Friday, February 9, 2007

The Web, Now Just for You

New online tools offer personalized recommendations to help users find what they like—and help advertisers target their audience

Kevin Rose likes to talk about his taste for oolong tea. But lately the founder of Digg, a popular bookmarking site that enables users to submit links to Web pages and articles they find noteworthy, has been more vocal about strangers' appetites for, well, everything. Rose has been paying particular attention to which Web sites, stories, and links are gobbled up by the 900,000 registered users who visit Digg—and which ones are cast aside. He plans to use what Digg knows of its members' tastes to help them find more media fare they might want to consume.

Later this year, Digg will launch a recommendation tool able to expose members to fellow Diggers who appear to have similar interests, says Rose. "Digg will be smart enough to know what interests you," says Rose. The site will identify those with like interests in part by the previous stories they have dug and "buried"—the site's term for voting down a story. "Theoretically, over time, you provide useful information," says Digg Chief Executive Jay Adelson. "It makes a personal version of Digg more possible."

Ad-Delivery System

Digg is not alone in working to leverage what it knows about users' tastes to suggest more relevant content. Internet giants Yahoo! (YHOO) and Time Warner's (TWX) AOL, as well as a host of startups, are testing or developing tools to do the same. Earlier this February, Yahoo quietly launched a recommendation feature for its bookmark tool that suggests content related to that previously bookmarked. Similarly, AOL began testing a tool in November that suggests news articles to individual My AOL customers based on what they have read before and what those with seemingly similar interests have selected.

Of course, tools that personalize the Web are not new. For years, people have been able to customize their home pages on sites such as Google.com (GOOG) and Yahoo.com. Similarly, e-commerce sites such as Amazon.com (AMZN) have long relied on recommendation tools to fuel additional sales.

So what's new? Previously, Web sites added automated recommendation tools to their e-commerce offerings to get you to spend more money. Now, it's about getting you to spend more time. The goal of the new generation of recommendation tools is to encourage visitors to stay as long as possible on particular sites and, in the process, deliver as many ads as possible to users—without alienating them.

The "Engagement" Quotient

In the world of marketing, the length of time spent on a site is called "engagement," and it's a key consideration when advertisers determine where to spend their ad dollars. Sites that have high user engagement can gain longer exposure time for ads, making it more likely that a user will click on an ad or absorb a branding message. Sites that offer higher engagement often charge higher rates to show the ads or collect more revenue from click-through advertising.

When sites know enough about visitors to suggest content, the additional ad-targeting capability they can provide is very appealing to advertisers. Theoretically, that knowledge can be used to suggest items users may want to purchase, making advertising more likely to translate into sales.

VideoEgg, a two-year-old company that provides video tools for sites such as social network Bebo, has developed a new version of its media player that recommends videos related to the one the user is watching. The new player, which is set to launch sometime in the third quarter, shows ads related to the video playing. For example, a music video could display an interactive ad at its base selling ringtones by the same artist. The hope, says CEO and co-founder Matt Sanchez, is that the recommendations keep the user engaged with the player, and potentially the advertising, longer. "We want to entertain users as long as they want to be entertained," he says.

Filtering Tools

Many companies have yet to aggressively deliver ads along with their suggestion tools. Sites are still trying to master the delicate balance between a helpful suggestion and an off-putting sales pitch. Too much advertising can defeat the purpose of the recommendation tool by aggravating users and unintentionally pushing them to a competing site, says Tomi Poutanen, Yahoo's senior director for social search products.

The potential for advertising is only one aspect fueling the recommendation trend. Companies see the sheer volume of Web content as creating demand for tools that help direct users to the sites they want as well as entertainment and information avenues they would want if they knew they existed. "With traditional media consumption, you trusted an editor to discover it," says Josh Kopelman, a managing partner at First Round Capital who invested in social-bookmarking site del.icio.us, now owned by Yahoo. "As more and more content gets put online in an unpackaged format, the importance of discovery is going to be extremely important."

