Posts by Emily Riley (bio)

Emily Riley | August 28, 2008, 01:17 PM
Going Corporate

For the past two days, several Jupiter analysts attended a meeting of the minds at Forrester headquarters in Cambridge. We assembled for a few reasons. First, to get up to speed on Josh's book, Groundswell, and the surge of interest it has generated. Second, to have a visionary discussion on the future of everything social (no small task, of course.) Finally, we just wanted to gel as a team.

With Jupiter as the acquiree, driving up to Cambridge into the home turf of the acquirer was a bit intimidating. They're bigger, more tech focused, bigger. However, I was happy to realize pretty quickly that we work together just fine. It was not a meeting to 'Forresterize' us. Rather, we all brainstormed together, and found that our ideas played well off of each other. David Card's media savvy was a great compliment with Jeremiah's Silicon Valley take on things, for example.
It was a brainstorming session, but I did notice that Jupiter usually cites more data when coming up with ideas, from my end, it often includes executive survey data as well as consumer survey data. Also, Jupiter is in New York, so we definitely think more about content and the consumer while they have more coverage around vendors and tools. Together, we probably have the deepest bench of any analyst firm when it comes to social marketing (ahem, social computing.)
Speaking of data, I am excited to learn more about Technographics and how it compares to our own consumer data. I'm also now officially allowed to run Groundswell projects (let us know if you are interested!) Also, expect a few "Big Ideas" coming from the group next year, as well as some more definition around what we each will cover.

Emily Riley | August 22, 2008, 01:58 PM

I was recently briefed by Facebook where they showed me a sneak peak at their new Engagement Ad platform. My colleague Jeremiah Owyang wrote it up here.

I was also briefed this week by Omar Tawakol, the CEO of the new behavioral targeting startup, BlueKai. The company takes an innovative approach on behavioral targeting not unlike a behavior exchange. The company is partnering with a rich list of retail and research sites, who sell their data, which is then bid on across a network of advertisers and sites (even some networks) to provide a true market value for each behavior. Of course, for behavioral targeting to really work, scale is key, which is what they are working on now.

Emily Riley | August 06, 2008, 03:42 PM
Fox on a decent track with MySpace

Fox CFO David DeVoe noted on yesterday's quarterly earnings call that interactive properties earned $225 million. They saw a 23 percent increase from the same quarter last year and that half of that was from search results, primarily on MySpace. This shows that they are still very reliant on their deal with Google. However, as they exhibited with their recent redesign, they have invested considerably in the site. David also mentioned the importance of international expansion. Their challenge is great. They seem to have leveled off in the US at about 60 million unique users. Typical big brand spenders like auto and travel are in rough shape. Facebook is also expanding quickly abroad, and Bebo, Orkut Mixi and others have regional popularity. We will see at the next earnins call if their investments pay off.

Emily Riley | August 04, 2008, 04:12 PM
Promotions around every corner

Some of you might have heard that Ryan Seacrest got bitten by a shark this past week. Yahoo! News is featuring a blurb about it on their home page today. With no pictures, and Ryan not even needing a hospital stay, its really a non-story. So they have to try a little harder to get people to chat about it on their message board. They hope people take the bait with this teaser:
"Talk About It: Do you think it's coincidence Ryan was bitten during Shark Week?"
For Yahoo! to jump to this conclusion makes me worry more than the actual possibilty of a Discovery PR agent in scuba gear with a little shark in a cage ready for release. However, the real missed opportunity was at the jump. No ads for shark week on the chat page.

Emily Riley | July 25, 2008, 05:47 PM
Some Friday musings about marketing imperfections

While reading a review of Mad Med, the AMC show that our industry is in love with, I noticed a Google ad for acne medication. There was a reference to a character's visit to the doctor (for anxiety, not acne), but otherwise, I can't tell where the ad was coming from. Today seems to be a day of weird marketing messages. A few others I noticed:
For cookies - "Now, better tasting!"
For cotton balls - "Ideal for many uses!"
And finally, a Social Ad on my Facebook page for the Dodge Challenger. Does my profile really scream Affordable American Muscle Car?
I think we can all do better.

Emily Riley | July 18, 2008, 04:22 PM
Creative targeting at its best

I just had a nice briefing with Zillow.com. In the midst of telling me about their behavioral targeting, which slices up their site based on where in the buying process someone might be, Greg Schwartz mentioned a campaign they ran for John Deere that took a slightly different tack. Based on the square footage of someone's property, John Deere targeted ads for different kinds of lawn mowers. So someone with 4 acres got an ad for a riding mower, while someone in a more urban setting would get a weedwacker ad. Simple and effective.

