What Scares Corporate Marketers

eyeball “It’s pretty scary,” Scott Hagedorn tells Advertising Age.

Who is Hagedorn, and of what is he afraid?

“We are not reaching young audiences effectively,” says this CEO of Hearts & Science, the marketing agency that describes its work for “the world’s biggest brands” thus:

Our clients shift from brands that push content out to brands that pull people in. We’re creating new relationships between brands and people like never before.

The crisis to which Hagedorn refers is the fact that:

a growing audience of people who aren’t tracked — and therefore can’t be targeted or measured — with traditional tools and platforms. They consume media on mobile devices and OTT. They’re “cord cutters” and “cord nevers.” And they represent tremendous buying power for brands. The stakes are high—47% of Millennials and Gen X appear “unreachable” within standard planning tools, and 66% of their media consumption isn’t tracked, either.

Hagedorn clarifies in today’s Wall Street Journal:

And if it can’t be measured, it can’t be properly targeted or planned against as part of a cohesive, cross-platform campaign.

“Planned against.” Write that down, TCT readers.

Meanwhile, not to worry, overclass. Answers, as always, are being perfected by heroes like Hagedorn. Thanks to the emerging standard practice of “integrating code to measure in-app content and ad consumption…on literally every [video-watching] platform, device and client app,” the crude surveillance methods of the past are on their way out.

The days of yore wherein the [Nielsen] panel served as the proxy for an audience — setting behavior, reach, and cost estimates — fall out of the picture. Google and Facebook , along with telecom “pipes” like AT&T and Verizon , and retailers like Amazon, have massive install bases that are logged in across screens, making identity-based marketing not only feasible, but the most accurate solution to capture these new consumer behaviors.

We’ll no longer need the panel as proxy for an audience, as we’ll have a deterministic view of the people in the audience. Identity-based marketing becomes the solution that holds consumer identity as the currency against which we measure, plan and buy media across devices and platforms.

As many of these platforms own the consumer experience from end to end – not just identifying their audience at a granular level, but also creating the content being consumed – it’s only a matter of time until these identity-based currencies and identity-based experiences become the marketer’s art. [WSJ, 9/22/2017]

This American Life, Indeed

Ira Glass photo The latest recipient of the Hicks Dictum Award is that hugely over-rated antiquarian, Ira Glass, who has this to say about how he views his own output:

“I think we’re ready for capitalism, which made this country so great. Public radio is ready for capitalism.”

One might ask what makes Mr. Glass think PBS and NPR have ever been anything but subservient to capitalism, but that is a side issue. The main point is that everything Glass says is a turd falling into your drink.

The Future is Now

eyeball For decades, corporate marketers have been working toward real-time linking of purchase and media-use data in the planning of their behavior-engineering campaigns.

The future is now arriving, friends:

Twitter ad targeting just got more broad … and specific. Today the company announced that it’s giving advertisers the ability to take aim at more than 1,000 audiences defined by big data partners Acxiom and Datalogix.

Called “partner audiences,” the new ad feature means advertisers can now serve Promoted Tweets to Twitter users who have signaled purchase intent in specific categories off Twitter. Acxiom and Datalogix are dominant players in the big data industry, tracking and analyzing consumer behavior across brick and mortar and online businesses. [Source]

In honest usage, “signaled,” of course, means an intended communication. What it means in marketing-speak, however, has nothing to do with any respect for the intentions of the target populations, whose “signals” in this case are merely their ordinary procurements of life’s necessities, a.k.a. naive purchases of goods and services.

The fact that overclass agents arrogate unto their masters the right to treat such acts as “signals” from their victims speaks volumes about how illegitimate the planet-wrecking reign of corporate investors really is, even as it remains so deniable and seemingly benign.

Automatrix

Sarah Mandato As “content marketing” devours the talent and space that once was journalism, its architects include the likes of Sarah Mandato (what a name for an overclass mind-molder!), “director of content solutions at Nativo, a native advertising company.” As shown at Advertising Age, here is how our dear pixie-bot thinks and talks, as she labors to get her victims to “consume” her tricks on her clients’ sites, as “brand content served within publisher editorial streams, matched to the look and feel of each publication”:

How can brands ensure they’re optimizing content?

Optimization opportunities are similar to having a focus group providing real-time feedback about what does and doesn’t appeal to readers. With today’s robust ad tech ecosystem, marketers have expanded tools to apply A/B tests and optimizations on campaigns. It’s no different with content — marketers can test their branded content’s various components, such as headlines and images. By not taking advantage of this, brands are turning down the chance to listen to consumers and gain actionable insights around messaging that best resonates with users.

Yes, “listen to.” That’s “listen to” in the mode of BB and Winston Smith, of course.

Lovely stuff, isn’t it?

Verizon Must Go

guillotine Verizon, the mega-corporation that told its employee David Strayer to stop telling it about the massively homicidal nature of encouraging people to use cell phones inside automobiles, now has this to say about the simple, long-overdue idea of ruling that internet access is, like snail-mail, broadcast airspace, and transportation, a public utility:

“The FCC can address any harmful behavior without taking this radical step,” Michael Glover, senior VP at Verizon Communications Inc., said in an e-mailed statement. “It is counterproductive because heavy regulation of the Internet will create uncertainty and chill investment.” [Source: Advertising Age, February 4, 2015]

First off: ROFL about that “investment” trope. Verizon and its partners-in-crime are blatant organized theft on the biggest scale, and, as such, are huge, very active obstacles to the proper, economical investment in and distribution of modern communications infrastructure, activities that are the natural and Constitutionally-mandated endeavors of the United States Postal Service.

Secondly:

O corporate death penalty, where art thou?