Month: May 2018

Is “Solo: A Star Wars Story” a victim of too-high expectations? Or of tepid reviews? Enough of the spin-offs already? Too many intergalactic antics too soon? Is it too predictable? Or did bad
publicity do it in? Let us mull the punditry.

The company’s staggering growth suggests that its model is working-without ads. Last week, Netflix surpassed Comcast-and briefly surpassed The Walt Disney Company-in market cap, becoming the most
valuable media company in the world.

“Data-Driven Thinking” is written by members of the media community and contains fresh ideas on the digital revolution in media. Today’s column is written by Kevin Akeroyd, CEO at Cision. When I first started out in the marketing business, there was no such thing as the cloud. Back then, data-driven marketing involved catalogs, direct mail… Continue reading »

The post What Does The Future Of The Marketing Clouds Hold? appeared first on AdExchanger.

Here’s today’s AdExchanger.com news round-up… Want it by email? Sign up here. Many Appy Returns It’s a truism that iOS users and Apple App Store downloads generate more value for brands than downloads that happen through Google’s Play store. But over the past couple of years Apple has been running away with the market, according to… Continue reading »

The post Apple Extends Lead In App Monetization; Duopoly Hit With GDPR Suits appeared first on AdExchanger.

The New York Times is thinking beyond its archives as it looks to add more subscription products to its portfolio.

The Times last week announced a team to develop a subscription product for parents. But while other recent product launches, the Cooking and Crossword apps, were built on archives of content, the parenting product isn’t based on a massive library of parenting content. The publisher’s New Products and Ventures team, which was formally announced eight months ago, is less focused on whether the Times has an easily exploitable asset in place and more on whether the publisher has a market advantage in an area.

“We don’t produce a lot of articles right now on [parenting],” said Alex MacCallum, who is the Times’ head of new product and ventures, reporting directly to the Times’ chief operating officer, Meredith Kopit Levien. “We focused more on imagining what’s possible than on what’s happening now.”

MacCallum and her colleagues, who work across the Times’ design, tech, editorial, data and advertising departments, weighed more than 15 different categories before settling on parenting. Four criteria are used to assess new product ideas: the market opportunity, the potential to build a subscription business, unmet needs in the market and whether the Times has an advantage in meeting that need. The Times uses qualitative and quantitative data. In the case of parenting, it found that Times readers got parenting coverage and content elsewhere and wanted the publisher to cover it more.

The next stage involves conducting focus groups and one-on-one interviews about things like what parents need, which will inform a prototype product to be released later this year.

The parenting product may have advertising, but the goal is for it to be habit-forming and mostly subscription-based.

The planned product is just one of many ways the Times has gotten more focused on growing subscription revenue, now the Times’ largest revenue stream. The Interactive News desk, which began building interactive elements for longer stories, spends a lot of time developing loyalty-building tools like calendars for readers.

Subscription services’ success has been mixed. NYT Now folded in 2016, but Crosswords and Cooking have grown enough that they’re now broken out in the Times’ earnings. Cooking and Crosswords, on their own, accounted for $4.8 million in revenue in the first quarter; the Times’ digital-only subscription revenues totaled $95.4 million during that period.

The post How The New York Times plans new subscription products appeared first on Digiday.

Brands are just getting their feet wet in podcasting.

Walmart is now on to the second season of its “Outside the Box” podcast. This year, Walmart is zeroing in on the value of time. “Outside the Box,” over eight weekly episodes, dives into philosophical and economic questions raised by the increasing value of time in the digital era. It’s a break from last year’s theme, which focused on the retail industry overall and topics that Walmart has invested in, such as the manufacturing process in the U.S. and sustainability. This season is more thematic and less promotional. But the podcast serves as another way Walmart can demonstrate how saving people time is now a key focus for the company.

“[Saving time] is something that customers, especially our customers, are looking for when they’re shopping,” said Emily Schmid, Walmart’s director of digital content. “They have a lot of choices, and we’re working to keep pace with them and offer things to them that help them save time.”