Emily Riley | July 10, 2008, 01:56 PM
Another FTC event, still nothing final

Yesterday's FTC hearings on behavioral targeting failed to create any regulations, but did outline that BT can be both good and bad. Compared to the scare that spam caused, the FTC has been relatively kind to behavioral targeting so far.

The FTC write-up notes:

According to the testimony, behavioral advertising may provide a variety of benefits to consumers, including free content, personalization of ads, and a potential reduction in unwanted advertising. Consumer research has shown that consumers value online ads that are more personalized.

Jupiter's surveys show that only 28 percent of online users prefer well targeted ads to random ads, but it seems intuitive that well targeted advertising is desireable in general.

The FTC seems to be leaning towards self-regulation not government regulation. I am a fan of self-regulation for a few aspects: how data can be collected and stored, which personal pieces of information can be targeted, and how often. However, there are still some issues that might need government oversight, notably with consumer privacy. Oddly, the FTC contradicts itself on privacy issues. They seem to believe NebuAd's claim that the data is anonymous, but then voice concern on sensitive issues:

In particular, "Without adequate safeguards in place, consumer tracking data may fall into the wrong hands or be used for unanticipated purposes," the testimony states. "These concerns are exacerbated when the tracking involves sensitive information about, for example, children, health, or a consumer's finances."

Just as AOL said that their search data was anonymous, but many proved how easy it was to identify people, behavioral targeting data carries obvious clues. How many people in Pittsburg are looking for a cure for insomnia, drive a pontiac and have a child entering college? Probably not many.
The FTC must create guidelines around privacy, for example to determine whether those who misuse user data can be prosecuted and who is held responsible for the ownership of the data. In this case, NebuAd or the ISPs.

Emily Riley | July 09, 2008, 02:28 PM
Online video ads can be fun

If there is one thing I've heard from family and friends about video ads through the years it is how annoying everyone thinks they are. They are hard to see, too slow, the same one plays over and over, etc. A lot of this has to do with the technology that publishers use and people's own connection speeds.
VideoEgg has been trying to make the experience more enjoyable for the masses, and today is releasing a 'widgety' video ad format that is really intuitive and good looking. It allows for localized ads, RSS, retail, and many other bells and whistles. But my favorite part is that it is fun to use. I have always been a fan of the 3,2,1 countdown from rollover to expand. Once fully expanded, the video plays cleanly and the skin is very well designed. These elements are what will make consumers pay attention.
Take a look for yourself:
http://www.videoegg.com/adlabs/multiclip

Emily Riley | June 18, 2008, 02:26 PM
MySpace's Flashier Front Page

MySpace debuted it's new front page design this week (among other user oriented tweaks.) Today, however, was the premier front page advertising takeover. It features a skin and a video box for the new Batman movie. The player worked very well, and I am happy to see that they used a wide screen player instead of a square box. The skin works pretty well, especially because Batman is a cool brand. Although the design does happen to clash a little bit with the "MySpace blue" of the navigation. I am skeptical that Crest toothpaste would be received as well by users of the site. Like any site that matures into a revered brand, MySpace will have to be careful choosing which advertisers to feature in order to manage the spot's value.

Emily Riley | June 05, 2008, 06:54 PM
Promise for advertiser widgets

Just had a nice briefing with Gigya, one of the largest widget platforms out there. They are getting a lot of traction by allowing their widget makers to offer online users an advertising widget as a companion to their own widget. Advertisers get the opportunity to be seen across MySpace, Facebook and others with one buy. It's a voluntary download on the user's part. Surprisingly, campaigns typically will get tens to hundreds of thousands of downloads. Gigya says that the download rate is so good that advertisers buy on a "cost per install" rate and end up paying a decent but not obscene amount - $1 to $2 CPI. They also track the rate of interactions, which have been 11 percent on some recent campaigns.
Liza Hausman of Gigya has three words of advice for advertisers when it comes to designing a popular widget: simple, shiny, and shareable.

Emily Riley | June 04, 2008, 09:11 PM
Full Page Opener Ad on NYTimes.com

The New York Times is running full-page ads that show before you get to the home page. They load quickly and don't take very long to run. I was not annoyed, although it is my job to be interested in this stuff. So far I have seen one for SAP (I'm not a good target) and Jet Blue (just bought a ticket there yesterday.) Newspapers are the bete noire of the advertising world these days. If the New York Times can keep visitors' attention long enough to make it to the home page, they might have a good money-maker on their hands.

