsen sweeps up to now in the future • Model of the „immobile“ citizen • Model of the global • Based on lifestyles and brand „citizen of the world“ preferences with a powerful regional • Internationally, brand preferences character are becoming increasingly similar • Geographical divisions based • Community building based on on Nielsen similar interests, irrespective of • Traditional values time and place • Traditional brand images are called into question Dividing up the map of Germany on the basis of Nielsen regions and ratings is totally out of date. What is needed are divisions and metrics that reflect today’s cosmopolitan mindset. 13
  13. 13. 12. Brand ambassadors versus advertising media up to now in the future • Media used to convey advertising • Multipliers/opinion formers in messages the net report on their brand • Advertising as a disruptive effect on preferences edited content • High degree of authenticity • Targeting a large number of • Community building for consumers a prerequisite individual brands possible • Risk of considerable scatter loss • No scatter loss • Decline in acceptance of advertising • No falling off in acceptance of advertising There have been fundamental changes in the media landscape and in media behavior patterns. Yet the mechanisms in the advertising sector with its „broadcast“ principle have remained the same for 50 years. Can anyone be surprised at the lack of acceptance? 14
  14. 14. 14