In its e-commerce race with Amazon, Walmart has been on a rampage to convince shoppers that it’s fast on its feet, including introducing online grocery pickup and grocery delivery. Most recently, Walmart introduced free two-day shipping for orders over $35 without any membership fees, a swift kick to Amazon, which just added $20 to the price of an Amazon Prime subscription.

Anna Nesser, executive director of content at creative and production agency Omelet, which works with Walmart on the podcast, said centering in on a specific theme allows Walmart to broaden the conversation around time. The second season of “Outside the Box” will be released in 20- to 30-minute episodes every Tuesday.

Each episode features guest commentators, including Adam Grant, professor of psychology at the Wharton School and host of TED’s “WorkLife” podcast; Bonobos CEO Andy Dunn; and Rent the Runway co-founder Jennifer Fleiss. Walmart, and guests on the podcasts, will promote the new season with a teaser trailer using social media.

Outside the Box, Episode 1, is out now. https://t.co/1KFz5QUxv3

We spend a quarter of our lives at work, but are we making the most of that time? Our guest @AdamMGrant shares how he has learned to value his own time, and how we can spend ours wisely. pic.twitter.com/g1FjXkMI8o

— Walmart Today (@WalmartToday) May 22, 2018

Having a singular theme for a podcast is also in line with other companies’ podcasts like GE’s “The Message” and Microsoft’s “.future,” which have proved popular. Most recently, Trader Joe’s, ZipRecruiter and McDonald’s have launched their own podcasts.

“We recognized in the podcast space that there was an opportunity to focus on one key narrative that we can build the entire season around, versus topics that can be somewhat different but at the same time related to us,” said Schmid.

Although Walmart wouldn’t reveal how many listeners the podcast’s first season reached, Schmid said Walmart is enthusiastic about connecting with listeners through podcasts. The company is relying on social media marketing to drive listeners to the podcast, the company said.

“Podcasting in general is explosive right now,” said Schmid, pointing to Edison Research’s 2017 Podcast Consumer report, which found that 24 percent of Americans listen to podcasts every month, with 42 percent of people listening to entire podcasts and 44 percent listening to most of them.

For more on the modernization of the retail industry, subscribe to our weekly Amazon Briefing email. 

The post Walmart’s podcast pushes message of saving time appeared first on Digiday.

Companies are experimenting with animated stickers for people to place over their Instagram Stories and Snaps.

Absolut Vodka, Red Bull, Jolly Rancher, Gucci, T-Mobile, Malibu Rum, Benefit Cosmetics, Essie and Coca-Cola’s new sparkling water label Bubly have all launched partnerships with popular GIF creator Giphy to create their own GIFs that live within Instagram Stories and Snapchat libraries, eager to reach young audiences in the ever-evolving ways they are communicating with each other.

The latest partnership took place this weekend with Bud Light. On May 25, Bud Light launched a dozen GIF stickers on Instagram and Snapchat that tie into the Anheuser-Busch company’s viral “Dilly Dilly” campaign, which it first introduced in summer 2017. The GIF stickers, which include cans of Bud Light pouring beer and the catchphrase “Dilly Dilly,” are an evolution of that trend, said Kyle Lazarus, Bud Light’s senior digital brand manager.

“People have gone past using GIFs for communicating one-on-one,” said Lazarus. “Now, they’re taking their own photos and placing animated stickers over them. We want to embrace that and bring the brand into their day-to-day communications more closely.”

According to a 2,000-person survey conducted by public polling group Harris Poll and Google-owned GIF-sharing platform Tenor, 69 percent of Americans use emojis, GIFs and stickers because they believe they can communicate their emotions better through images.

However, Instagram’s and Snapchat’s Giphy integrations are not the friendliest for companies. Specific GIFs are not easily discoverable on either platform; Instagram and Snapchat feature only a certain amount of GIFs when users select the option to use Giphy. So, in order to find Bud Light’s (or any companies’) GIFs, users have to know what to search for. Bud Light is paying against keywords like “Dilly Dilly” and “Bud Light” to make its stickers discoverable for users, but wouldn’t disclose what other keywords it’s buying against or the price per specific keyword. Instagram and Snapchat are also not doing any extra work to promote promotional GIFs within their platforms.