Emily Riley | May 27, 2008, 08:23 PM
The new engagement metric

It looks like "sold out" might be the next way to determine success for a viral marketing campaign. This is as reported by WOMMA, but it's been picked up elsewhere over the weekend:
The response to Paramount's "Indiana Jones" Facebook campaign has been enormous -- with all of the 250,000 available Indy-branded Fedora free virtual gifts being snapped up and sent to friends in under 12 hours.

Of course, if they had decided to offer 1 million virtual fedoras on Facebook, that would just cause a glut in the market.

Emily Riley | May 19, 2008, 03:42 PM
Thoughts on the Display Market During Recession

The New York Times ran a vague and contradictory article today about the display market's behavior during a recession. Particularly, how ad networks will fare. The main points were:
1. The display market is the first online ad market to be hurt during a recession.
2. The online ad market shows some big companies growing and some shrinking year over year.
3. The online ad market might grow during a recession due to its measurability.
4. Some advertisers might spend money with "other" sites, both big and small, in order to get more out of their online spending.

I am not sure what the conclusion is from these points.
My thoughts regarding this are a little contradictory too, but let's see if we can't come to some sort of a conclusion:

1. "Ad Networks" is a generic term now for any large display company including the portals. If you strip the definition down to true ad networks, they are typically still growing (for example, AOL's Platform A rather than AOL as a whole and of course Google.)
2. It is true that performance advertisers could spend less on display and keep their search budget intact during a downturn. However, Jupiter forecasts growth in display because the market is still not mature, so the general increase will outweigh reallocation by current advertisers.
3. Advertisers will move their budgets around and around the web, forever. Ad Networks serve a huge percentage of all of the display ads shown online, so even if advertisers test smaller sites, or different sites, they could not possibly make enough spot buys to equal the sheer volume they can get from one or two network buys. In addition, networks represent the most measurable portion of display advertising: therefore it is the most immune to economic downturn.
4. There is a huge increase in inventory, causing rates to go down. So some large advertisers have been able to spend less and get what they used to get.
5. Some big players, such as financial services companies, are not spending what they used to.

Jupiter has always been conservative in its forecast for reasons just like points 4 and 5. So we believe that the opportunity for growth still exits. In other words measurability and general bargins for the volume you can get will outweigh the volatility of external economics.

Emily Riley | May 13, 2008, 03:38 PM
Surveys online, the good and the bad

So I had the good fortune of filling out two different online surveys this morning. The first was on Facebook. I was taking the Flickster movies quiz. After rating a bunch of movies, they asked me if I wouldn't mind rating my enthusiasm for the upcoming Indiana Jones movie. Of course I wouldn't mind. I assume most people wouldn't mind. If 1 million people take the quiz in a month, and if the CPM was say, $5, LucasFilm only needed to pay Facebook $5,000 for that survey. It was short, and well targeted. Facebook could start collecting this data and report back on how movies are faring relative to past surveys.
Later, on weather.com (hey, this is my job!) I took a rather long quiz for Oral B. They asked me 20 questions about different Oral B toothbrush brands. I actually tend to buy Oral B toothbrushes, but was sadly unable to provide them with much of an opinion. It would have been fun if they asked me what colors I like or what type of bristles I prefer. Instead, they wanted to know which obscure brands I was familiar with (Active Pro vs. Active Pro Health anyone?) and other arcane details relating to their various designs and supposed health benefits. The banner ad they showed me was pretty bland as well. I must admit that I only remember the head shot (pun intended) and none of the health-related facts on the ad. At the end, they asked me how fun it was to fill out the survey. Alas, not as fun as it could have been. Let's hope it was a value-add.

Emily Riley | May 05, 2008, 03:13 PM
Facebook moving away from Groups?

