Thursday, September 10, 2015

What's the difference between viewthrough and viewability?



In case you haven’t noticed, digital marketing performance is more important than ever. With advertiser’s increasing need for accountability and measurement tools evolving to meet that need, there is major and growing interest in associated ad analytics or adverlytics. More specifically, display viewability measurement and attribution are hot topics. Yet, before the explosion in ad viewability technologies and an enthusiastic trade group response to standardize (IAB, MRC), viewthrough remains complicated and mysterious.

Even among experienced digital marketers, agencies and analytics professionals, there is often confusion around these terms with many people using the terms wrong or inter-changeably. They each describe important steps in the digital advertising funnel with viewability an important first step towards measuring exposure and viewthrough gauging post-exposure latent response. It makes a lot of sense to use these tracking methods together.

Viewthrough Defined

Display viewthrough measurement has been around since the late 90s and the advent of agency or
3rd party ad serving (3PAS). That means an advertiser’s digital media agency centrally manages the serving of their display ad campaign across multiple Web sites and/or ad networks. Typical tools used for this purpose include Sizmek, Pointroll, Google DoubleClick and Atlas. The beauty of this approach is having one report that consolidates one or multiple campaign performance metrics across multiple media vendors. The advertiser-centric approach and even allows for performance analysis by placement, ad size or creative treatment across media vendors. Prior to this, agencies had to collect the reports from each media vendor and doing cross-dimension analysis required advanced Excel manipulation. Included in the consolidated report was usually impressions, clicks, media cost a calculated click rate and effective CPM (cost per thousand). Potentially average frequency of ad delivery could also be reported.

How Viewthrough Works
As a more advanced option, the ad server could generate a special beacon tag which could be coded on an important digital event on the client’s Web site, e.g. a visit to the home page, playing a game, initiating a particular download and most obviously the rendering of an order thank you page. The latter being a revenue-generating conversion. The way it works is simple enough: the ad server site code that is placed is page-specific and named in a certain way with a certain ID. When that beacon tag fires, the ad server increments the count for that specific ad. The ad server uses clicker cookies to distinguish between clickthrough conversions and viewthrough conversions by the presence of a click cookie that is served to the browser if they click an ad. Generally, a viewthrough can be simply a visit to the target site or it can be an actual ecommerce conversion.

Fig 1. Viewthrough Process

In practice this meant that digital advertisers were no longer limited to the more direct-response oriented clickthrough rate for measuring display campaign performance. With viewthrough they could also analyze the passive impact of display which is more difficult to measure since it is not immediate and is harder to measure than clickthroughs which use appended query string parameters in the landing page clickthrough URL. That said, viewthrough measurement from the ad server is not enough as unscrupulous ad networks learned to do what is called cookie-stuffing to take advantage of affiliate advertising systems.

Site Analytics Technology Matters
Going beyond simplistic, ad server viewthrough measurement is not easy for digital marketers and technology choices matter. The complexities of generating and managing ad server site tags has also made ubiquitous measurement operationally difficult. What’s more ad server counting of viewthrough was an afterthought. The solution to better viewthrough measurement is ingesting ad server data into the site analytics system where site taxonomy, visitor uniqueness, multiple marketing channels and event level tracking infrastructure already exists. Another option are the better algorithmic attribution systems; a couple even integrate display viewability into their solution (ideal).

The reality is that there is are a few site analytics platforms that integrate with the ad servers in the market today. All are not created equal, not independent of media and there are significant differences in the methodologies. The integrations can be complex but well worth it for advertisers spending more than $10MM per year in display media. However, the learnings are significant when it comes to understanding customer’s digital path to the target Web sites and the latent effects of display ads (banner/video/mobile). 

Last, a word of caution: the best way to really understand display media from a viewthrough standpoint is through periodic incrementality analysis, i.e. test and control.

Viewability Defined

Display viewability is a newer capability for digital marketers that has really caught on over the last five years. Essentially, display viewability leverages Web technology that can determine how much of an ad is “in view” of the user’s browser window and for how long. While there is some additional complexity involved, simply put this offers a way for digital advertisers to really understand the quality of the ad inventory that they are buying from Web publishers and ad networks.

Fig 2. Viewability Process

Industry Reaction to Measuring Ad Viewability
Not surprisingly, ad viewability has met with resistance from publishers and even media agencies though it is of obvious interest to advertisers. By better managing viewability, advertisers can ensure they maximize the value of their display spend in terms of both raising awareness and driving a measureable response (clickthrough, viewthrough, engagement, conversions). Unlike viewthrough which languished for years as somewhat of a stepchild metric, The Internet Advertising Bureau (IAB) and the Media Ratings Council (MRC) stepped in early on viewability to create some early standards: 50% or more of an ad for at least 1 second. Advertisers can certainly raise the bar here but there is at least a baseline.

