-
Opinion
What's in a name?
In this guest post, Moensie Rossier wonders about the power of names for brands and marketers.
Brands have been having a bit of fun with names lately, not to mention a fair bit of success. Interbrand just named a headhunting firm Cloak & Dagger. And ‘Share a Coke’ showed how much power there is in a name.
The Coke campaign effectively short-circuited the usual mechanics of communication. It undoubtedly stroked people’s egos. But, I believe, its success stems from the fact that it directly and automatically affected people’s behaviour, rather than doing so indirectly by shaping attitudes.
Best ads from Super Bowl 2012
The Super Bowl is all done and a team from North America won. But as well as some sort of sporting event, it’s the world’s biggest advertising showcase. See the best of them right here… and please tell us what you think.
How to debunk media myths
In this post, UWS’s Ullrich Ecker, John Cook and Stephen Lewandowsky argue that cognitive science can help PRs form strategies in managing media misreporting.
A growing cohort of commentators has bemoaned the descent of contemporary political “debate” into a largely fact-free zone.
How about simply focusing on what consumers want?
In this guest post, Peter Mountford argues that brands should think more about what is really going on for consumers
Who here is hoping their favourite brand of toilet paper is going to be organizing a flash mob on their way home from work today?
What the Optus web copyright victory means
In this analysis first published on The Conversation, RMIT’s Marita Shelly examines the implications of Telstra’s defeat over the online rights to the AFL broadcast deal
This week’s Federal Court ruling that Optus customers are able to view sporting matches minutes after they are streamed live without breaching copyright is a landmark decision that alters our understanding of copyright law, and has significant implications for the AFL’s broadcasting rights deal.
Does Gina Rinehart’s bite of a chunk of Fairfax make her an oligarch?
In an article that first appeared in The Conversation, Mark Rolfe wonders whether the mining magnate’s move could turn Fairfax into something resembling America’s Fox network.
Australia’s richest person Gina Rinehart has moved to increase her stake in Fairfax Media, owner of The Age, Sydney Morning Herald and a number of radio stations. Rinehart has already shown her desire to play a role in public life, campaigning against former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s aborted mining tax. She has also demonstrated a willingness to make media investments to ensure her pro-business worldview is promulgated.
What does this latest move by Rinehart mean?
Gillard's Australia Day crisis
PM Julia Gillard’s media adviser Tony Hodges has been forced to resign over the Australia Day tent embassy debacle.
It came after it emerged he had revealed opposition leader Tony Abbott’s whereabouts, leading to both politicians being rescued by police in ugly scenes.
Mumbrella editor Tim Burrowes and advertising practitioner Jane Caro debate the topic on Weekend Sunrise’s masters of Spin segment:
The biggest cock-up I made in business
In this guest post, Chris Savage urges agency staff to live the brand.I still shudder when I think about how incredibly stupid I was when I made the biggest stuff up of my career. And then, 18 years later, I did it again. Do not make this mistake with your clients. Ever.
Hey Groupon. Thanks for fucking up email
In this guest post, Daniel Monheit warns that group deal overload is devaluing email marketingEmail marketing used to be fabulous. Back in the heady days of 2010, brands would work hard to build up well qualified databases, upon which they’d bestow carefully crafted correspondence filled with information, offers and incentives. The recipients, of course would be delighted: “Oh look! An email! From one of my favourite brands! And it’s 40 cents off at Woolies this week!”.
The staggering sway of Harold Mitchell
The Power Index today names Aegis Media chairman Harold Mitchell as the most powerful person in Melbourne. Andrew Crook profiles him.
Harold Mitchell takes pride in dispensing with the niceties. When The Power Index visited his South Melbourne private office before Christmas, fresh remains were scattered all over the boardroom table.
Share a Coke with… the moronic masses
The most-read story on Mumbrella last year, with not far off 100,000 page views, was a fairly humdrum yarn about the launch of Coca-Cola’s name-on-a-bottle campaign.The headline, “Coca-Cola puts people’s names on bottles in ‘Share a Coke’ campaign”, though hated by any self-respecting sub-editor, was loved by Google. And in rushed what can be politely described as the public.
Assumptions kill creativity
In this guest post, Gual Barwell disagrees that the sales success of the Old Spice social media campaign was overstated.Yesterday’s post from Cathie McGinn suggested the Old Spice campaign failed to connect with consumers. Based on the facts and figures, I disagree.
What Old Spice and Wieden + Kennedy has done and done phenomenally well is to create a franchise.
The SMH's readers (are wrong) editor
We are now about five months into the reign of Australia’s first readers’ editor. And I don’t think it is working.