I really don't want to get in the habit of repeating information from other blogs, it already happens too much. But just this once, Valleywag reported over the weekend that Facebook is encouraging marketers, bands, and the like to migrate from Groups to Pages. Apple has made the move, and now has 400,000 fans of its Page.
The idea is that the traffic to and from the Pages will generate enough ad revenue to offset the previous revenue that Facebook charges for sponsored Groups. This model has not been proven yet, and I am a tad skeptical due to the fact that Facebook is still relying on text ads. Potentially competitors will pay to show up on competitors Pages?
Ad revenue aside, there are positives for marketers, as told by a developer and blogger:

- Pages are more customizable than groups. You can add HTML, Flash, or even Facebook applications to your pages to extend their functionality and the depth of experience users can have with your brand.
- Pages get more prominent “Bumper Stickers” real estate than groups on the profile pages of your fans.
- There is no limitation to the number of fans in your group that you can message.
- “Fans” who join your group are NOT able to invite their friends to be fans of your Page. Fans must either “Share” your page with their friends, or their friends must observe that they “are a fan” of your Page either via their profile page or News Feed.
- Facebook has taken an active role in cracking down on Pages not created by authorized agents.

So what's maybe good for Facebook is probably good for marketers, or something like that.

Emily Riley | April 30, 2008, 02:46 PM
Adify snapped up

Adify got snapped up by Cox a few days ago for a reported $300 million. You may recall that I mentioned Adify in a recent post about vertical networks being all the rage right now.
Cox will use the Adify platform to help its own media outlets and partners build out networks online, a way to increase reach and revenue for all involved. Each partner will have a different group of little sites to manage, from blogs to fan sites. These small sites don't necessarily have the panel data available that newspaper and TV advertisers typically want, so there might be some difficulty for the sales department. The CPMs could be low until this is figured out.

Emily Riley | April 24, 2008, 03:19 PM
Will we finally get pricing information?

I was recently briefed by SQAD (pronounced like squad.) They have been around in the offline world for a while, and provide pricing data to advertisers. They recently briefed me on a new project they are working on that would bring this service to the web. You might be thinking it's great that someone finally will report the CPMs for thousands of websites. And it is...however...

"What is the CPM for...?" is the most common inquiry I receive. And almost always, my answer is, "It depends." Even with a service that reports on average CPM by site, the answer will still be "it depends." Sites are complex, and pricing varies widely from sponsorship spots to remnant inventory. An average number is always going to tell an incomplete story.
Despite all this, I am looking forward to this service and do think it might help advertisers at least compare overall pricing for different sites. It will also shed some light on which sites sell more at premium rate card prices and which are being dragged down by lower remnant pricing. So now I'll say "It depends, but if you are looking for an average, there is this new service..."

Emily Riley | April 16, 2008, 02:53 PM
New networks in the news

Our president, David Schatsky, pointed me to a Wall Street Journal article this morning that highlights one of the themes from my recent Ad Networks report. While the online conglomerates are busy tying all of their acquisitions together, big media companies are fighting back with network plays of their own. The WSJ reported that Disney is creating their own premium ad network by coordinating ad spending with other content sites. Much the way Adify works with sites like the Washington Post, Disney is using a branded vertical network approach to increase relevant impressions for its SOAP site and hopefully command higher CPMs and more premium advertisers than a traditional network. (Adify may well be behind this announcement, but it wasn't mentioned.)
At the same time, ComScore announced the top ad networks for last month. Not surprisingly, AOL's new Platform-A is the largest. About 98 percent of the volume comes from Advertising.com. That makes it obvious that other acquisitions like Tacoda and Quigo did nothing to increase reach, but hopefully added new clients and new technologies to the offerings.

Emily Riley | April 15, 2008, 03:21 PM
Behavioral limitations

On the 10th of April, the Network Advertising Initiative floated some guidelines they'd like to use to make peace with the FTC and potentially with advocacy groups as well. I saw the New York Times write-up of the guidelines, which focused more on the cheekiness of the whole operation. Obviously anything that promises not to target people based on things like incontinence and death is a bad joke waiting to happen, but it is also so important to the future of online advertising. More personal information is known about individuals than ever before, and it's very valuable stuff...SO what to do?
Forget the laundry list of taboo subjects for now, today I'm thinking about their proposal for self-regulation.

The NAI includes all of the big networks, so they argue that self regulation is good enough. But why blow the whistle on a competitor if your own targeting has problems? These operations span many offices, hundreds of employees, and billions of impressions - so there is always a risk of a mistake.

The best solution is to create a combination of self-created technology and third party audit. Targeting technology is constantly evolving, so it would have to be the responsibility of each member to design its own monitoring system, then have it be approved by the third party, who would also perform random spot checks.

Advocacy groups should have access to the results of the checks and the ability to request audits for specific circumstances.

