CRE QUARTERLY MEETINGDecember 11, 2014
Welcome!
OPENING COMMENTS
Ceril Shagrin, CRE Chair
NIELSEN R&D UPDATE
Christine Pierce
Christine PierceCRE Quarterly MeetingDecember 2014
GETTING TO TOTAL AUDIENCE MEASUREMENT
A RESEARCH PERSPECTIVE
Copy
right
©20
12 T
he N
ielse
n Co
mpa
ny. C
onfid
entia
l and
pro
prie
tary
.
5
MORE CHOICES > MORE FRAGMENTATIONMORE PLATFORMS FOR CONSUMPTION OF MEDIA
TV WEB MOBILE VIDEO GAME CONSOLES
TABLETS RADIO NEWSPAPER
+3 BROADCAST CHANNELS
VIDEO ON DEMAND
CABLE TV: 100’s OF CHANNELS
USER GENERATED CONTENT >
MORE MEDIA PER PLATFORM
GROWING AND CHANGING POPULATION
> >
GROWINGMIDDLE CLASS
MOVING TOURBAN ARES
MINORITIES BECOMINGMAJORITIES
CHANGES INDISCRESIONARY SPENDING
Copy
right
©20
12 T
he N
ielse
n Co
mpa
ny. C
onfid
entia
l and
pro
prie
tary
.
6
INDUSTRY MEASUREMENT NEEDS
Accurate and actionable respondent level data
Currency ratings stability
Comprehensive measurement of ethnic groups and distinct consumer groups
Cross-Platform currencies with and without duplication
Ability to support increased media fragmentation and changing business models
Copy
right
©20
12 T
he N
ielse
n Co
mpa
ny. C
onfid
entia
l and
pro
prie
tary
.
7
Copy
right
©20
12 T
he N
ielse
n Co
mpa
ny. C
onfid
entia
l and
pro
prie
tary
.
7
WHAT THIS MEANS FOR METHODOLOGY
Sample & RecruitPeople
Directly MeasureSample of People
Weight & Project Sample of People
Calculate & Report
Collect Data From Devices/Servers
Integrate, Calculate & Report
Calibrate Big Data w/ Panel Truth Set
Assign/Model Demos & Characteristics
Panel Only
Integration of Panels and Big Data for Accuracy & Stability
Panel + Census
Stability from Census/Organic – Accuracy from Panel/Designed Data
Copy
right
©20
12 T
he N
ielse
n Co
mpa
ny. C
onfid
entia
l and
pro
prie
tary
.
8
IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH NEEDS
• Respondent level data
• Integrating consumer databases & direct measurement
• High quality, low-burden cross-platform measurement
• Quantification of PC/mobile co-viewing, device sharing
• Education - Organic Data vs. Designed Data
STEERING COMMITTEE
Pat Liguori
10
DECEMBER 3, 2014 CONFERENCE CALL> Funding Approval by email
- If proposal has not been presented to full CRE, it must be presented via webinar.- Email approval requires affirmative votes by 1 more than half of the voting membership. - Still open: what is the minimum number of members required to attend the webinar?
> CRE Website- is there a place for Nielsen on it?- If yes, what would be the nature of content?
> CRE Membership or ARF?
> Create a “Proposal Methodology and Pricing” committee?
> Membership request from Australia
INSIGHTS TO PRACTICE
Nancy Gallagher
CRE FINANCES
SOCIAL MEDIA
Beth Rockwood
MEDIA CONSUMPTION & ENGAGEMENT
Joe Abruzzo
15
MEDIA CONSUMPTION AND ENGAGEMENT COMMITTEE (MCE)
JOSEPH ABRUZZO(CHAIR)
REDJEBSHAH (VICE
CHAIR)
TIM BROOKS
ARTIE BULGRIN
JOANNE BURNS
MICHELE BUSLIK
LAURA COWAN
NATALIE DAVIS
BILL DUGGAN
JANICE FINKEL-GREENE
BETSY FRANK
JANET GALLENT
HADASSAGERBER
GREG IOCCO
DIAHANNAPOST
CERILSHAGRIN
SUSIE THOMAS
JUDY VOGEL
CANDACE WHYE
RICHARD ZACKON
(FACILITATOR]
16
THE ASSIGNMENT
MCE Committee issued an RFP during Spring, 2014
GOALCreate a White Paper that summarizes the issues and challenges around Cross-Platform Metrics Alignment,
in order to provide the CRE with a research agenda to move forward
Awarded to Horowitz Research
Expanded to include Betsy Frank Insights
PART ONE PART TWOProvide a general overview of
the current state of cross-platform metrics alignment,
including an analysis of existing measurement methodologies
Conduct Interviews with experts from different sectors of the media
business to understand their issues, needs, and concerns around cross-platform measurement
17
PROGRESS TO-DATE
> Part Two interviews have been completed and presented to the CRE, the interviewees, the ARF Cross-Platform Forum, the “Mandate” committee.
