If an Advertisement Runs Online
And No One Sees It, Is It Still an Ad?
Empirical Generalizations in Digital Advertising
Stephanie Flosi
comScore
[email protected]
Gian Fulgoni
comScore
[email protected]
Andrea Vollman
comScore
This study presents findings from three charter studies involving leading global
advertisers in three key geographical regions: the United States, Europe, and Canada.
The goal of the research was to identify and better understand the incidence of suboptimal digital campaign delivery as it pertains to viewability, audience delivery,
geographic targeting, and brand safety. Through an evaluation of the study findings,
several significant empirical generalizations emerged, and this article highlights these
generalizations and discusses their implications for the digital advertising ecosystem.
[email protected]
INTRODUCTION
and to uncover opportunities for improvement,
According to the Interactive Advertising Bureau
comScore has conducted research in the United
(IAB), online advertising spend in the United
States, Europe, and Canada. The current study dis-
States exceeded $36 billion in 2012—a 15-percent
cusses empirical generalizations drawn from the
increase over the prior year that represented a
research involving dozens of the world’s leading
growth rate five times faster than all other media
marketers.
combined. Similar growth trends also were seen
in Canada (up 16 percent in 2011) and Europe (up
BACKGROUND
15 percent in 2011).
Across the globe, digital media have become an
This strong migration of advertising spend-
important component of many advertisers’ mar-
ing to digital across the globe is likely the result
keting mix. Just as there has been exceptionally
of increased confidence in the medium, which has
tremendous growth in terms of the volume of
been enabled by technological advancements that
digital advertising, the digital ecosystem itself also
make the buying and selling of online media more
has experienced a profound evolution. From new
efficient, and measurement tools that reveal the
advertising formats and placement strategies to
effectiveness of digital advertising.
new delivery systems and advertisement-targeting
Today, it is largely accepted that digital is an
effective advertising medium for both direct
192 JOURNAL
technology, it has become challenging for marketers and researchers to stay up to speed.
response and branding advertising and that it can
Historically, the measurement of digital adver-
lift both online and in-store sales. Still, given the
tising has not kept pace with these kinds of
complex nature of the online advertising ecosys-
complex changes. The transactional focus has
tem, questions remain about potential sources of
been on measurement of gross impressions deliv-
online advertising waste and opportunities to lev-
ered, as opposed to those advertisements that actu-
erage digital in an even more efficient manner by
ally were seen by consumers in a particular target
improving the accuracy of ad delivery.
segment.
Until these questions are addressed, it is likely
In fact, the primary metric used to buy and sell
that digital will not be able to achieve its full poten-
online advertising has been the number of delivered
tial as an advertising medium. To better understand
(or served) advertising impressions. As advertis-
issues associated with digital-advertising delivery
ing platforms, formats, and delivery technologies
OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH June 2013
DOI: 10.2501/JAR-53-2-192-199
empirical generalizations in digital advertising
DATA SOURCES AND RESEARCH DESIGN
Empirical Generalization
To draw the empirical generalizations,
The broad market adoption of holistic campaign validation will allow the online advertis-
comScore leveraged validated Campaign
ing ecosystem to reach its full potential by helping to eliminate impressions that are
EssentialsTM (vCE), an integrated comScore
paid for but never have an opportunity to be seen and affect behavior. A viewability
solution for complete campaign-delivery
metric will provide the ecosystem with a currency by which to measure campaign deliv-
validation and in-flight optimization.
ery and to provide the first truly cross-media-comparable metric for use in effectively
Unlike existing single-point solutions,
building multi-platform campaigns.
vCE provides an unduplicated accounting
of impressions delivered across a variety
have evolved, however, it has become
The empirical generalizations discussed
of dimensions, such as advertisements
obvious that not all online advertisements
in this study focus on the following core
delivered in-view, in the right geography,
delivered actually have the opportunity to
dimensions of advertising delivery:
in a brand-safe environment, and with
be seen. Moreover, in some instances, they
NHT removed. It also evaluates the degree
were not accurately delivered based on the
• reach and frequency: the percent of the
to which validated impressions reached
buying specifications (e.g., they are deliv-
population that was reached with at
the correct campaign target audience. It
ered to the wrong demographic segment,
least one ad impression, and the aver-
should be noted that while vCE typically
in the wrong geography, delivered near
age number of advertising impressions
is used for in-flight optimization, for the
brand-unsafe content).
delivered per individual;
purposes of the current study, optimiza-
Until recently, it was impossible to
properly validate delivery across the relevant dimensions because the appropriate measurement technology did not exist.
