NEWS: Signals in the Noise - Part 2: Doing the Right Things

Proprietary data from walled-garden platforms is no substitute for joint-industry standards when assessing campaign effectiveness, asserts new IPA white paper

The industry’s increasing dependence on proprietary data from ‘walled-garden platforms’ is undermining informed decision-making about media budgets, by leaving advertisers and agencies with a mosaic of incomparable and opaque datasets. This is one of the key assertions made in a new IPA whitepaper published today (Tuesday 21 April) and co-authored by Work Research Partner, Tony Regan and Barb Chief Executive Justin Sampson.

Download Now - Signals in the Noise Part 2: Doing the Right Things

.pdf 6612261

Download

Building on the 2023 Signals in the Noise paper which made the case for the role of joint-industry audience measurement in era of data abundance, Signals in the Noise 2: Doing the right things argues that while the advertising industry has never had a better scientific understanding of how advertising works, the data environment which it exists in, is actively working against that science. This, according to the paper, has resulted in an industry that is less well-equipped to make the comparable, objective measurements that would allow those scientific principles to be applied with confidence.

The gap between measurement and effectiveness

In addition to the issue of the industry’s dependence on proprietary data from ‘walled-garden platforms’, further contributing factors to this include short-termism and the abundance of performance data that drives advertisers towards the platforms that are the most measurable and attributable, but not necessarily the most effective.

The case for a joint industry solution

Signals in the Noise 2: Doing the right things outlines that what effectiveness experts need is consistent audience data, which allows comparable evaluation across different media. This data can then act as the foundations of marketing-mix modelling and allow for informed media investment decisions.

This solution, according to Regan and Sampson, is provided via UK’s well-established model of independent, joint-industry governance. However, the data science community needs these joint-industry sources to be more accessible and more readily integrated into the modelling and analytics which sit at the heart of effectiveness measurement.

To address these issues, the paper asserts specific actions for the various different stakeholders:

• For the joint-industry bodies to invest in making their data work harder for the next generation of analysts and modellers who need it.
• For the data-science community to bring the same rigour to assessing the quality of their inputs that they apply to building your models.
• For the online platforms to engage seriously with joint-industry principles rather than treating transparency and comparability as inconvenient constraints.
• To advertisers and agencies to remember that the freedom to invest with confidence - rather than with faith, or with resignation - depends on the quality of the evidence on which their decisions are based.

Commenting on the report:

Tony Regan, Managing Partner, Work Research and co-author of Signals in the Noise:

“The principles of joint-industry governance for which the UK is recognized around the world has always been based on independent audience measurement. As well as allowing media markets to operate transparently and fairly, joint-industry data sources have provided advertisers and media agencies with informed choice on how to optimise their investment in media advertising. We have never had a better scientific understanding of how advertising works, yet the data environment makes the measurable the enemy of the meaningful.”

Dan Flynn, Joint Research Director, IPA:

“Signals in the Noise is a response to the conundrum that the profusion of data about media audiences has not led to an equivalent increase in knowledge. With ongoing pressure on marketing accountability, the industry’s ambition to account rigorously for the investment in media advertising is being clouded by the noise that comes from a variety of proprietary definitions of audience exposure. This new paper is a call to action for all sides of the industry to prioritize the use of trusted, joint-industry sources as a foundation stone for strategic planning and campaign evaluation.”

Additional contributors to the report include EssenceMediacom’s Chief Strategy Officer Rich Kirk; Bicycle’s Media Science and Strategy Director Aidan Mark; independent econometrician Alex Vass; and Havas Media Group’s Global EVP and Head of Planning, Jon Waite.

About JICs:

• ABC: Distribution of published and online media is audited to provide census-level data which complements readership and other audience data provided by other JICs.
• Barb: Viewing figures for linear channels and streaming services are collected from a representative panel of UK homes and integrated with a census-level count of viewing to broadcasters’’ VOD services.
• JICMAIL: A representative panel of UK homes uses a web-based collection technique to provide detailed information on the receipt and consumption of direct mail.
• JICREG: Readership of regional published media relies on an integration of audited print-circulation data and survey data provided by PAMCo.
• PAMCo: Readership of national published media is generated from the integration of a survey of 22,000 people each year with digital audience estimates supplied through a partnership with UKOM.
• Rajar: Listening figures for radio stations are collected through a large-scale, people-based survey that uses a hybrid of techniques including smart-phone metering.
• Route: Exposure to outdoor advertising relies on a range of census counts – e.g. government road counts, TFL pedestrian data, shopping centre footfall – with survey-based research that provides the profile of audiences.
• UKOM: Online audience measurement relies on harnessing large-scale census data with audience data from a representative panel of people across the UK.