Ad viewability is fairly easy to implement on a display campaign but can often be challenging to operationally integrate into media performance reporting. As a best practice, having an independent analytics team pilot test and benchmark current performance will help gauge how much upside potential there might be.

Rising Tide Lifts All Ships
It stands to reason that you cannot have a clickthrough without an ad first being viewable. If an advertiser were to increase their ad viewability rate from 50% to 75% that would likely mean the number of clicks and therefore clickthrough rate should increase. Similarly, you cannot have legitimate viewthrough without an ad first being viewable. Increasing ad viewability rates should also benefit viewthrough rates as well.

  • Viewthrough - It’s all about response measurement. Advertisers ultimately should be very keen on measuring viewthrough from display media if they are interested in Web site engagement and even more so if an online conversion is possible (offline measurement is also possible).
  • Viewability – Think front-end of the advertising process, i.e. the inputs. The focus is on doing what branding has always sought to do through media campaigns: create an impression, influence behavior or change preferences.

As you can see, while they are certainly related viewthrough and viewability are very different. Measuring and optimizing viewability should be a self-evident way to improve those front-end metrics that will likely also boosts downstream ones. Viewability and viewthrough can and should work together.


Sunday, March 2, 2014

Monday, February 17, 2014

IAB Recognizes Viewthrough



Interactive Advertising Bureau -- Dedicated to the growth of interactive advertising 

From their annual meeting in Pam Springs, CA, the Internet Advertising Bureau published its Defining Cross-Platform Engagement White Paper. While there are plenty of interesting metrics to be found, we're excited to see a short and sweet definition of viewthrough. Positioned as one of the three categories, Display Viewthrough is included among behavioral metrics.

Definition: Number of Brand site visits that could have been influenced by display media within a particular look-back window.
Measureable Today: Yes, Web Analytics

While this is a small victory for the cause of viewthrough measurement, there is plenty more to do to get the word out about VT. We'd like to advise the IAB that the prior metric included in this section of their study, "Video Completion Viewthrough Rate" ought to get a different name - perhaps "Play-through?" It is bad enough that Viewthrough and Viewability,  are routinely confused but this could actually obfuscate the different kinds of post-impression behavior, e.g. VT Visits, VT Conversions, etc...Also, the following metric listed, "Searched for More Information" could also use a better name - Viewthrough Site Search?

Other considerations:
  • VT does not have to be at a branded site although this is most likely, e.g. related microsites
  • Any high-value task that can be measured in a Web analytics platform could have a VT source
  • Look-back windows are usually set by the ad server not Web analytics systems
  • Like the "could have been influenced" but no mention of how to understand incrementality

Scroll down to Page 10 of the Defining Cross-Platform Engagement White Paper, to read it for yourself.

Sunday, February 9, 2014

Mass Surveillance?

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

This Blog is now Google Analytics free

We've been tinkering with the open-source Piwik analytics for some-time now and are pleased to be retiring Google Analytics page tagging. Soon we'll be moving to WordPress, so long Google!

The VMC Management

Saturday, September 14, 2013

DAA Chicago Symposium 2013

Connecting the Dots: Optimizing the Customer Experience in an Omnichannel World

Tuesday, September 17, 2013
10:30 - 12:00pm Student & Entry Level Primer
12:00 - 1:00pm Registration, Networking & Exhibit Browsing
1:00 - 5:30pm Symposium
5:30 – 7:00pm Cocktails & Reception

The Mid-America Club
200 E Randolph Drive, 80th Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60601

http://www.digitalanalyticsassociation.org/symposium2013-chicago

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

In Support of IAB

While we don't always agree with IAB when it comes to viewthrough, a recent post on AdExchanger deserved support: IAB Vs Mozilla: Randall Rothenberg Takes The Gloves Off

The Viewthrough Measurement Consortium supports the IAB's position. The idea of a centralized cookie clearinghouse run by people with anti-business agenda is suspect. When Mozilla forces users out by default, that smacks of paternalism if not Bolshevism. The natural quid pro quo between a publisher and their online audience is being hi-jacked as a result of these maneuvers. Meanwhile, the biggest threat to privacy is likely the Feds who have effectively unlimited resources and can use force to compel behavior. Free people have a choice.
The question for the consumer (as always) is what's in it for me? Today the choice is free content or free content (no ads/tracking). Some will choose the latter. Right now, consumers of ad-supported content really don't know what it costs to provide it and there is no penalty for blocking ads or cookies. VMC's position is to let the consumer decide: their choice should be to either pay for the content or accept ads/tracking...everybody else should get blocked by the publishers - meaning no or very limited content/functionality. Users can always opt-back in.
While it is great that browser companies want to provide consumers with more control, the consumers themselves ought to make their decision in a way that is also truly informed. Publishers have really got to wake-up to actively owning this - that day is coming, albeit slowly. For the Bolsheviks, there really is no free lunch.
Related post from the Tip of the Spear Blog: Solutions to the Privacy Debate: Lemons, Carrots and Potatoes.