• target audience: the extent to which validated impressions were delivered to the
correct demographic target audience;
tions were not implemented because the
intent of the research was to better understand sources of sub-optimal delivery and
identify opportunities for improvement.
now
• in-view: defined according to IAB
The validation module of the vCE tool
exists to validate whether an advertise-
guidelines as an advertising impression
has received accreditation from the Media
ment was delivered as intended based on
with at least 50 percent of the advertise-
Rating Council. The accreditation includes
a variety of key dimensions, including
ment’s pixels in the user’s viewport for
the measurement of viewability, brand
one second or longer;
safety, in-country geographic delivery,
Advanced
technology,
however,
• viewability,
• target audience,
• target geography,
• brand safety, and
• non-human traffic (NHT).
The use of “validated” impressions—specifically, impressions delivered in-view, in
the right geography, in brand-safe content
and with NHT removed—provides a more
accurate picture of advertising delivery
compared to gross impressions. Furthermore, when validated impressions are
used to calculate validated gross rating
• brand safety: advertising delivery on
sites deemed not appropriate for brand
advertising due to objectionable content
considered to be in violation of brand
safety;
engagement, and the removal of NHT.
This measurement includes certain advertisements delivered via cross-domain
iframes, which account for a significant
percentage of U.S. display advertising
impressions but also have proved particu-
• target geography: measured by country;
larly challenging to the research industry
from a measurement standpoint.
and
• NHT: impressions served to non-human
agents, as per the IAB spiders and bots
list and advertisements that were served
to users via illegitimate methods or
content.
METHODOLOGY
Census Measurement
For every campaign under measurement,
a single advertising tag was placed on
each creative execution to provide a com-
points (vGRPs), the metric provides a more
plete view of campaign delivery. This
accurate comparison to traditional GRPs
The current study sought to uncover
tag provides detailed information at the
than the broadly used gross digital GRP,
sources of waste, identify opportunities for
publisher-, creative-, and placement-level
which can include wasted advertisements
improvement, and ultimately enable digi-
about impression delivery, enabling the
(e.g., impressions that were delivered but
tal to reach its true potential as an effective
reporting of viewability, geographic deliv-
never had a chance to make an impact).
and efficient advertising medium.
ery, brand safety, and NHT (See Figure 1).
June 2013 JOURNAL
OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH 193
what we know about advertising ii
Duplication and inconsistency typi-
accuracy of delivery of digital media plans
“cross-domain” iframes that historically
cally arise when disparate data-collection
for more than 120 advertisers and agencies
have been nearly impossible to measure.
sources are merged, which can negatively
in 28 countries using its Campaign Essen-
impact the quality of the analyzed data.
tials service. These studies measured the
EMPIRICAL GENERALIZATIONS OF
Because the methodology in the current
reach, frequency, and demographic deliv-
DIGITAL ADVERTISING
study relies on a single tag, issues associ-
ery of thousands of digital campaigns.
EG1
ated with duplicate impression counting
More recently, comScore also has con-
Because cookies are deleted regularly by
are eliminated, offering a more accurate
ducted studies using its vCE service that
a substantial proportion of Internet users,
view of campaign delivery.
involved dozens of leading global adver-
their use leads to large errors in the meas-
tisers in the United States, Europe, and
urement of the number of unique visitors
Unified Digital Measurement
Canada to better understand the inci-
to a Web site and in the delivery and meas-
To understand the extent to which adver-
dence of sub-optimal digital campaign
urement of planned reach and frequency
tisements are delivered to the right target
delivery in terms of viewability, accuracy
for digital ad campaigns. Because of cookie
audience, the authors used comScore’s
of targeting, geography, brand safety, and
deletion, the use of Web-site server data
global 2-million-person panel in conjunc-
NHT.