Emily Riley | April 14, 2008, 03:01 PM
Back to the grind

I am now officially back in action after 3 months of maternity leave. It seems that the report I wrote about the future of ad networks was timely to say the least - the uproar that is currently occuring over Yahoo proves how much is at stake.
I also hope that the new announcements around Platform A's leadership jumpstart that effort, as it is the closest to living the dream of the "new ad network."
I'd love to hear updates from everyone as I get myself back up and running.

Emily Riley | January 11, 2008, 04:28 PM
New Beginnings and a Brief Hiatus

2008 - A new year, a new chance to regroup and rethink our strategies. For me, it’s also a new beginning. Today is my last day before I go on maternity leave. (Wish me luck.) While I’m gone, my boss David Card, as well as the other members of our Marketing team will be filling in for me. We’ve also got some good reports in the hopper to tide you over, including the Category Advertising Forecast.
When I come back, I imagine not too much will have changed. Perhaps Google will own Doubleclick. Perhaps the writers strike will be over. Hopefully, one or more of the Big 4 will offer some great new options in the wake of their costly acquisitions in 2007. In any event, I’ll be keeping my ear to the ground, so send any interesting tidbits my way.

Emily Riley | January 03, 2008, 02:44 PM
2008 - Another Year, Another Crop of Viral Campaigns

Just as I was about to sit down and write out my prediction that fewer advertisers will spend money on obviously forced social marketing campaigns, I get an email that Chick-Fil-A is running a “make your own video” contest to find their biggest fan. Then, hours later, I read that McDonald’s has basically ripped off Ray Ban’s Wayfarer video with a viral video that depicts two cool dudes catching French fries in their mouths as they do cool dude type stuff. So maybe I was jumping the gun; a valuable thing to realize as we’re just getting ready to send out our Social Marketer Executive Survey, where we’ll get a great understanding of just how many marketers are still trying for instant word of mouth fame and fortune. I fear that there are many. Social Marketing is still very new to many marketers, but hopefully the learning curve will be fast. This coming year, we will be focusing not only the hype-y stuff like viral marketing and using widgets, but the evolution of brand advocacy, successful product launches, and how to deal with fragmented audiences. These last topics seem to me to be the ones with the lasting themes that will define the next phase of social marketing. In the mean time, I will keep my eye out for more viral shenanigans.

Emily Riley | December 21, 2007, 04:06 PM
More than one Googleclick

Now that the FTC has cleared Google’s acquisition of Doubleclick, we have only to wait for Europe and it will be a done deal. That makes it sound easy. In reality, Europe will probably be the toughest fight, particularly because much of the concern surrounding the deal is around privacy. For those who read John Lovett’s blog this week, note that Google already has plenty of places to track behavior, albeit all on Google properties. Doubleclick has the potential to expand that far beyond such boundaries. But I have to admit that I do see the FTC’s point that many other large properties have recently been allowed to acquire far reaching ad networks that provide similar opportunities. This week Microsoft announced its new partnership with Viacom, which will include replacing Viacom’s Doubleclick software with Atlas as well as an ad revenue deal. There is no reason why Microsoft can’t benefit from relationship the same way Googleclick would have if Viacom hadn’t made the switch.

Emily Riley | December 10, 2007, 09:15 PM
Writer’s Strike, Opportunity for New Video Formats?

With the TV writer’s strike likely to last into the new year, it has been noted that advertisers will be left with open ended budgets to re-allocate, not only for the rest of this season, but potentially into next season. The Jack Meyers report estimated $600 million at stake this season, most of which they predict will go into other TV forms including cable. Additionally, Mediaweek reported that NBC and others are starting to give refunds to advertisers in the case of low ratings, some checks reaching $500k or more. For networks with decent-sized web properties interested in keeping their money, it would seem that now would be a good time to push their Internet play to a new level. To be sure, many of them are trying, but there are still major obstacles to getting a one-season $500k advertiser budget to work on a single online web property, let alone multiple budgets of that size or more.
That advertisers have more money than they can spend is a good problem for publishers to have. While there isn’t nearly as much consumer video watching online as on TV, formats are small and content is light, there certainly is enough consumer activity online to warrant an attempt at filling the gap. I think publishers need to reassess the true value of their web properties in a time where TV is rapidly losing value.
The web needs a better case for offering impact, reach and frequency. Can the industry come up with ad formats that give more advertisers more inventory or more bang for their buck? I know Adify is trying that one. Is the full screen commercial taboo unless the user is watching Joost format video? Ultramercial has been quiet lately. And why is high frequency always a negative online? Anyone watching Sunday night football will know that “more is more” when it comes to frequency on TV lately. Maybe we have what we need after all.