It struck me at the time of Judy Prisk’s appointment to the Sydney Morning Herald that the fact that her boss was editor-in-chief Peter Fray was not going to be ideal if she was going to be the independent voice of the reader.
The emperor's new fragrance: Old Spice’s campaign failure
In this guest post, Cathie McGinn slays a sacred cow of 21st century marketing – the highly awarded Old Spice campaign.One of the biggest myths of recent times (by which I mean a story of great heroism and triumph we’d all like to believe but deep down know to be untrue) is the Old Spice social media campaign. It’s been much lauded and awarded as an example of outstanding content, a creative and collaborative way of connecting with consumers and driving a record increase in sales.
How reliable are radio ratings?
In this guest posting, Jason ‘Jabba’ Davis wonders how accurate radio ratings can be, since the data is collated from handwritten diaries.
So, the radio ratings season gets underway tomorrow. After a well-earned break, Australia’s commercial radio stations will renew their obsession with figures to see how many of us are listening. Are they winning or losing the ratings war?
The much feared radio survey is the only way to measure the success or failure of a station’s playlist, talent, promotions or even good old Black Thunder crosses. With six-figure salaries riding on the make-or-break nature of ratings, just how accurate are Australia’s radio survey results?
Media Monitors launches new media value measure
Media Monitors has launched a new service which it claims will allow brands to measure their media and PR coverage online and in traditional media and work out its equivalent value in advertising dollars.
The service comes as part of a tie in with audience research organisation ComScore.
In a release, Media Monitors claimed the tool will “provide the region’s most comprehensive quantitative analysis tool for editorial content across all media types”.
It said it had developed “a measurement methodology that incorporates data on page impressions, unique visitors, content style, advertising rates, size, language scaling and placement to provide instantly comparable advertising space rates (ASR) across internet monitoring content.”
Gregg Amies, Media Monitors’ GM for Australia and New Zealand said: “Our clients will be receiving comprehensive and immediate ASR values across press, broadcast and internet, allowing full and consistent reporting of both campaign and ongoing media relations measurement.”
The announcement may trigger some debate as many PR pfressionals challenge whether advertising equivalent is a credible measure of media coverage for brands.
July 8th, 2010 at 8:21 am
-
Follow Us
-
Email Newsletter
Latest Jobs- Online Business Operations and Community Coordinator - Ultimo, Sydney
- Project Managers - Sydney & Perth
- Account Manager - Online Display - Sydney
- Senior Account Manager - Online - Melbourne
- Senior Digital Project Manager - Sydney
- Digital Marketing & Sales Manager - Ultimo, Sydney
- Front End Developer - Sydney
- Front End Developer - Large eCommerce Company! - Sydney
- Digital Account Executive - Sydney, NSW
- Social Media Content Manager - O/S Posting - Ho Chi Minh City, VIETNAM
Comments
8 Jul 10
9:16 am
Oh dear. What wonderful innovation Media Monitors is bringing us.
Nobody with any credibilty, and hardly anybody without credibility, thinks AVE is a suitable measure of anything.
Wouldn’t it be better for Media Monitors to be focussing its efforts on measuring outcomes as a result of media coverage?
8 Jul 10
9:24 am
Agree with Matthew.
Why not look at developing a measurment service that truly reflects the impact and influence of media coverage.
AVE is no longer a valid measurement and the more people in the industry begin to devlop alternative means of measuring outcomes the better we will be. My experience, however, has shown clients still expect a dollar figure when reporting on results. It is just as much about educating clients that AVE is not the be all and end all of measuring outcomes.
8 Jul 10
9:25 am
Agree. AVEs are not the way
That being said am very intrigued to see the mechanics of how they measure online PR coverage in $$
8 Jul 10
9:29 am
Echoing Matt’s comments. All this does is highlight the disconnect between certain business functions and the wider business outcomes of clients/brands.
8 Jul 10
9:42 am
I remember telling my old boss that this was a dated and meaningless evaluation tool – in 1993. I had hoped we had moved on from this long ago.
There is nothing like the simplicity of a $ value created vs $ spend, is there?
8 Jul 10
9:54 am
AVE continues to be measurement tool because clients, particulalrly those not familar with other metrics, continue to demand it – its value has always been questionable, even when it was alledgedly fashionable.
The industry needs to continue to focus on educating clients in better methods of measurement – MediaMonitors wouldn’t have created this service without the expectation of demand for it, which must have, in part at least, come from agencies.
8 Jul 10
9:58 am
Good point on the clients demands. And education.
8 Jul 10
10:32 am
Would prefer MM to concentrate on keeping its contacts lists up to date.