> The MCE has held 2 work sessions toward development of the agenda for the Alignment of Cross Platform Measurement.
> We would like to solicit your input on the agenda.
> In future weeks we will be soliciting input from senior Nielsen Clients who are not currently CRE members.
> We also intend to form a CRE 5-to-15 Group. And, we will solicit their suggestions.
18
KEY FINDINGS OF PART TWO INTERVIEWS
> Nothing is More Important than Cross-Platform Measurement (but we need to fix the pieces first)
> Media fragmentation is nothing new
> We need a measure of exposure and reach across platforms
> A lot of activity and “trial balloons
> Agencies are building their own data-driven systems
> Single Source is the “ideal,” but acknowledged to be logistically impossible
> The Stumbling Blocks will be formidable
19
INITIAL IDEAS FOR RESEARCH AGENDA> Hypothesis: Perceptions captured by the 50 interviews do not represent the current state of
single-platform measurement
> Recommendation: Develop a critical assessment of single-platform measurement across media types
> Build upon recent MCE cross-media matrix
> Are there deficiencies in single-platform measurement? E.g. lack of comparably rigorous measurement standards, quality issues surrounding mobile and social, digital fraud
> Note recent developments / works in progress / timelines
> What are best ingredients for cross-platform measurement?
20
INITIAL IDEAS FOR RESEARCH AGENDA> Hypothesis: Industry leadership not be aligned on cross-platform measurement (definitions,
current products, methodologies)
> Recommendation:
- Clarify industry expectations for cross-platform measurement and alignment of cross-platform metrics
- Determine approach to cross-platform measurement validation
21
INITIAL IDEAS FOR RESEARCH AGENDA> Objective: Develop a cross-platform “valuation equivalency”
> Recommendation:- Involve experts from recognized academic institutions to review and develop points-of-view on best practices for establishing “valuation” equivalencies
- Plan two half-day events (including the “experts”) to discuss/debate approaches to developing a valuation equivalency
- Develop recommended approach
> Timing: Late March through second quarter 2015
22
INITIAL IDEAS FOR RESEARCH AGENDA> Hypothesis: Parochial interests represent stumbling blocks to achieving alignment of cross-
platform metrics
> Recommendation: Define and suggest ways to overcome the business issues and marketplace issues that stand in the way of a cross-platform solution
> What needs to be agreed upon and how can that agreement be accelerated?
23
RECAP OF NEXT STEPS
> Continue to evolve the research agenda
> Present findings and initial agenda to senior Nielsen Clients who are not members of the CRE (and form CRE 5-to-15 Group)
> Two work sessions (senior Nielsen Clients + CRE 5-to-15 Group) to take place in late January 2015
> On additional work session with the “Mandate” group to take place in late January –early February
> Nielsen to provide additional information about Adobe Partnership and Extreme-Reach Partnership
24
TENTATIVE TIMELINE
Event DateFindings shared with CRE 11/4/14Findings shared with Interviewees 11/11/14Findings shared at ARF Cross-Platform Conference 11/13/2014 Findings shared with "Mandate" group 11/20/14 MCE working session 11/25/14 MCE working session 12/9/14Quarterly CRE Meeting 12/11/14Research White Paper Published end of DecemberMCE working session 1/6/15Meeting with senior Nielsen Clients, nominations for CRE 5-to-15 Group
1/13/15
Separate in-person working sessions w senior Nielsen Clients and CRE 5-to-15 groups
1/27/15
Working session with the "Mandate" group TBDPresentation of Research Agenda - Media Insights and Engagement Conference, San Diego, February 3-5, 2015
2/2/15
DIGITAL RESEARCH
Brad Adgate
ACCELERATION STUDY
Study Progress
27
PROJECT GOALS> The original Acceleration Study participants were revisited in order to observe and compare
differences in viewing behaviors and device usage. The goal was to get a view into factors that surround device and service churn, the impact to viewing locations, and reveal opportunities to understand future measurement challenges.
- Were the changes in device usage and viewing behavior observed during the Acceleration Study indicative of long term change or of behavior that was temporarily arising from a honeymoon period?
- What was involved during the learning period following the purchase?
- What device and service churn resulted from the introduction of a new device?
- What viewing Apps are participants using after an extended use of the devices?
- What new approaches to viewing have arisen in these households?
27
28
PROJECT UPDATE> 35 of the original 50 households participated in phase 2.
-Of the 15 that did not participate, 2 had moved out-of-state, 8 did not return recruiter call, and 5 were unreachable.
> All 35 households were visited in-home for 2-3 hours in October and November.
> Analysis and reporting are underway.
> GfK will present findings in January, 2015.
