Identity Crisis in Digital Signage, or How to Stop Picking Up Crumbs And Start Getting Real Ad Dollars?
A few years ago, the first web portal for our industry named itself aka.tv, citing the fact that no single name was universally accepted at the time. Aka.tv’s home page still lists many names the medium went by then: narrowcasting, captive audience networks, electronic display networks, electronic billboards, digital media networks, out-of-home media networks, digital in-store merchandizing, retail media networks, place-based media, digital signage, intelligent visual information systems and datacasting.
Looking back, most of the names ended up to be short-lived, as they failed to resonate with providers or their clients. Out of the initial aka.tv list only ‘digital signage’ remains in heavy use, the rest got either extinct or were modified; for instance: ‘out-of-home media networks’ evolved into ‘digital out-of-home’, ‘out-of-home video’ and ‘alternative out-of-home’ (e.g., in PQ Media reports). ‘Place-based media’ was backed by Nielsen, but did not fly either.
So, unlike the clearly defined traditional media and Internet, we remain for the most part a ‘no name’ media segment in the eyes of agencies, although many advertisers recognize the potential impact of communicating with consumers when they leave home.
Nevertheless, despite the confused identity, since aka.tv was launched, the medium has quickly expanded into a two-billion-dollar-plus sector, with a growth rate of 27% per annum in 2007 (PQ Media Report) and forecasted CAGR of 12.9% from 2007 through 2012 (PQ Media Report). That’s impressive, considering the recession (it was factored in the report) and the fact that digital signage is thus far largely off the radars of major media buying houses.
The recent Digital Media Summit organized by OVAB in New York showed that Madison Avenue finally succumbed to the two-prone pressure – from advertisers and networks, and is now ready to consider digital signage for inclusion in media plans.
However, as I see from my discussions with marketers, agencies and networks, the continuing identity crisis keeps preventing the industry from getting a legitimate seat at the media buyers’ table.
While agencies say they are ‘ready’, they are still structured by silos, or ‘buckets, neither of which gives digital signage any visibility. If we do not proactively help them define the appropriate category for our sector, we risk staying buried somewhere deep in the ‘out-of-home’ or ‘alternative’, or ‘digital’ buckets and, as such, being eligible for nothing but ‘crumbs’ versus real ad dollars.
Due to the fact that we are currently a subcategory of a category, or even a subcategory of another subcategory, most planners are also largely unaware of digital signage. And, as the saying goes, ‘if you’re not on the plan, you’re not in the buy.’
The question is, should we keep hiding within an existing category, or simply create one of our own and get the attention our medium deserves? A separate category would have a much better chance to distinguish itself from other media by clearly stating its unique value in implementing marketing strategies.
The next question is: if we push for a separate category, how should we pitch it, what name would reflect its true identity? Should we promote ‘digital signage’, which is already the most wide-spread and proven term inside the industry, or make a brand new one?
Speaking about a new name, what quality makes digital signage so valuable to advertisers? Undoubtedly, the fact that it reaches people when they are at a location other than home, when they are in a ‘consumer mode’ and are not so opposed to advertising messages, as when they are at home. Following this logic, why not name it ‘location-based media’? Or revive the ‘place-based media’, but make it a stand-alone category this time?
PQ Media in its latest report adopted the general name ‘digital out-of-home media’ for the industry and subdivided it into ’video advertising networks’ (VANs), ‘digital billboards’ and ‘ambient advertising’. This classification makes sense and is in line with recently increased usage of ‘digital out-of-home’, but if we go along this path, we will inevitably find ourselves back in the Out-of-home/Outdoor category, which is “the last one to plan and the first one to cut”. Even certain influential members of the OVAB (Out-of-home Video Advertising Bureau) are now doubtful about the ‘out-of-home’ part in the bureau’s name for the above-mentioned reason. Besides, ‘video advertising networks’ can be confused with online networks (just ‘google’ it and see what comes up).
Our trade, by all conservative estimates, is one of the fastest-growing media with unrivaled effectiveness, and it fully deserves a clear voice, a distinct name and an independent media buying category. It all starts with a name that may either help it soar, or stall acceptance by the advertising community. How do we resolve the identity crisis and get to play with ‘the big guys’? I would like to know everyone’s opinion.
Entry Filed under: Digital Signage Evolution, How to: Digital Signage Tips, The Big Picture, Uncategorized
0 comments:
Post a Comment