that leverages cookies to estimate unique
tion with census server data. The use of
Key details of the vCE studies included
the panel enabled a fuller understanding
visitors to a Web site will overstate the true
number of unique visitors. In the United
of the audience that was exposed to each
• 40 advertising campaigns for a group
States, this overstatement was found to be
campaign, including demographic infor-
of advertisers that included Kellogg’s,
by a factor of 2.5. The measurement of the
mation, such as age, gender, household
Kraft, Ford, Roger’s Wireless, Volks­
delivery of advertising campaigns based
income, household size, and ethnicity and
wagen, Unilever, and American Express;
on the use of cookies will underestimate
information regarding different behavioral
• measurement of approximately 3 billion
actual delivered frequency by about 2.5
segments (See Figure 1). The use of panel in
conjunction with cookie data (as opposed to
ad impressions;
times and overestimate actual reach by the
• measurement across more than 600,000
a solely cookie-based approach) eliminated
same amount.
Web sites; and
High rates of cookie deletion occurred
errors associated with cookie deletion and
• 100 percent of the ad impressions deliv-
in all countries included in the current
multiple-user machines—practices that can
ered in iframes, including a majority of
study. On a global basis, comScore studies
skew results dramatically.
The panel used in the current study is
the same comScore panel that powers comScore’s audience measurement capabili-
A single ad tag is
appended to every
creative to provide
a complete view of
campaign delivery
ties, including its Media Metrix service. All
panelists have opted in to panel participation and have given comScore explicit per-
CENSUS
PANEL
mission to measure their online behavior. A
comScore’s global
two million person
panel is used in
conjunction with
census data to
validate target
audience delivery
unique and critical component of the panel
is Unified Digital Measurement, a measurement methodology that merges comScore
person-level panel data with raw census-
in-view
level server and advertising-delivery data
Geography
(collected through tagging) for a complete
Brand safety
360-degree view of consumer behavior at the
Non-human traffic
person-level across markets (See Figure 1).
RESEARCH DESIGN
Over the last 5 years, comScore has conducted more than 4,000 studies of the
194 JOURNAL
Audience
–
–
–
–
–
–
Age
Gender
HHI
HH size
Ethnicity
Behavioral Segments
Figure 1 vCE Methodology Through Single Ad Tag and Unified
Digital Measurement
OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH June 2013
empirical generalizations in digital advertising
High rates of cookie
Because of Multiple Users on a Computer, Cookies Alone Can’t Always
Accurately Identify who is Using a Computer at any Given Point in Time
deletion occurred in
Percent of people
Percent of computers
all countries included
3+ Users
15%
in the current study.
3+ Users
32%
have found that Web site server (i.e., “first-
2 Users
26%
party”) cookies were deleted from an
1 User
36%
1 User
59%
average of 28.5 percent of computers in
2 Users
32%
a month while ad server (“third-party”)
cookies were deleted by 32.5 percent of
computers. The rate of deletion was higher
for ad-server cookies (average of nine
times per month) than for Web site cookies
(five times per month).
In the United States, 28.5 percent of first-
Figure 2 Use of the Same Home Computer by Multiple
Individuals
party cookies and 35.8 percent of thirdparty cookies, on average, were deleted
compounded
cookie-related
behavioral segments typically resulted in
in a month, with first-party cookies being
problems: the same person using multiple
inaccurate advertisement-delivery infor-
deleted six times per month and third-
devices (e.g., a person using both a work
mation due to targeting errors caused
party cookies being deleted nine times
and a home computer and, therefore, hav-
by cookie deletion, multiple devices per
per month. The lower deletion metrics for
ing more than one cookie per person for a
user (which leads to multiple cookies per
first-party cookies likely is because of their
given Web site or advertising campaign),
individual), and multiple users on a
higher utility to the user (e.g., they elimi-
and different people using the same com-
given computer (which makes it difficult
nate the need to re-enter “sign-in” infor-
puter (resulting in more than one person
for an ad server to know which person is
mation at some Web sites).
per cookie).
using a “cookied” machine at any point in
by
other
Every time a cookie is deleted from a
Trying to tie a cookie to a specific indi-
computer following a Web site visit or
vidual is problematic. To begin, comScore
When targeting to only one variable
the receipt of an advertisement, when the
data showed that the average U.S. com-
(e.g., women), cookie-based delivery accu-
Web site server or the ad server “sees”
puter user utilized 1.29 different comput-
rately reached its target 70 percent of the
that same computer again, the server
ers across work and home locations and,
time. When two variables were used (e.g.,
will “think” it represents a new unique
as a result, an individual had a 30-percent
women ages 25–54), the targeting accu-
visitor or a new recipient for an advertise-
likelihood of having more than one cookie
racy decreased to an average of 48 percent.
ment and will count it as a new unique vis-
assigned to him or her.
