Man & his Media!



Photo Credit: Ravi Kiran



A picture is worth a thousand words.. but here I want to add a few words to this photo. I am sure this picture by Ravi Kiran caused many more to ponder than only those who left their comments on his post. Different people may have seen the picture with a totally different perspective and I was just thinking of all the different perspectives that could have been possible. Here I would want to comment on possibly what thoughts this photo would have germinated in the minds of professional related to media.

What does a professional (media) think when he/she sees a person of this profile reading the TOI?

Now, when I say "this profile" I am not being judgemental nor do I want to hurt any sentiments. By the looks of it (note, the words) the person is a of lower SEC, probably has no shelter, is low on means of subsistence and hence not really a desired target for most branded products and services. For anyone who has a different pov on the above profile, it may be futile reading further as the difference in our perspectives will only get wider.

Of course! maybe the person in the photograph may have just got the newspaper from a passerby and it was just a coincidence that Ravi captured him on camera with the newspaper. Maybe, the person is not a regular reader at all.

But, then as I said, for arguments sake let us just look 'at' the picture and not try to look 'behind' the picture and continue the discussion further. 

The newspaper is a product and like most products is designed to cater to a certain profile of audience. If the newspaper defines, its desired audience in terms of demographic characteristics (Gender, Age, SEC, MHI) then the man in the photo may probably not qualify as the desired audience. But, if the newspaper defines its desired profile in terms of a mindset, in terms of an attitude - though the picture does not tell us much about that but, the person may well qualify.

However, if I may take a guess, the demographic profile of the person in the picture does not match the desired profile for over 90% of the advertisers in the newspaper. The advertiser may wonder if the perception (possibly supported by research data) that he has about the profile of the readers of this newspaper is correct?  And, he would only hope that there are not many others of a similar profile who read this newspaper.

The advertiser is bound to give his media agency a tough time when next he sees his media plan.

The media planner will quickly rationalize that yes - 6% (say) of the readership of the  newspaper basis the IRS does come from the lower SEC and hence this person reading the newspaper is not surprising at all. Going a step further, the planner may start qualifying that while the man is seen reading he may still not be an 'average issue reader' and hence may not be part of the CPT calculations in the plan.

If the query reaches the media researcher, I am sure the researcher will be able to explain how the said profile is an exception and even if counted in the research it would not have enough weightage to skew the overall profile of the reading audience. Besides, since the research is a masthead recall research if the person is not a regular reader - he may just not recall the masthead even if he is part of the research sample.

Each, in their own world thinking of just what concerns them - but they all miss the big picture.

The 'Man' and the 'Media' are not just 'eyeballs' or 'mastheads' - these are two in a relationship. There is a bond between them. Imagine the hardships and challenges that the man must be facing in life - but, he makes time for his media. He is as immersed in it just as much as you and I would be - in the luxury of our rooms. The newspaper gives him something he cherishes, it does something to him which he finds very valuable. As a media, as an advertiser, as a planner or as a media researcher - unless we understand this relationship we cannot make a judgement on what is depicted in the picture. Whatever, would be the demographic profile of the man; whether the man is on a pavement or if he were reclining on a luxury yacht - it is the relationship between him and his media - that is of interest.

Yes, reaching an audience of a desired profile is important; but, engaging with the audience is critical. Just knowing that a certain person identified a masthead is not enough to know how to build an engagement with the person by using some space below the masthead.

And, all of us - involved in the business of media have nothing with us to understand this relationship. Unless we understand the relationship we cannot partner with the newspaper to deliver to the consumer a 'facet' of the advertising brand and hope that the consumer will engage further.

The research we currently have is just like this 'long-shot'; we know that the person most probably is a reader and that is about all that we know from the photo/research - rest all is left for us to hypothesize.

Media Research - Connecting v/s Counting

The IRS counts how many people read a newspaper or a magazine or whatever other media is covered; TAM counts the number of people who watched a program; RAM counts the number of people listening etc. We debate how while dailies should be counted; but for magazines we should do less of the counting and do something else because they can never beat the dailies in the counting. All the media research that we use is mostly about counting - whereas they all should actually be about connecting.

I keep saying that the era of 'limited media' is over and it was in that era of limited media that counting media was of import. But, now in days of 'over-supply of media' its naive to be still only counting. What really matters is for us to understand how the media-vehicle and the consumer connect with each other. So if we can understand what makes them connect - we can enhance the experience further also by creating opportunities for brands to participate in the 'connecting'.

'Connecting' is about understanding what the media does to the consumer. A media vehicle is not just the masthead or the content - in consuming a media vehicle the consumer experience is a net result of the feelings associated with the medium from the past, the content and also the manner of presentation. This is the same as it is for any other product or service for the consumer.