StumbleUpon, one of Kopelman's investments, is among the companies tapping this trend. The company, which launched in 2001, has a toolbar that suggests sites relating to categories or words users have expressed interest in. Users can then rate the site by clicking either a thumbs-up or thumbs-down button on the toolbar. Over time, the toolbar learns preferences and can better tailor suggestions to particular users. It also suggests sites highly rated by fellow stumblers whom users identify as friends.

Discovery Engine

The company, which calls itself a discovery engine, has added 1.8 million users in the past two years since focusing on recommendations and social search. "As the amount of content has grown, the need for effective filtering and recommendation engines has grown," says Garrett Camp, StumbleUpon's co-founder and chief architect.

The challenge for companies offering recommendations is to balance that need—and their need to make money through advertising—with users' privacy concerns and changing tastes. It is clear from the millions of folks who personalize their home pages, subscribe to topic-specific news feeds, and engage with sites such as StumbleUpon that they do want the ability to both focus on and discover content they find interesting.

However, many people are also uncomfortable with companies knowing too much about who they are: their likes, dislikes, interests, and habits. In September, three AOL users sued after the company released "anonymous" search data that was, in some cases, traceable to individuals based on the information contained in queries. Similarly, consumer groups have filed complaints with the Federal Trade Commission against tech companies they feel silently collect too much data about their users (see BusinessWeek.com, 11/15/06, "Taking Aim at Targeted Advertising").

Fickle Users

Web companies have long been grappling with privacy concerns but what may prove to be a more daunting task is understanding and keeping up with Web surfers' ever-changing palates. Digg's Adelson has noticed that tastes change depending on the time of day. In the morning, people tend to be more interested in hot-off-the-presses news scoops, meaty analysis pieces, and what is at the top of Digg's home page. By lunchtime, many are looking for easily digestible Internet snacks—entertaining stories or video clips that can amuse them during a quick break from work. If the engine thinks, based on morning behavior, that a user wants in-depth, up-to-the-minute news stories during the lunch hour, the suggestions could become a nuisance.

Despite the challenges, many see recommendations and personalization as the next wave. If 2006 was all about community and user-generated content, 2007 and beyond will focus on individual desires. "I think that the long-term future is personalization," says Digg's Adelson.

What's on next

Feb 8th 2007 | SAN FRANCISCO
From The Economist print edition
The union of television and the internet is spawning a wide variety of offspring
Claudio Munoz

BOSSES in the television industry have been keeping a nervous eye on two Scandinavians with a reputation for causing trouble. In recent years Niklas Zennström, a Swede, and Janus Friis, a Dane, have frightened the music industry by inventing KaZaA, a “peer-to-peer” (P2P) file-sharing program that was widely used to download music without paying for it. Then they horrified the mighty telecoms industry by inventing Skype, another P2P program, which lets internet users make free telephone calls between computers, and very cheap calls to ordinary phones. (The duo sold Skype to eBay, an internet-auction giant, for $2.6 billion in 2005.) Their next move was to found yet another start-up—this time, one that threatened to devastate the television industry.

It may do the opposite, as it turns out. The new service, called Joost and now in advanced testing, is based on P2P software that runs on people's computers, just like Skype and KaZaA. And it does indeed promise to transform the experience of watching television by combining what people like about old-fashioned TV with the exciting possibilities of the internet. But unlike KaZaA and Skype, says Fredrik de Wahl, a Swede whom Messrs Zennström and Friis have hired as Joost's boss, Joost does not “disrupt” the industry that it is entering. Instead, rather than undercutting television networks and producers, he says, Joost might, as it were, give them new juice.

That is because Mr de Wahl and his Joost team, working mostly in the Netherlands, have bravely ignored the totems of the internet-video boom. Chief among these fashions is letting users upload anything they want to a video service—which might include clips of themselves doing odd things (“user-generated content”) or, more questionably, videos pirated from other sources. The celebrated example of this approach is YouTube, which is now part of Google, the leader in internet search. Its big problem, however, is that it can be illegal (if copyright is violated) and fiendishly hard to turn into a business.