And when three variables were used (e.g.,
time).
itor or deliver it an advertisement, thereby
comScore panel data also showed that
women ages 25–54 with children younger
leading to over-statement of the true
64 percent of U.S. Internet users utilized
than 18) the targeting accuracy fell to only
number of unique Web site visitors and
multiple user machines, which means
11 percent (See Figure 3).
an over-delivery of advertising frequency
that a given cookie potentially could be
Using cookies to target behavioral seg-
and a corresponding under-delivery of
assigned to multiple individuals on that
ments (e.g., visitors to travel sites, viewers
reach.
computer (See Figure 2).
of food preparation content, etc.) also is
EG2
EG3
campaigns, the current study showed
Measurement errors caused by Inter-
Using cookies to target digital adver-
that the average campaign accurately
net users deleting their cookies are
tisements to specific demographic and
reached the correct targeted behavioral
subject to significant error. Across all U.S.
June 2013 JOURNAL
OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH 195
what we know about advertising ii
Low
% of Ads Delivered to
Demographic Target
100
Average
In-view rates varied
High
dramatically by site, ranging
80
from a low of less than
70%
60
1 percent to a high
48%
40
of 100 percent.
20
11%
0
1 Variable
2 Variables
3 Variables
Importantly, pricing for advertising
Figure 3 Percentage of Advertisements Accurately Reaching
Demographic Target Based on Number of Targeting Variables*
most often is not derived based on view-
*Demographic variables can include: age, gender, household income, and/or number
of children in the household. Due to sample size, a meaningful range could not be
calculated for campaigns with 3 demographic variables.
placements with a correlation of only 0.19
ability rates. According to the current
study, in-view rates varied across sites and
between viewability and price paid (cost
per thousand impressions—CPM) for the
advertisements (See Figure 4).
segment only 36 percent of the time, with
rates of 48 percent to 96 percent; “below
a wide range of accuracy from 23 percent
the fold” messages (images viewable
EG5
to 67 percent.
to computer users only after scrolling)
The number of advertisements delivered
resulted in viewability rates of 3 percent to
next to unsafe content is not substan-
67 percent.
tial, but the authors of the current study
EG4
Approximately one in three delivered digi-
Lack of viewability above the fold typi-
tal advertising impressions never have the
cally occurs when a user scrolls past the
opportunity to be seen (i.e., are never vis-
advertisement (or moves to another page)
In the current study, the majority of digi-
ible to the end user), with the viewability
before the message was fully rendered.
tal campaigns in the United States (72 per-
rate varying dramatically by site.
Lack of visibility below the fold generally
cent) and Europe (67 percent) saw some
occurs because a user does not scroll down
impressions delivered alongside unsafe
far enough to see the advertisement.
content, which is defined as adult content,
For the campaigns measured in the
current study, comScore evaluated view-
believe that the absolute number of consumers impacted is significant.
ability rates on an individual campaign
Viewability rates tended to be higher
hate sites, or other types of digital content
basis and found that, on average, 30 per-
on large sites when compared to mid-size
deemed unsuitable by leading advertisers
cent to 37 percent of all served advertising
or “long-tail” sites. Even within the larg-
(e.g., spam, malware, child abuse, copy-
impressions in the United States, Europe,
est sites, however, the viewability rate
right theft).
and Canada never were actually view-
averaged only 74 percent across the top
Fortunately, because of the use of third-
able by the end user. In other words, the
100 U.S. sites and 63 percent across the
party advertising-blocking technologies,
advertising impressions did not deliver an
top 100 European sites. Within the long
only a small percentage of overall adver-
“opportunity to see.”