The research done so far has served us well. But, now the markets have evolved and the same research is in-adequate. The existing research besides being revised needs to be supplemented with research that aids understanding and connecting. Each brand has a different relationship with the consumer and hence for each brand the manner of engagement via media  would be different. From an advertisers perspective therefore, the research needs to advise the brand on the best manner to engage with the consumer. The media brand itself needs to understand what affect the brand has on the consumer so that it can further orient itself to enhance the experience of the consumer.

So far, with the syndicated research available - we know how many people read a newspaper/ magazine or how may people watch/ listen to a broadcast, etc but we have no idea how their interaction with the media makes them feel. Without this kind of information about the relationship between the media and the consumer; the manner in which the brands utilize media to communicate with the consumer often ends up being very trivial, superficial and irrelevant to the consumer.

To enable brands to build a meaningful connection with the consumer - the media research must be recrafted to focus on Connecting rather than on Counting. 

Advertising - a ritual !!

The effectiveness of advertising is always under question but still brands continue to advertise again and again and again. So, despite limited proof of success in the past nor a certainity of results in the future - many continue to follow the practice of advertising and spend valuable resources doing this. Now, I would suppose that when the "result" of advertising is so uncertain - brands would be extra careful about making advertising decisions.

But, for a lot of brands - advertising is just a ritual. It is done because it has always been done and needs to be done in a certain way because it has always been done in that way. It is only in the case of rituals that we do things without questioning them - again and again in the same that they have been done in the past. I remember reading an article where they defined a ritual as  - a task done regulary and religiously  without any link to the outcome :-). And, this ritualistic treatment of advertising has got us to a situation that is so well captured in this video.

Brands, needs to very carefully re-look at their consumers. These consumers are changing very fast and unless Brands understand them and appreciate the transformation that they are going through - all communication from advertisers will be a waste. Brands need to make a conscious decision to not do what they did last year and crtically review communication plans for the future.

Do not look at advertising as a ritual - take a fresh view.

Happy advertising!

Rationalizing Readership Research

My introduction into the world of media as a professional was through my involvement with readership research. I have been very fortunate to have been inducted into the science of media research by veterans in the industry and I will always be obliged to them for their input and guidance in life. Readership research being the first subject for me in the domain -  is very close to my heart and I have some very strong views on the matter. Here, I want to place 5 points before all of you for your feedback and action.

1. Focus on Readership

Years ago, the readership research in the country took on the onus of providing a wholistic research database which not only provided readership data but also profiled the whole country in terms of demographics, usage/ownership/ consumption of products and services, etc. This research did allow a better understanding of the profile of readers but was used more for developing an understanding of categories and brands.

Over the years, I believe that readership itself has not get its due in this huge research program. The focus on readership needs to be revised as we move ahead.

2. Newspapers and Magazines are different

Newspapers and Magazines are treated absolutely in the same manner in the current readership research. The manner in which these are consumed by readers are different; the media planners and buyers study these differently and the role that they play in a communication solution is different too. But, in the research only the order of questioning (according to the periodicity) and inclusion in the state masthead booklets are the only decisions that treat magazines as different from newspapers.

A fresh view is required to building an approach for investigation and recommendation for newspapers and magazines.

3. Masthead readership is passe

In the era of limited media and advertising - masthead recognition (as a claim) was a good enough surrogate for readerhsip and hence ad-exposure. But now, masthead recall is a very inaccurate assesment of readership. Also, the probablity of exposure to an ad in a newspaper despite the newspaper having been read - is very low. Hence, readership as measured today is not a fair representation of OTS  - the findamental metric for media planing and buying.  

The readership estimates available in the readership research therefore are truly inflated. The actual readership and the probability of ad-exposure would be considerably lower. It is a totally different matter that Publishers now discuss business on "Total Readership" estimates instead of Average Issue Readership (AIR) estimates making this over-estimatation even more acute.

There is a need to revise the definition of "Readership" from the research perspective.

4. Beyond Reach and Rankings

In designing communication solutions, there is a lot of exploration to understand the manner of engagement and the extent and nature of the effect that the media/ media vehicle has on the consumer. The number of consumers who can access a particular media vehicle is of secondary importance. The current research only delivers on the "number of consumers" and nothing else.

Metrics beyond readership estimates need to be devised and measured.

5. Newsprint is getting digitized

Content is no longer only a "printed" entity. The same newspaper content is today accessed on the internet or through mobile phones and iPads. The same content is stripped by net-robots and delivered as part of other web pages. Content is shared and tagged and also re-purposed for rendering in other formats.

Do we only measure the print copy readership or do we measure the publications content exposure across formats. We need to look at a revised scope for what we term as Readership.

Change Ahead

Every year, industry forums keep discussing the future of print. The base for rendering the content may change from paper to a screen - but the rules of engagement with the consumers will remain. We need to get our readership research right to keep it continuously relevant to the changes so that it aids publishers, planners and buyers all to add long-term value to the medium and not just reap short-term results.

Media Fragmentation - an Opportunity.