What’s more, it’s not easy to measure how ephemeral content performs. Lazarus said Bud Light will be able to track how many people use the stickers in their Instagram Stories and Snaps through its Instagram and Snapchat channels. Lazarus said Bud Light views its GIF stickers as a test of the space, but will keep them available for the summer regardless.

GIF stickers are fairly new to both Instagram and Snapchat. Instagram first introduced GIF stickers to its Stories in January. As these platforms are endlessly one-upping each other, Snapchat followed suit in February. Since then, both platforms have had a turbulent relationship when it comes to their GIF libraries. In March, Instagram and Snapchat had to suspend their Giphy features after users encountered a racist GIF, as reported by TechCrunch. By the end of March, both platforms had re-enabled Giphy after the GIF search engine committed to reviewing its library and said it would add more moderation to prevent future issues.

Companies work with Giphy’s Sticker application programming interface platform to distribute their GIFs through other compatible platforms. Benefit Cosmetics, for instance, has created 20 GIFs that reference its beauty products and company imagery, such as the Golden Gate Bridge and sayings like “New brows, who dis?” Along with Instagram and Snapchat, Benefit Cosmetics stickers are available over SMS and Giphy-compatible platforms Tinder and Slack.

The post Marketers’ newest shiny toy: GIF stickers appeared first on Digiday.

Digital publishers are falling in love with Hollywood, but they’re running up against a different set of economics.

Digital publishers like BuzzFeed and Vox Media are producing original shows as part of a broader effort to diversify their businesses. But selling those shows to platforms like Netflix and Facebook can complicate, if not constrict, other revenue opportunities.

For example, BuzzFeed’s Tasty may have launched as a Facebook page, but nothing precluded the publisher from adapting its food videos into its own cookbook and a line of Tasty-branded cooking products. But those options may have been taken off the table if Tasty originated as a cooking show BuzzFeed sold to Netflix, which increasingly wants to own the shows it buys from publishers as well as traditional producers. And it’s not only Netflix that is asking publishers to part with their intellectual property. Facebook is also looking to own the Watch shows it pays publishers to produce, as are TV networks.

“We are in the business of owning our brand and our IP,” said Shelley Venus, global head of video at HuffPost. “Producers make content for sale, which is an entirely different mindset for what digital publishers are about. The question is whether you can do both.”

For publishers like Hearst and Vox Media, the simple answer is yes, but arriving at that answer isn’t so straightforward.

Given the financial pressures on their advertising businesses, publishers are mindful that their production businesses not come at a large cost. Hearst Originals — Hearst’s team dedicated to producing original shows — has managed to avoid deficit-financing productions while maintaining profitability and ownership of its intellectual property “in most cases,” said Michael Mraz, vp of strategic partnerships at Hearst Digital Media.

Facebook paid Hearst to produce “Beauty Battle” for Watch, but that was before Facebook began demanding ownership in exchange for funding. Since Hearst maintained the rights, it was able to syndicate the show to YouTube and Twitter, and the publisher has discussed developing it for network TV, which it wouldn’t be able to do if it had sold the show’s rights to Facebook. “In that case, it definitely helps to own the show,” Mraz said.

A separate publisher, which had previously sold shows to Watch, turned down Facebook once it began asking for ownership because “I don’t think it benefits us from a long-term perspective — not just the video assets, but all the things you can do with it, like merchandise,” said an exec at the publisher, which now opts to fund the productions itself or to get a brand to finance a project.

Alternatively, Vox Media’s Vox Entertainment is navigating how it can sell the rights to its shows in the short term in order to benefit its business in the long run. Netflix may own the rights to Vox Entertainment’s weekly explainer show “Explained” that premiered May 23, but it doesn’t own Vox Media’s explainer site and therefore doesn’t prevent Vox Entertainment from producing shows in the future that feature a similar explainer-style format or involve Vox founder Ezra Klein.

“It’s in that gray area,” said Chad Mumm, vp of Vox Entertainment. “Yes, they’ll own the show, but it’s so much a part of the [Vox] DNA. Ezra is not owned by Netflix.”

Similarly, Hearst Originals is producing shows that are related to its publications, but importantly, are not its publications. “They’re series ideas. They’re not necessarily new publishing brands,” said Mraz.

