4 ms·
At the end of the day, the real problem with using ComScore #'s when developing a media plan is unlike with all other forms of mass media (TV/Radio/Print), in O
by kitcar 17y ago
At the end of the day, the real problem with using ComScore #'s when developing a media plan is unlike with all other forms of mass media (TV/Radio/Print), in Online the advertiser has direct feedback from the audience of their advertisements - hence you don't really need to use a 3rd party measurement service to help you determine if your campaign was on target/"worked".
A much better way to buy media online is sprinkle money around, see what performs best, allocate more money there, measure, test, repeat.
ComScore was designed to meet the need of old world media buyers working in online - those who can't wrap their heads around allocating media $ based on actual placement performance, rather than a 3rd party measurement company's estimate of what the audience might look like. There are A LOT of these people out there - hence ComScore has done OK for themselves. Unfortunately I agree that over the long term, their importance in the world of media buying will dwindle, and they will become more of a competitive research tool used by middle management and tech bloggers to re-enforce their viewpoints.
- andrewvc 17y agoI'm not in the ad game, but what you just said doesn't sound right to me. I mean, if I see 10 ads for a new show on TV network X, even if I don't click on them they have value. Not everything is monetizable online, and those things that aren't will be hard or impossible to track.
- kitcar 17y agoThe key point I'm making is as an advertiser, there is no way for me to know that you saw those 10 ads on TV - hence the need for 3rd party measurement. On the web, I have a direct line of sight to you - hence why introduce a 3rd party?