Which is better? Which drives more awareness? Which will give me the highest ROI? The rivalry between online video and television advertising has persisted as marketers argue one over the other. Yet the ever-growing overlap between the two channels has prompted marketers to take a closer look at online video and television compatibility. They found that online video advertising is complementary to TV advertising and the two should be combined to optimize results.
A study from YuMe and Nielsen reported that an integrated “TV 2.0 Media Planning” approach would allow advertisers to take advantage of TV’s unparalleled reach and online video’s interactivity and engagement. In the study, YuMe launched a $500K online video campaign to augment an existing TV campaign for a packaged goods advertiser. By doing so, they improved reach, enhanced frequency, reduced cost per impression, and improved recall all by significant percentages.
YouTube has been promoting the idea for a while now in order to increase advertising partnerships with brands that are using television marketing. In December 2011, the video streaming site released this case study/promo video:
Advertisers have been shifting advertising dollars to pre-roll ads, and according to AOL’s Be On division, they will continue to do so. In their April 2013 study, they found that 73% of marketers polled worldwide expected to increase spending on pre-roll ads over the next 12 months.
Recently, Microsoft and its advertising partners commissioned Nielsen to conduct research examining how TV and online video advertising can work together to achieve optimal reach, frequency and GRP metrics. David Porter the global strategy lead for video at Microsoft reported these insights on MediaPost.
“1. The 80/60 rule: When determining what online targeting methodology to use, TV reach and demo size should be considered first. Recommending index targeting versus cookie-based targeting will depend on whether TV reach is above, below or in between 60-80 percent.
2. Reach more without spending more: Advertisers should not have to drain their budgets to obtain “fresh reach.” To achieve high incremental reach, consider shifting your media share. Use analysis to evaluate your inefficient TV placements and consider redirecting your media spend to online video.
3. Duplication is doubly good: Reach that is duplicated through cross-screen exposure (TV and online video) appears to grow faster than unduplicated reach. Consider mirroring and/or sequencing your TV and online video schedules, and test your creative online first before running them on TV.
4. The digital amplifier effect: Cross-screen exposure has an exponential increase in brand impact. Akin to other research studies, our findings indicate that using online video before TV is an effective way to increase the brand impact of TV exposure. Unquestionably, multiple screens are better than just one.
5. Smooth frequency: Use online video to more efficiently accomplish optimal frequency goals. TV and online video can be used together to achieve “cross-screen” frequency goals, but only with thoughtful analysis and coordination. Try to align your TV and online video frequencies to achieve your cross-screen campaign frequency goals.”
These insights and other findings should help marketers transition into cross-screen advertising. Together online video and television advertising are doing big things; marketers do not have to favor one over the other. Said Porter, “—after all, it doesn’t have to be a platform war.”