Videoink: Digital Video Measurement is Imperfect So What?

During digital content NewFronts earlier this month, Gawker posted a provocative piece stating that because internet video viewing measurements are flawed, the value of online video is generally null and void. The piece then goes on to point out, correctly, that traditional TV viewing measurement methods are similarly as flawed, and concludes with a screed about the state of online journalism, bemoaning layoffs at outlets like Mashable, which recently switched to a more video-heavy format.

While portions of the piece weren’t factually wrong, per se, the way in which the facts were positioned to reach the conclusion was deeply flawed. When it comes to measuring video views, because there isn’t a great system in place right this minute, goes the logic of the piece, digital video is comparable to a scam and not worth advertisers time (or money). If we take a step back and look at the macro picture, we will find that it’s simply not the case. Digital video is a growing space, and it yields valuable benefits for brands who choose to deliver more engaging content on its platforms.

For one, digital allows far greater targeting than traditional media outlets — a boon both for big brands who don’t want to waste money and smaller brands who have the opportunity to compete. There are certainly smart people, like Dave Morgan with Simulmedia, evolving the targeting capabilities but largely TV ads remain an antiquated form of advertising in which brands buy blocks of time in big markets and don’t segment beyond the programs they select.