« ISHERWOOD, GOODSON, PEREIRA TO DELIVER KEYNOTE SPEECHES AT DUBAI LYNX 2009 | Main | CANADA'S MARKETING 100 YEAR BASH »

November 07, 2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Tobias

Mhm.

I think digital is already miles beyond the measurability of "classical" advertising. As you state in your headline. Still the lions share of the budget goes into TV, Print, etc. - and nobody REALLY questions this. It's always been this way, one has agreed on the inaccuracy of "offline" - so the inaccuracy is defined as accurate. And: the accuracy of digital is trying to be diluted to make it as "inaccurate" as offline and more "comparable".

I agree, we (digital) could be better, get better data, especially when the digital world is left. There's always room for improvement.
But shouldn't we work on both subjects and stop complaining about the flaws of digital advertising and not see the whole in the "offline bucket" where real sums are thrown down the drain?

Tyler Fonda

I agree somewhat with McKinsey on this one, though as I heard at ad:tech, where there are eyeballs there will be media spend. So online will continue to suck up spend with or without fully fleshed out metrics, just because that’s where the eyeballs are. With that said, measurement has a big problem online, that problem has everything to do with the abundance of data. The breakthrough will not be in how detailed the metrics are, but rather the abstraction that encompasses all of this detail. I think that Professor Yoo down at Univ. of Kentucky may be on to something with his implicit/explicit memory experiments.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Uprising Movements

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    Strawberry Frog News