‘Millennials think news is free and ads are annoying, they need to understand that journalists need to get paid,’ says Xaxis boss
The APAC head of programmatic trading firm Xaxis has said that the rise of ad blockers is a concern that the ad industry has partly created itself, but highlighted the role of the publisher in heading off the threat as the under-covered part of the story.
Talking at the Malaysian Media Conference in Kuala Lumpur last week, Michel de Rijk, Asia Pacific CEO of Xaxis, said the industry needed to do a better job of ensuring ads reaching people on digital devices were less intrusive and more relevant.
He pointed to Yahoo’s move last week to deny access to Yahoo Mail users who have installed ad blocking software as an indication that publishers may not allow ad blockers on their platforms, because it hurts their business.
“No one is writing that story, no journalist is covering that,” he commented, referring to the potential loss in revenue ad blockers could mean for publishers. Yahoo’s action on ad blocking “goes really far,” said de Rijk, but added that “someone needs to maintain the servers.”
“Millennials think news is free and ads are annoying. They need to understand that journalists need to get paid,” he said.
De Rijk added that the ad blocker issue should not be “blown up” as growth of the technology was coming from a small base, an observation echoed by a Forrester analyst a fortnight ago, who told Mumbrella that the rise of ad blocking in Asia has so far been slow.
The Dutchman was also asked a question about brand safety, and why ads often end up on inappropriate websites.
“There are a lot of companies making money from fraudulent activities [on the web]. Our responsibility is to fight that battle together. And it’s not an easy battle,” he said, adding that there were no guarantees that automatically traded ads would find the right targets.
“When we find out that it’s [an ad] delivered in a non brand-safe environment we’ve been surprised as well. On the other side of the business, there are smart companies making money from non brand-safe environments. If you’re chasing for the lowest CPM then there’s a bigger risk [of inappropriatley placed ads].”
“That’s why it’s so important to understand that when working with publishers they are able to deliver ads in a brand safe environment. We do that with upfront media [buying],” he said.
De Rijk took a question from the audience over the transparency of Xaxis’ business model, a question the company has fielded often over the last two years. Xaxis buys digital media upfront, then sells it on to advertisers but does not disclose the margin it makes on a trade, the audience member noted. How then does the firm “manage transparency” with its clients?
De Rijk pointed at the large investments Xaxis makes in new technology to serve its clients, plus additional services laid on top to ensure its clients’ ads are actually seen by their target market, and do not end up in embarrassing places, a problem the CMO of CIMB Adam Wee had suggested that morning had limited the trust marketers have in programmatic trading.
“We’ve always been transparent about the fact that we are a non-disclosed business,” said de Rijk, who added that he did not regard Xaxis as a media agency, and that his firm is “as transparent as Google or Facebook.”
De Rijk also responded to the suggestion that Xaxis enjoys an exclusive relationship with GroupM, benefitting from business channeled from the clients of GroupM media agencies MEC, Mindshare, Mediacom and Maxus.
“If we do not perform, then kick us out [of the media schedule], like you do with any other media supplier,” de Rijk said, adding that over the four years since Xaxis launched in APAC the firm has moved away from a dependence on its parent; 20 per cent of Xaxis’s business now comes from outside of GroupM, with e-commerce players among their biggest clients.
Robin Hicks for Mumbrella Asia
I wonder how advertisers would feel seeing drivers flick a switch on their steering wheel and changing radio stations every time a four or five minute ad break starts?
Or TV viewers zapping through ad breaks with their remote, or jumping onto social media during live shows?
User ID not verified.
Good luck convincing people that trash news is worth paying for. Most publishers have sabotaged their own customer bases by dumbing down their content to the level that no-one would bother paying for it.
If you want people to pay for your product, you need to make it worthwhile. Otherwise find an ad funded model that works.
User ID not verified.
It’s not just Millennials, it’s everyone.
Problem is most journalism is not worth paying for, like fairfax and the newscorp.
User ID not verified.
As far as my digital newspaper reading goes then….
NYT international – Yep I’ll pay for that!
The Guardian – Yep I’ll pay for that!
The Independent – Yep I’ll pay for that!
The rest just arent good or interesting enough to expect payment unfortunately.
User ID not verified.
Been using adblockers for years and will continue to… until advertisers and website owners learn that advertsing should go alongside or around the content percentages matter, if you aregoing to take over my screen, im going to block you, if you sit relatively quietly alongside the story i am reading.. ill allow that.
Newspaper adverts back in the day were placed to suit the editorial and the build of the pages, everyone knows that we go to the content not to the adverts.
I started using adblockers back when the splash pages and pop ups became common so now… i see no ads at all.. (except on my work computer) This page is a good example of effective, non intrusive advertising, if all pages were like this, i might allow ads through and i might actually pay attention.
Oh im old and grey by the way.. not a millenial by any stretch.
User ID not verified.
Ok so..
Millennials think news is free.
… because it is.
and ads are annoying
… because they are
need to understand that journalists need to get paid
… as the head of trading for the worlds biggest agency you should just pay them
There are a lot of companies making money from fraudulent activities
[edited under Mumbrella’s comment moderation policy]
We’ve always been transparent about the fact that we are a non-disclosed business
… and it’s fine to be honest about lying.
“If we do not perform, then kick us out [of the media schedule], like you do with any other media supplier”
because GroupM won’t cut the profit centre unless the client pulls the budget.
20 per cent of Xaxis’s business now comes from outside of GroupM, with e-commerce players among their biggest clients
& those journalists who need paying really love a DR budget.
User ID not verified.
The Age, SMH, Herald Sun, and their ilk are just Buzzfeed with older mastheads. Let be honest – you need to provide people with compelling stories and news for them to want to pay for it.
Facebook, Google, Huffington Post and Buzzfeed all manage to get people to engage even with ads. It’s because they’re giving people a meaningful or, at least, enjoyable experience.
So maybe it’s not the ads – it’s the fact that you’re not doing anything to justify suffering through the ads.
But sure – keep whinging about ‘millenials’.
User ID not verified.
Michel de Rijk and Xaxis are very transparent, we can see right through them.
User ID not verified.
The crystal set was invented in the 1920s, and most households had television by the mid 1960s. News has been free for some time.
Adblockers can be jammed by sites if they want to. You don’t get many advertisements if you use an up to date browser anyway.
User ID not verified.