8 Jul 10
10:48 am
The videos from MM staffers really help understand their methodology….
http://www.mediamonitors.com.a.....eports-asr
8 Jul 10
11:11 am
Agree with Ella! I think MM also needs to work on improving its clipping service.
8 Jul 10
11:47 am
PR is not advertising and should not be compared with it. Ad agencies don’t report their success in terms of PR equivalence, but what other measurement tool can provide results as ‘impressive’ as AVE? Also agree with Ella and Kiz, MM contact lists are SO out of date it’s a joke.
8 Jul 10
11:55 am
I’m the Product Director at Media Monitors, responsible for the recent release of our new metrics. We really welcome this debate.
Some points of clarification if I may. I think it is important to understand that Media Monitors does not use the term Advertising Value Equivalents, because it is not viable to equate the value of editorial content with advertising.
Our metric is an Advertising Space Rate (ASR) which is calculation of advertising space only, without qualitative elements such as tone or message. Our metric is based on advertising cost, space of coverage and relevant audiences. The intention of our product release is to allow clients to use these output metrics, such as audience data or ASR, in their reporting as they see fit.
Media Monitors does not believe that ASRs or AVEs are in any way a measurement of the value of public relations or communications, nor do they inform future strategy, which is what good outcome based measurement provides (which Media Monitors also provides). I fervently agree with all the above comments to that effect.
What is new with our service, and an industry first, is that we are able to provide a methodology across all media, allowing clients to benchmark their media coverage in a consistent manner. One of the key reasons for us to provide this enhanced service was the strong client demand for these metrics, especially for internet content.
Happy to take any further questions here, or on twitter @bpswalenz. We at Media Monitors would like to host an event on 22nd July (free drinks!) to continue the debate. Details TBC.
Cheers
Brendan
8 Jul 10
1:42 pm
No method is perfect. Whether you think it is accurate or not, in my experience dollar value or column inches is the most requested method of measurement in most consumer-facing PR.
Even if you think that it’s crude, when you are working on an overarching campaign involving marketing, advertising and PR, it is virtually the only way you can measure the sole impact of PR. If anyone has a client who is willing to invest money in post-campaign research to find out exactly how much awareness was raised due to PR only, then please contact me.
8 Jul 10
4:35 pm
It doesn’t help when fellow industry “professionals” conform to uneducated client demands instead of insisting on an appropriate way of reporting on the merits, value and impact of PR. Stand up for the profession…if you really believe in it and are confident of your ability
8 Jul 10
9:47 pm
Brendan. you’re putting lipstick on a pig. This is nothing but AVE’s renamed. It’s no different than VMS’s Weighted Media Cost. You are still equating PR to Advertising in total violations of the Barcelona Priniciples. What’s the point of getting a majority of people in the industry to agree to a standard and then the next month going out and announcing something that is in total contradition to those principles? I’m disappointed and disgusted.
9 Jul 10
11:12 am
The main problem here is that, while Media Monitors is good at providing press clips and summaries, they have almost zero media/PR professionals in their fold. They take a stab at developing products that have a chance of selling, but at the end of the day these are built around uneducated guesses. The latest offering is a perfect case in point: 1. can it be automatically built at the touch of a button? check! 2. can it be provided cheaply to the client, while still securing a profit? check! 3. Is it progressive, moving the industry forward with fresh ideas and innovation? who cares. Media Monitors has been pushing analysis services to their clients for the last decade, with little success. I know of no body who has bought any of their services twice – they should stick with what they know. Check out the video link provided by Ben – does this bloke honestly seem like he’s ever worked in PR, or is he a career academic???
9 Jul 10
12:26 pm
Brendan, just to clarify, you claim this service “will allow brands to measure their media and PR coverage online and in traditional media and work out its equivalent value in advertising dollars.” Then you turn around and say “Media Monitors does not believe that ASRs or AVEs are in any way a measurement of the value of public relations or communications”
What’s the point?
9 Jul 10
1:32 pm
free drinks!
9 Jul 10
1:59 pm
*sigh*
Much agreement with Matthew, Lani, Jye and others.
AVE and any other variant of qualitative measurement is not accurate nor is it representative of true success for a client. It’s a false economy of assumption that because it’s editorial means xx number of people read it and valued the message 3x higher than the same message in paid media.
Even if MM argue it’s not ‘like’ AVE, take the spin away and reveal the theory: it’s false economy and AVE.
Digital PR, MSM PR, social media etc etc have moved beyond this to proving value through direct results. It’s time MM and other providers understood that if you can’t provide a measurement service that attributes outputs with the bottom line, you’re doing a massive disservice to yourself and your client.