The more shows that Vox Entertainment and Hearst can sell, the more interest they can attract from TV and digital buyers. That interest can either strengthen their bargaining chips for negotiating rights to future shows, or supply them with more money to reinvest into funding shows by themselves and assuming control over ownership.

In other words, publishers as producers are finding ways to sell the milk, not the cow, which is similar to what traditional producers do. For example, Simon Fuller created the “Pop Idol” format in the U.K. and then was able to sell the “American Idol” version in the U.S. “A good negotiator can still hold on to format rights, and format rights can become massive money,” said Jonathan Stern, svp of strategic development at Bunim/Murray Productions.

Get more of our coverage on the modernization of television, digital video and entertainment by subscribing to our weekly video briefing email. 

The post Digital publishers with Hollywood ambitions adapt to new economics appeared first on Digiday.

The Telegraph has set itself a target of reaching 3 million registered-access users by the end of this year, and it’s hoping its sports coverage will be a key subscription driver for new and international audiences.

Starting last week, the news publisher has been offering access to its paywalled sports coverage, Premium Sport, for £1 ($1.33) a week, half the price of a full subscription. According to the publisher, sports content is behind news and politics in driving subscriptions.

“The hypothesis is our sports content is one of our areas that transcends traditional core audience. Some people only consume sports content from The Telegraph,” said Peter Hickman, managing director of subscriptions. “This product will cater to an audience of people who come specifically to sports. Hopefully, it will be a launch pad to upgrade to other products.”

The publisher introduced a premium paywall strategy in November 2016, where roughly 20 percent of its content requires audiences to either register to read one premium article a week or subscribe. Roughly 60 percent of The Telegraph’s premium content is news, business and politics, while about 15 percent is sports, which equates to between seven and 10 articles a day. According to the publisher, this interview of German football manager Jurgen Klopp and this piece by rugby player Doddie Weir on being told he had motor neurone disease have both driven between 500 and 1,000 registrations and dozens of subscriptions.

This week, The Telegraph will launch an accompanying newsletter rounding up the best of its premium sports coverage in time for a busy summer of sporting events. “The sports subscription is a natural fit for our strategy of building registered users focused on different sections and building communities through podcast and newsletters,” he said.

In two weeks time, The Telegraph will start marketing Premium Sport on its site to users who have shown interest in its sports content. Those who are likely to subscribe will be shown overlays pushing them to buy the product. For registered-access users, the messages will be personalized with their name. “We know using propensity models to target people around the site is a more effective way at selling subscriptions than display advertising,” said Hickman.

The Telegraph experiments with a number of different ways to encourage people to subscribe. During the Six Nations Championship in February and March, the publisher put rugby coverage behind a soft registration wall, so users hit messages to register but weren’t required to do so in order to read the content. According to Hickman, this converted at 20 percent of the rate a hard registration wall would. “That’s pretty successful if it’s voluntary for audiences and not a hard block,” he said. “That shows the strength of rugby coverage at driving subscriptions.”

Once the publisher understands how Premium Sport grows its subscription base, what type of audience this appeals to and how they differ to a full subscriber, it will introduce this type of pricing to other sections.

According to Hickman, Premium Sports will grow The Telegraph’s international subscribers. So far, this rings true: The first two sales were made from Australia and the U.S. The Telegraph doesn’t share how many subscribers it has, but 20 percent come from outside the U.K., mostly from the U.S.

“The Telegraph has been persistent with its premium offer,” said Alex DeGroote, an independent media analyst at DeGroote Consulting. “There’s room for one or two premium sports publishers in the market. No doubt, The Telegraph is one of them.”

Rather than seeming like the reduced pricing could hamper the perceived value of The Telegraph’s content, Hickman said this pricing reinforces the value and strength of the publisher’s sports coverage as a standalone subscription product.

“There’s always the possibility of unintended consequences like dilution or switching or cannibalization, but we’re confident we understand what the all-in audience wants, and that the sports product will stand on its own and will be additive and grow market,” he said. “We don’t expect people to be trading down, but this is to tap into new audiences who are not already subscribing.”

The post The Telegraph bets on sports to grow subscribers appeared first on Digiday.