On February 2nd Viacom, an American media giant, became the latest company to demand that YouTube remove copyright-infringing clips from its website. YouTube has struck deals with some media firms, including NBC and CBS, to allow their material to appear on its site, and had been trying to thrash out a similar agreement with Viacom. Many observers regard Viacom's move as a negotiating tactic. But whether YouTube can make money is unclear. Last month Chad Hurley, YouTube's chief executive, sketched out plans for generating advertising revenues and sharing them with content providers, but so far his firm has none to speak of.

Joost is also ignoring the two business models seen as the most respectable alternatives to advertising. One is to make users pay for each television show or film they download, but then to let them keep it. This is the tack chosen by Apple, an electronics firm that sells videos on iTunes, its popular online store; by Amazon, the largest online retailer; and by Wal-Mart, the largest traditional retailer, which launched a video-download service this week. The other approach is to let users subscribe to what is, in effect, an all-you-can-eat buffet of videos, and then to “stream” video to their computers without leaving a permanent copy. This is the approach taken by, for instance, Netflix, a Californian firm that mostly delivers DVDs to its subscribers by post, but now also streams films.

The reason that Joost is ignoring all of these methods, says Mr de Wahl, is that none has much to do with the experience of simply watching TV, which most people enjoy. Unlike the download or streaming approaches, he says, “TV is not about buying today what you want to watch tomorrow, it's about turning it on and watching.” And in contrast to the “lean-forward” context of “snacking” on a YouTube clip in one's cubicle while the boss has stepped out, TV is a longer and more relaxed “lean-backward” experience.

Hence Joost's most shocking innovation, which is not to change the practices that TV adopted decades ago. It will be free, with advertising breaks—no more than three minutes per hour—either before, during or after a show, depending on the market. Americans, says Mr de Wahl, are more tolerant of interruptions.

Joost has “channels”, like ordinary TV, but these are now playlists of videos that start whenever it is convenient to the viewer. Viewers can import their instant-messaging buddy lists and chat online with friends while watching the same programme. For advertisers, such engagement is worth something, because the activity proves that somebody is watching, rather than being asleep or out of the room. Combined with other information, such as the computer's IP address and hence its location, advertisers will be able to target their spots much more accurately—all “Desperate Housewives” fans in a particular neighbourhood, for example—and thus ought to pay a premium.

The thing that is missing in this new vision of television, however, is the set itself. Beaming video from a computer to a television is possible: Apple and other firms are starting to sell the necessary gadgets. But until it becomes much easier to connect televisions to the internet, big media companies are likely to “wait and see” before committing to Joost, says Jeremy Allaire, the boss of Brightcove, a rival internet-video firm based in Massachusetts. In the meantime, thinks Mr Allaire, media firms are mainly interested in building their own brands, so Brightcove provides content owners with technology to show television on their own websites, syndicate their shows to other websites, track audiences and collect advertising revenue.

There is, in short, no consensus about the best way to combine television with the internet. Instead, there are a variety of experiments, of which Joost is the latest example and YouTube the best-known. But as with telephony, the internet is unpicking service delivery from network ownership. Joost, YouTube, iTunes and Netflix do not need their own networks to supply their video services: they can piggyback on fast internet links provided by others.

According to iSuppli, a market-research firm, internet downloads will claim more than one-third of the market for on-demand video by 2010 (see chart). So just as internet telephony has been bad for traditional phone companies, this “internet bypass” could be bad for the “on demand” video services being offered by cable-TV and telecoms firms over their networks. But by bringing television to more screens in more social contexts, all this could provide new models for programme-makers to finance their productions and offer advertisers new ways to reach consumers. And so Joost and rival services could end up rejuvenating the 75-year-old medium.

RAEL: Radio Plus Web Equals Better Ad Recall

Katy Bachman

FEBRUARY 09, 2007 -

Radio’s share of local online ad revenue dipped from 4 percent to 2 percent in 2006, according to Borrell Associates, but a new study conducted by Harris Interactive for the Radio Ad Effectiveness Lab could help the industry reverse that trend. The study, the fifth in a series of eight studies designed to demonstrate and explore how radio works for advertisers, found ad recall increased significantly when ad campaigns mixed radio with the Internet.

