Advertising in online videos is still a long way to go
Online video is the great alternative to television. 73% of marketers globally have increased their budget in this area, according to AOL. A budget that, for the most part, came from the resources originally intended for television. The rise of online video advertising is a reality, 58% of marketers consider it to be a more effective medium than television advertising, however it could still improve. Let’s see why:
The cost of online video is too expensive
Even sometimes more expensive than TV, this does not encourage the migration of investment from conventional television to the online medium. Fortunately, this situation is going to change soon. These costs are expected to decrease, thanks to the possibility of content being transmitted worldwide through cable television and broadcasting agreements. Another aspect that will positively influence is the making of content specifically for the web, which will be broadcast through online video platforms such as YouTube, AOL, Yahoo or Netflix. These advances will facilitate the process and will give rise to cheaper supports.
It’s a complex world
The execution of online video is somewhat difficult, both for the need to adapt its format to a wide range of screens, not less than 6, to the existence of various operating systems, coding technologies and protocols.
In this area is also working to improve, so the VAST protocol, the IAB, is perhaps the biggest advance for its standardization and unification of criteria. Thanks to the implementation of its guidelines, it is now possible to create a large-scale online campaign, also applicable to both paid and interactive campaigns.
Fear of the unknown
This is still a very new medium, which generates certain insecurities, especially around its effectiveness. Although in the digital environment everything is possible to measure, and the figures support the high impact of this medium, as well as its impact on sales, traditional marketers still feel safer with traditional television. Not in vain, it is a medium they have used for 40 years, so the step towards definitive change is resisted.
Different types of measurement
The units of measure in television and in the online medium are totally different, which makes difficult the comparison and global analysis. When developing an advertising campaign on television, we rely on GRPs, while online video quantifies impressions. How do you eat this?
Fortunately Nielsen and comScore seem to have the solution. In addition there are tools that allow the measurement of visualization, in a short time, its use will be generalized and this will improve the analysis and comparison of the effectiveness in both supports.
Lack of transparency in the sector
On the one hand, advertisers are not sure what they are buying. The vast majority of online video is blindly contracted, something that does not allow marketers to choose the content that will accompany your ad. In contrast, television does allow a contextual and psychological correlation between the advertisement and the programming where it is inserted.
On the other hand, video platforms are not entirely honest with advertisers, offering them a cheaper, if less effective, product based on in-banner rather than in-stream ads. With the aggravating fact that marketers are not always aware of this reality, nor do they know the different possibilities, or know for sure when and how their piece is displayed.
To solve these problems, online media must clearly show what your campaign will consist of, how and where the ads will play, the context that surrounds them, and the display ratios. This data can be compared thanks to the standard tools designed for this purpose. As these good practices become widespread and the industry matures, it will gain confidence and increase its use, breaking down existing barriers and finally tapping the full potential of online video.