In-view rates varied dramatically by
site, ranging from a low of less than
tail, viewability rates averaged 61 per-
tising impressions (0.01 percent) are deliv-
cent in the United States and 55 percent
ered in brand-unsafe environments. The
in Europe.
absolute number of consumers exposed
1 percent to a high of 100 percent. Pla-
Across all studied advertising cam-
to advertisements in these unsafe envi-
cing an advertisement “above the fold” (a
paigns, the average in-view rate hovered
ronments, however, is substantial enough
term borrowed from the newspaper
at around two of three impressions, mean-
(5,000 per U.S. campaign and 1,400 per
industry to describe images that appear on
ing one in three impressions were never
European campaign) to concern many
a computer screen) generated viewability
seen and, therefore, were wasted.
marketers (See Figure 5).
196 JOURNAL
OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH June 2013
empirical generalizations in digital advertising
EG6
an individual campaign basis, how-
the inability for an advertisement to be
On average, geo-targeting of digital
ever, error rates can be high, reaching
delivered in its intended geography was
campaigns at a country level using IP
27 percent in Europe and 15 percent in
related to limitations in the ability of IP
addresses is quite accurate, with only
the United States. The current study
addresses to accurately designate geo-
4 percent of advertisements in the United
showed that geographic-targeting accu-
graphic location and errors in complex
States and 7 percent in Europe falling
racy diminished as the target market
advertisement buying and selling pro-
outside of the intended geography. On
became smaller in area. In such cases,
cesses (See Figure 6).
EG7
An equally weak correlation was also observed between
CPM and ability to hit a primary demographic target
NHT, including fraud, is a significant
challenge for accurate digital advertising
delivery, and it is not adequately elimi-
Correlation of In-View Rates & CPM
300
nated by industry blacklists of known
R2 = 0.0373
robots or fraudulent operators.
250
In the U.S. comScore study, known
industry black lists identified between
CPM Index
200
US
150
100
50
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
4% of ads were served
outside geography.
Up to 15% of ads
on a given campaign
% of Ads In-view
Figure 4 Viewability Does Not Relate to Price Charged for
Digital Ads
EU
7% of ads were served
outside geography.
Up to 27% of ads
on a given campaign
28%
72%
Some ads in inappropriate content
No ads in inappropriate content
92,000 people exposed to
adult content and/or hate sites
Figure 5 Percentage of U.S. Advertising Campaigns with
Impressions Delivered Next to Content Deemed “Not Brand
Safe”
Figure 6 Percentage of
Advertisements Served
Outside of Intended
Geography in the United
States and Europe
June 2013 JOURNAL
OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH 197
what we know about advertising ii
0.03 percent and 0.49 percent of campaign
• Need for Validation
Advertisers need to understand adver-
impressions as being delivered to NHT.
The recent comScore studies demon-
tisement delivery along each of these
However, when using comScore’s more
strated that each dimension of adver-
core dimensions. And they also should
sophisticated methodology to detect
tising delivery—viewability, audience
require a holistic, unduplicated view
and filter out NHT, a higher 4-percent to
targeting, geographic targeting, brand
of total campaign reach and fre-
11-percent of impressions are identified
safety, and NHT—had a substantial
quency. To achieve this un-duplicated
as being delivered to NHT. The comScore
impact on whether an advertisement
accounting of delivered impressions,
methodology goes well beyond industry
achieved its intended objective.
advertisers must find a way to elimi-
blacklists of known robots. By its very
Each dimension, therefore, should
nate all the wasted time and error asso-
nature, this type of non-human activity
be a central component of advertising
ciated with merging disparate data
is highly adaptable to the countermeas-
delivery measurement and validation.
sources.
ures applied against it, and it is no surprise that published industry blacklists
There have been some clear top performers. In total, this campaign
effectively delivered to the target and efficiently balanced the exposures.
capture only a marginal amount of this
activity.