9 Jul 10
2:09 pm
Talk about a debate that goes around in circles.
Yes, we all know AVE etc.. is not an accurate representation of the value of PR, but try telling that to a client who has to justify their spend on PR to head honchos who care about $$$$$$$ and nothing else!
The unfortunate reality is that until a better system comes up, we’re stuck with it.
9 Jul 10
2:18 pm
“Brendan, you’re putting lipstick on a pig”
Katie, you’re a living legend.
9 Jul 10
2:21 pm
@Brendan, thanks for taking the time to respond and engage in this conversation.
I’m glad you too don’t think AVE is a suitable measure for PR, but I still struggle with your assertion around this being a tool to compare results across channels. In my mind this is still a poor measure. Like AVE, it relies on the value of advertising as the metric for measurement. It doesn’t take into account audience, message penetration, user reaction/behaviour as a result or indeed if the article is even positive or negative. It is a crude and in my mind a pointless measure.
Of course you wouldn’t have created this tool if there wasn’t demand for it, but in my perhaps too idealistic view, as a leader in this industry you should be taking a stand against this as a measurement device and focusing more on the qualitative measures you mention. Instead you will have your sales teams selling this as a good measure for PR effectiveness and marketing its availability.
9 Jul 10
2:43 pm
Hi Brendan
I’m a new media analyst. Am I missing something? I’ve been following the launch of ASR. I’m wondering, how do you differentiate real substantive news from mere brand mentions? Also, you said that the methodology calculates advertising space rate only and doesn’t include qualitative elements such as tone and message. So, am I right in thinking that this is purely quantitative? Are you treating positive and negative coverage equally? If the bottom line of this metric is only about dollar value, how valuable is this information to the clients?
9 Jul 10
3:03 pm
I’m with Trish – so long as demand is prevalent, then there will be services put into place in order to meet that demand. AVE-like services wouldn’t continue to be offered throughout the market if there weren’t demands from clients and managers asking for this sort of information!
Educating is all well and good but at the end of the day it boils down to demands and dollars.
9 Jul 10
4:49 pm
Hi all,
Thanks for the ongoing comments. I’ve written a response but it’s quite lengthy, so I’ve posted on our blog. The great thing is that people are so passionate about our industry, as am I.
http://bit.ly/aeWQb6
Cheers
Brendan
10 Jul 10
4:16 pm
Brendan
I’ve read your blog but I dont think your company can fence sit on this one. As you know I have run a successful media analysis company in New Zealand for years now. I have never know a client who can not be convinced that AVE is wildly optimistic at best and crook maths at worst. Who are these marketing and public relations professionals who are willing to swallow this Pollyanna view of the world. For example if you were to run the ruler over this blog (and some other views of it — lets say Katie Paine’s) what would the outcome be. My clients expect some critical analysis. They don’t expect me to say its all great or a crisis is a marketing opportunity. If it is a career ender for me, so be it. Analysts have to do some informed work.
16 Jul 10
12:25 am
Oh, the irony. How can anyone rely on AVE when no one is even clear on AV? Regardless of whether advertising and PR have equal impact (which they simply don’t).
19 Jul 10
3:44 pm
Hi all,
Thanks for the comments.
Details of our event can be found here: http://asrpanel.eventbrite.com/
Looking forward to the panel and discussion.
Deb
28 Jul 10
11:34 am
Hullo Again! I just wanted to let you know that Penny Rose from Marketing Elements posted a blog on her outtakes from our ASR discussion last week.
We’ve also included audio from the evening if you missed it.
http://bit.ly/a7UDix
Thanks!
28 Jul 10
3:15 pm
Brendan
Maybe media monitors should concentrate on actually having products that work suitably for those of us that actually work in PR, rather than creating products to fool corporates.
Here’s some examples:
- a media clipping service that actually works, and doesnt require clients to waste their valuable hours doing their own monitoring
- better priced video and audio clippings. Charging a non-profit $350 for a 60 second newsclip is ridiculous. I’ve had CEOs tell me they would rather illegally record their own clips than pay your prices.
- maybe a suitably priced monitoring service for PR agencies, so that they can see the value in using your service?
28 Jul 10
4:02 pm
Couldn’t agree more with Brendan. As one who works in corporate pr had a big announcement and needed the clips for the client first thing in the morning. Clips emailed – all good. Problem is MM missed the half page article in the AFR, our leading business daily!!
28 Jul 10
4:11 pm
Chris and Dave,
Thanks for letting us know your concerns.
If you like you can email me your details and I can call you to address your individual concerns further.
mm_au@mediamonitors.com.au
Thanks
Deb