Adding radio to an Internet-only campaign enhanced unaided recall of advertising by four-and-a-half times, from 6 percent to 27 percent, while aided recall increased 25 to 58 percent.

“Branding was consistently higher with a mix of radio and the Internet. The differences were large and statistically significant,” said Jim Peacock, president of Peacock Research, which is a consultant to RAEL. “The two are powerful complements for advertisers."

Results of the test were based on the responses of two test groups. One group of 800 respondents were exposed to two Internet ads, the other group of 800 was exposed to one radio ad and one Internet ad. Actual advertising campaigns were used in the test from a variety of categories including fast food, grocery/meat, over the counter drugs/headache, travel, restaurant, grocery/canned, over the counter/breath and an electronic device.

The next study on the Ad Lab’s list will examine the hot-button topic of engagement with radio advertising compared to TV. The results will be reported in about three months.

Thursday, February 8, 2007

MediaTrust brings ABA All-Star Weekend to iPods and mobile devices

Our Sports Central
January 30, 2007
http://www.oursportscentral.com/services/releases/?id=3420977

Halifax, Nova Scotia. MediaTrust, Inc., an online marketing services company announced an agreement to create and deliver free audio and vido podcasts of the ABA All-Star Weekend in Partnership with Jazz Media, a company that specializes in big screens and big events. The ABA is the first professional sports league to podcast its All-Star game and to make it available for fee download to any mobile device.
The ABA All-Star Weekend took place Jan 27-28 at the Halifax Metro Centre in Halifax, Nova Scotia. MediaTrust and Jazz Media produced the ABA All-Star Weekend. MediaTrust's media artists have provided the podcasting resources, infrastructure and post production capabilities. In addition to podcasting the game, MediaTrust created audio and video podcasts that provide viewers with a behind the scenes look at the sponsorship dinner, Slam Dunk contest, 3-point Shootout, Hedley concert and meetings between ABA All Star players and local students.

"The ABA gets it: Podcasts are the future. Companies are opening a whole new set of revenue streams by offering events and advertising opportunities through new media, such as podcasts," said Peter Bordes, CEO, MediaTrust. "In partnership with Jazz Media, we are able to disseminate popular sports games to mobile devices worldwide."

"If you can't make the game in-person, we'll bring it to your mobiledevice," said Susan Douglas, VP Operations for Jazz Media. "The ABA All-Star Weekend is just a starting point. We look forward to bringing additional sporting events to fans around the world, in the very near future."

Podcasts are available now. Mobile users can browse to www.MediaTrust.com/aba/2007all-stargame, www.abalive.com , www.ODEO.com and www.apple.com/itunes/podcasts. Click the banner on the ABA website, www.abalive.com - and see all the exciting action from Halifax.

SBIFF Successfully Introduced Podcast To Hollywood Celebrities

Podcast Fresh
February 2, 2007
http://www.podcastfresh.com/2007/02/sbiff-successfully-introduced-podcast-to-hollywood-celebrities/

SBIFF or Santa Barbara International Film Festival who officially incorporated the use of podcasting with their annual film festival celebration has been very fruitful in introducing podcast or podcasting to many Hollywood celebrities.

Today, Hollywood stars like Will Smith, Helen Mirren and Willam H. Macy welcome podcast appearances or interviews with excitement. One member of SBIFF podcast team, Scott Parent told that this year, SBIFF podcasters are enjoying their unfettered access and the powers-that-be really seem to get the importance of viral grassroots style promotion.

Cost Per Lead -- Why Stop There?

by Gary Kreissman, Thursday, February 8, 2007
NOT ALL leads are created equal. To illustrate this point, which lead generation program is more appealing? Would you prefer 1,000 anonymous email addresses where you eventually determine only ten to be good prospects? Or would you like one that delivers 100 leads, each of whom is an ideal prospect?

The answer is obvious, but the trick is how to find those 100 prospects without wasting time sorting through thousands of anonymous and irrelevant respondents.