Impressions
Impressions
Avg. Frequency
Targeting Index
% on Target
Total Campaign
KEY IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Given
the
empirical
generalizations
derived from this research, there are a varCampaign Total
216
58%
3.2
advertising ecosystem. Among them:
Publisher 1
163
44%
4.0
• In-Flight Optimization of Media Plan
Publisher 2
225
60%
3.1
Publisher 3
140
37%
3.5
iety of key implications that the industry
should consider as it relates to the online
Increases Return on Investment (ROI)
For advertisers and agencies, holistic inflight validation of campaign delivery
provides an opportunity to understand
delivery across all dimensions. It also
There have been some opportunities. In this case many impressions are virtually
being thrown away as the wrong audience is reached over and over again.
allows time to efficiently make changes
to the media plan (e.g., spending allocations across individual publishers) that
can improve overall campaign results
(See Figure 7).
Kellogg’s used comScore’s Campaign
Campaign Total
Essentials service to obtain daily feedback of actual campaign delivery to
adjust its spending by individual pub-
Kellogg’s digital media plans based on
market mix models revealed that the
Impressions
Avg. Frequency
Targeting Index
% on Target
Total Campaign
105
53%
12.0
Publisher 1
97
49%
8.8
Publisher 2
25
13%
21.7
Publisher 3
92
47%
11.4
Publisher 4
143
72%
15.6
lisher in order to optimize frequency and
improve targeting accuracy. Analy­sis of
Impressions
company realized a dramatic improvement—five- and six-fold—in ROI for
two of its brands as a result of in-flight
optimization of its digital media plans
(See Figure 8).
198 JOURNAL
Figure 7 Kellogg’s Experience in Optimizing its Delivery of
Digital Media Plans
OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH June 2013
empirical generalizations in digital advertising
effectiveness, providing the first truly
Brand 1 ROI
cross-media comparable metric for use
Brand 2 ROI
in effectively building multi-platform
6x
campaigns. 5X
ROI
Year 1
2X
Year 2
3X
ROI
1H 2011
Year 1
Stephanie Flosi is a senior analyst at comScore
Year 2
in the marketing communications group, where
1H 2011
she manages product marketing for comScore’s
Brand Survey Lift suite of advertising effectiveness
Figure 8 Kellogg’s ROI Impact after Optimizing Digital Media
Plan In-flight in 1H2011
solutions. She supports various thought-leadership
initiatives at the company and has co-authored
several comScore whitepapers including NextGeneration Strategies for Advertising to Millennials
• Viewability Is Necessary but Not
models, resulting in better proof of
(2012), Surviving the Upfronts in a Cross-Media
Sufficient
digital advertising effectiveness—ulti-
World (2012), and comScore’s annual Digital Future
Viewability is a critical component of
mately bringing more branding dollars
in Focus reports.
campaign validation. Given the vari-
to the Internet.
ance in in-view rates across sites and
Gian Fulgoni is the co-founder and executive chairman
campaigns and the importance of
• Broad Adoption Will Allow the Digi-
of comScore, Inc. (NASDAQ:SCOR). Previously, he
“opportunity to see” in developing a
tal Marketing Industry to Reach Full
was president and CEO of Information Resources,
cross-media comparable GRP, campaign
Potential
Inc. During a 40-year career at the c-level of corporate
delivery metrics must include viewabil-
The broad market adoption of holis-
management, he has overseen the development of
ity. Such a treatment would generate a
tic campaign validation will allow
many innovative technological methods of measuring
service analogous to television audience
the online advertising ecosystem to
consumer behavior and advertising effectiveness. He
guarantees.
reach its full potential. It will help
is a previous contributor to the Journal of Advertising
Research.
In addition to viewability measure-
eliminate impressions that are paid
ment, it is also necessary to validate
for but never have an opportunity to
campaign delivery based on geography,
be seen and affect behavior. It will offer
Andrea Vollman is senior marketing director of
brand safety, and NHT. Eliminating
more accurate valuing of impressions
advertising effectiveness at comScore. Her research
inventory that does not have a chance
that deliver on their promise across
interests span all facets of online and cross-media
to make an impact results in more
a broad spectrum of campaign attrib-
advertising effectiveness and measurement and
effective/efficient campaigns and less
utes. And a viewability metric will
evaluation of brand communications and creative
waste for advertisers. It also provides
provide the ecosystem a standard
messaging. Her work has appeared in the Journal of
more accurate metrics for market-mix
set of currency by which to value
Advertising Research.
June 2013 JOURNAL
OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH 199