FIGARODIGITAL.CO.UK
ESSAYS
ust how valuable is a video view? And how do you measure that value? Recent research by Channel 4 suggests that the answer to both those questions
depends on where a video ad is viewed.
Channel 4’s study, undertaken with
Cog Research, examined differences in the way viewers consume video on demand (VoD) on different platforms via mobiles, tablets and laptops. It found that advertising on TV on- demand players outperforms YouTube (and other video platforms) for viewer acceptance, engagement and attention. The way viewers consume VoD content, it seems, is just as important as what they consume.
DISRUPTION AND DISTRACTION “This was a very investigative study,”
says Martin Greenbank, Head of Advertising Research & Development at Channel 4. “We weren’t looking to either prove or disprove any particular thing, though we did have a hypothesis. Anecdotally, we’d seen evidence that broadcaster VoD is watched in a different way to platforms like YouTube, and underpinning that is the way the players have been designed. We found that three-and-a- half times more attention was being paid to the broadcaster VoD commercial secondage than to YouTube’s commercial secondage. We didn’t expect that, but the figures were consistent across a significant number of observations.” This wasn’t just about eyeballs,
however. The study also examined viewers’ physiological responses. “We wanted to find out how viewers’
brains were responding to what they were seeing,” says Greenbank. “We found that on broadcaster VoD players, ads are consumed in a very similar mental and emotional state to that in which the programmes are consumed. That suggested to us
42 issue 26 november 2015
Martin Greenbank, Head of Advertising Research & Development at Channel 4, talks to Figaro Digital about a recent study which found that advertising on TV on-demand players outperforms YouTube for viewer engagement
YOUR VIEWS COUNT
that the ads weren’t such a disruptive element. They reached viewers in what we term a ‘relaxed and fluid’ state of mind. That was very different to the experience they had while watching YouTube, Facebook or publisher sites like MailOnline.” The reason for that, says
Greenbank, is because busy social media platforms and publisher sites, with their rolling sidebars, flashing notifications and continuous updates, hit us with too much information. Literally. Neuroscientist Dr Amanda Ellison from Durham University was on hand to interpret the results of Channel 4’s study. She found that video ads on YouTube threw viewers out of the ‘relaxed and fluid’ state associated with watching a chosen piece of content and knocked them into a more distracted, planning- oriented state.
“The primary purpose of social media is not to serve video in the way that TV or a broadcaster player does,” says Greenbank. “That means that when video is served, it can feel as if there’s been a compromise. On Facebook, for example, you don’t select to play the video content that appears in your newsfeed. It plays automatically. So it feels intrusive because it’s an unrequested assault on your senses. “We got a real education from our
neuroscientist in this project. If you’re rationally engaged with an ad, you’re probably not taking that ad in. It’s the same as when you’re watching a drama: you’re not stopping to think about what each character is doing. You don’t think about the kind of car they’re driving. You’re having that relaxed, fluid, lean-back experience. Once you’re in that state your brain activity becomes
less spiky.” That’s because when we’re enjoying our favourite show,
we’re in a mode of thought FEATURE JON FORTGANG
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68