Happily, a new approach to lead generation that focuses on quality, not quantity, is gaining traction among marketers. This approach, called cost per qualified lead, is the inevitable next phase of online marketing, which to date has evolved from cost per impression to cost per click to cost per lead. The benefits of cost- per-qualified-lead programs are significant, including stronger prospect relationships, shorter sales cycles, great sales efficiency and the virtual elimination of click fraud.

Best of all, while it sounds like this cost-per-qualified-lead process would be complicated, it is actually based on a very straightforward exchange of information between marketers and prospects. To find qualified prospects, marketers place ads, typically text-based, that offer high-quality, relevant incentives, such as webinars, white papers or books, that are tied closely to the marketer's business. In exchange for the opportunity to learn more about specific topics, prospects answer a very brief -- but highly focused -- set of qualifying questions at a landing page that is unique to each company, product, service or offer.

While the programs are straightforward, to get the most out of cost per qualified lead programs, marketers should be sure to keep in mind the following six recommendations:

1. Performance matters. As in direct marketing, marketers want to increase the efficiency of reaching and selling their best prospects. Unlike typical direct marketing -- or more generic Web-based marketing efforts -- advertisers should insist on paying only for prospects who match their ideal targeting criteria.

2. Less is more. Qualified lead generation is not about capturing a great number of leads for a one-way sales process. It is about determining the characteristics of those prospects that marketers most want to reach, finding out what information about a product or category motivates them to share information or details about themselves, and then providing them with what they want as the basis for a two-way relationship.

3. Use prospects' profiles in the pitch. How much better would an initial sales call or email be when the conversation starts with knowledge of the prospect's goals for using a product, his or her experience with similar products, budget expectations or overall attitudes to a marketer's brand? Qualified lead generation programs not only get the right prospects, they lay the building blocks for an initial conversation with them.

4. Education is the best incentive. Many marketers drive mass traffic with promotional offers that encourage consumers to respond, whether or not they are interested in the underlying product. Free iPod offers will attract lots of names because an iPod is valuable to everyone, but smart marketers offer what is valuable to their prospects alone. In most cases, this means education first.

5. Find a niche and scratch it. For marketers, perhaps the ultimate promise of the Web is the ability to reach and motivate small groups that can't be efficiently reached through mass media, and then pay only for people who are really interested in what they sell and have the money to pay for it. In fact, for many firms, cost-per-qualified-lead programs may be at their best when used for niche marketing.

6. Test, test and test again. Qualified lead-generation programs can be continually refined by testing the performance of each program element, such as audience targeting, incentives, copy and media outlet. Qualified leads programs become constantly more efficient based upon that experimentation. This laboratory approach puts the marketer and the qualified leads provider on the same page.

As mentioned earlier, it is inevitable that qualified lead generation programs will rapidly increase in popularity, as marketers become both more sophisticated at understanding what makes their prospects tick, and more eager to appeal to those specific motivators. When applied in the right way, incorporating the six elements above, the cost-per-qualified-lead approach will ensure stronger ROI by putting marketers where they have always wanted to be: in front of the right prospects, at the right time, with the right offer.

Survey: Users prefer targeted online ads

More users are going online to watch video streams, and for most, an ad before the stream starts is preferable to fee-based services. That is the word from a new Advertising.com survey.

by Kristina Knight

According to the survey, which polled 500 adult web users, 66% said they watched online video streams at least once per week. Another interesting tidbit is that of the 84% said their online video consumption either stayed the same or increased from 2005 levels; an indication that streaming video is showing a growth in popularity.

Other results from the survey include the preference for online ads. According to survey results about 94% of those who watch online videos prefer pre-rolled ads to fee-based services, though most believe online ads should be shorter than traditional television ads (61%), better targeted for the viewer (18%) or created exclusively for the web (15%).

With the increase in viewership, just what are users watching online? News clips (49%), music videos (47%), movie trailers (33%), television shows (26%) and user-generated videos (21%). However, the click-through rate for online ads is highest with online gamers. Gaming sites have a .87% click-through rate, followed by career sites (.71%) and automotive sites (.63%).

Online video is predicted to have explosive growth through 2012, according to research from Informa. Online television and video is expected to bring in about $6.3 billion by 2012 in North America. That is about 10 times more revenue than was generated in 2006.