28
LONGITUDINAL ETHNOGRAPHY
Study Progress
30
100 HHs
25 HHs
Q1, 2014
STUDY TIMELINEQ2,
2014Q3,
2014Q4,
2014Q1,
2015Q2,
2015Q3,
2015Q4,
2015
Kickoff and Recruitment
Ethnographic Visits
Digital Ethnography via Toolkit ALL 100 HHs
Subset Visits 25 HHs
25 HHs
Final Visits
New HHs
Develop Strategy for Phase 2
Phase 2
Phase 1
Ethnographic Visits
Recruit Replacement Households
Subset Visits
Ethnographic Visits
OUT OF HOME VIEWING
32
DETECTION
Limited data plans can hinder OOH viewing, but the proliferation of public WiFi networks may compensate to some degree.
Group viewing of devices OOH does occur; however, it occurs at unpredictable times. There are times when group viewing OOH is more likely to happen (e.g., when traveling long distances, at work).
1
2
33
DISCOVERY
Limitations of the device or the data plan used in order to view OOH may force users to seek out a WiFi connection, which can in turn influence viewers’ content choices, as WiFi allows them to access content that is not available to them over a mobile network or use devices that are do not have a mobile data plan.
1
2 Viewers, specifically in the case of long-form viewing OOH, value the ability to access the same content OOH as they can access at home.
34
EXPANSION
In many ways, OOH viewing behaviors are similar to those at home, specifically in the case of long-form viewing; people multi-task, engage in other online activities, and chat with friends.
1
2 People who do not normally watch OOH on a regular basis do report watching when they are traveling or on vacation.
35
WHO VIEWS OOH?> Nearly everyone is viewing on the go.
> Kids and teens do more OOH viewing than other age groups.
> Kids and teens frequently act as change agents for others in the household.
35
36
WHAT DOES OOH VIEWING LOOK LIKE?> A significant percentage is short-form
viewing, either encountered incidentally, or navigated to directly.
> Those with longer periods of time available may gravitate toward long-form content.
> Some people who routinely engage in long-form viewing outside the home mimic their behaviors when viewing at home, and demonstrate a desire to consume the same content OOH as they would at home.
36
37
VIEWING WHILE WAITING
> Adults typically watch news clips, sports clips, and other short-form video linked from social media and other websites, while waiting or commuting.
> Kids and teens primarily watch short-form video to fill time OOH in a variety of situations, frequently using their parents’ mobile devices.
ROI
David Poltrack
BREAK
LOCAL MEASUREMENT
Billy McDowell
BIG DATA
Stacey Schulman
SAMPLE QUALITY
Ceril Shagrin
43
THE SAMPLE QUALITY COMMITTEE SUGGESTS THE FOLLOWINGQUESTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR RESEARCH IN 2015:
> How is nonresponse bias impacted when more than one type of device is metered in a homee.g. television sets, tablets, computers? What is the impact on sample quality of requiringmeters on all television sets but not all computers or tablets? How valid is using the nationalsample for missing persons data from digital census data if not all the devices in the nationalsample are metered?
> How will use of PPM for out of home viewing impact sample quality as a result of differentsamples, different sample methodology, different definition of viewing, different editing rules?
> How can affluent homes be motivated to participate in samples and provide usable data. Howcan this be accomplished in all types of Nielsen samples?
> What is the impact of using different models for persons information? The reliability of thedata will only be as good as the input to the models. How can this be evaluated?
RETURN PATH MEASUREMENT
Pat Liguori
45
DECEMBER 3, 2014 CONFERENCE CALL TO DISCUSS 2015 ACTIVITIES AND PROJECTS
> Schedule informational meetings with Nielsen, Rentrak, TRA and Tivo- Create comparagraph outlining similarities/differences of measurement services
> Potential Issues to explore- What are the KPIs for RPM? - What do advertisers believe is the future role of set top boxes? - Size versus Representation – what are the pros and cons of each?- Technology of STBs – what data is captured and can be reported?
> One Touch Intelligence – possible update of MVPD Subscribers by DMA
COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
Emily Vanides
COMMUNICATIONS ACTIVITY UPDATE
VP
Director
Other
SeniorCEO
Sources: LinkedIn stats, based on self-reporting; and internal CRE data. All data as of 12/8/14
667 members
Newsletter 740News Releases 620
Subscribers
Webinars 619
Weekly Clips 149
RECENT EVENTS / COMMUNICATIONS
> Committee-related activities:
− Big Data: October rollout of primer
• Primer covered in MediaPost
• Ongoing discussions with TVNewsCheck re coverage of local study
• Currently evaluating LinkedIn as platform to generate activity around Big Data wiki
FORTHCOMING EVENTS / COMMUNICATIONS
> Committee-related activities:
− Cross platform whitepaper and matrix− “Talking Social TV 2” academic review− ROI update
> Other:
− December Newsletter next week− Additional guest columns
NEW WEB SITE
> Template review conducted with Communications Committee
> New web site - anticipated timeframe for launch: January
> Live review of web site: Joanne
EDUCATION COMMITTEE
Jed Meyer
COUNCIL ELECTIONS: CHAIR, TREASURER, STEERING COMMITTEE
NEW BUSINESS
ADJOURN