It is the era of choices for the consumer in every sphere of their lives. And, as the consumer exercises these choices - the consumers life is becoming more and more fragmented. And, it is this fragmentation of the consumers life that is the cause of the phenomenon called media fragmentation.

For each role that the consumer plays in life, for every community that the consumer is engaged with, for every mood that the consumer feels daily, for every task that the consumer needs to complete - there is a different set of media that the consumer interacts with. In each of the above scenarios not just the set of media but also the manner of interaction with the media changes. The expectations from the media are different, the affinity that the consumer feels for different media changes and the effect that each media has on the consumer also varies.

Thus, the term media fragmentation doesnt encompass just the multiplicity of media but also the complexity of its relationship with the consumer. And, in such a scenario the task of the brand manager remains the same as ever - to create an affinity for the brand in the mind of the consumer.

For a mind addicted to the limited means of communication using conventional TV and Print - this scenario is a certain threat but to one who looks at the consumer and media landscape afresh everyday this is a great opportunity. Differentiation is key to brand building and in yester years it was only the creative that offered the key to differentiation in communication while now the choice of media and the manner of use of the media to communuicate with the consumer play as much a role in creating this differentiation for a brand.

In the era of limited media - basis the reach of media first the media to be used for communication was identified and the creative was developed specific to the media. Of course!! Reach of the media is critical but the first step now is to develop an 'idea' for the consumer and then layer this idea with media that best suits the idea. Communication Planning has turned inside-out.

It is this 'idea' that strings together the activity done with each media. In the absence of the connecting idea - the consumer just sees a set of dis-connected exposures/ activities at different times. But, if all the fragmented media activites have the idea at the core then these together form a beautiful collage with each media working in tandem - and to the consumer it is all 'one story'.

Brand managers today interact with so many partners each bringing to them capabilities of working on specific media and in this 'variety' of partners the connnecting idea is very vulnerable to getting diluted. Companies, cannnot afford that this conecting idea gets diluted as it would impact the communication ROI. While, on reach and cost metrics the individual media plans may perform brilliantly - the overall communication effectiveness could be adversley affected.  And, this is where 'media strategists' have a key role to play in organizations. While, the brand managers are best equipped to decide on the 'connecting idea'; it is the media strategists who can best work on its execution along with the multitude of media/ agency  partners.

So, to conclude - media fragmentation is here and only increasing. For brands to utilize it as a opportunity rather than to see it as a threat there is need for an increased focus on communication design vis-vis media planning. To the consumer, only an ill-designed campaign appears fragmented.  

SEC System - an endangered marketing concept.

Yes, maybe a few years from now we wont be as much in need of the SEC System as we are today. It is a system that has served us well but it is time we get ready to park it in the archives.

Marketing is a social science - it is about people. And, people are a complex system - each person is unique in more ways than one. But, as markets expanded, marketers got distanced from their customers - and gradually each customer just became a statistic in the marketers books. The expanding marketing eco-system then needed a language to transact this statistic and the SEC System evolved. As happens with most transaction currencies, they proper on unity of value and dimish the multi-dimensional acpects of the product itself. Likewise, the SEC System took a very simplified (uni-dimensional) view of the consumer and shoved consumers into some very dark cells of this SEC Grid.

It was also not possible for the marketers to do much different as a collective. Organizations did not have the technology and the resources to manage one-to-one relationships with customers. Every interaction of the brand was a broadcast to a segment of the population. SEC provided a viable method to refer to this population, to group them, to study them and to communicate with them.

For decades we have designed products, services, communication - all for these boxes often caring least about the unique multi-dimensional personalities in these cells. But, gone are the times when the consumer allowed himself/ herself to be confined to these cells. The times are a changing.

Now we are in a connected world. The marketer is no more far removed from the consumer. The consumer is no more a stranger for the marketer. Yes, the mind of the consumer may still be an enigma as always but atleast, the physical presence of the consumer is very well recorded. Today, the marketer at times knows more about the consumer than the consumer himself/ herself. Every day brands are establishing one-to-one connections with the consumers.

When, interacting with other functions of the marketing eco-system such as research or communication companies, brands are lesser and lesser dependent on refering to their consumers by the SEC. The comsumer profiles are far more specific. We already talk of attitudes, psychorgaphics, consumption behaviour, future intentions and so much more. With newage digital technologies of 'tagging' - customer definitions are becoming more and more specific and dynamic. The innumerable tags that today define consumers in the digital world can never fit into a system as simplistic as the SEC.

With the advent of digital technology consumers have now emerged from the SEC boxes and marketers are treating them as real people. Yes, it will be sad to see the SEC system set aside but I am sure this change shall lead the consumers to more delightful products, services and communication that is more human and personal.

Of course! we still turn to candles when the latest tecnology fails and plummets the world into darkness - so also we will always look to the SEC System to throw its frail but guiding light on to consumers as and when we stumble into darkness.