Comments on: Numbers game http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/08/28/numbers-game/ by Jeff Jarvis Mon, 01 Dec 2008 23:01:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Joe http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/08/28/numbers-game/#comment-119727 Joe Thu, 31 Aug 2006 02:42:00 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/08/28/numbers-game/#comment-119727 Having valid audience measurement techniques are important, but the only ones that are truly accurate (Javascript "beacons" embedded in pages) are the ones that advertisers don't trust. Nielsen, Comscore, Hitwise, and their ilk are notoriously inaccurate, particularly for small sites. We have frequently compared their figures to our actual numbers, and found them off sometimes as much as a factor of four. But developing good and externally verifiable audience measure techniques is essential. Jarvis misses the point ("advertisers need not care how big the site is, only how often the ads they pay for get served"). A company isn't an advertiser until it buys an ad. And why would someone buy an ad on a site? Because it reaches a critical mass of the desired audience. So once someone is running the ad, they get fulfillment information from DoubleClick or other ad servers, so Nielsen becomes irrelevant at that point of the relationship. If ABC or someone could figure out a way to audit a site's Omniture/SiteCensus/Urchin/whatever set-up on a regular basis, we'd then have great audience numbers for major sites. Sure, the little, itty-bitty sites won't have audience, but advertisers aren't interested in them anyhow. Having valid audience measurement techniques are important, but the only ones that are truly accurate (Javascript “beacons” embedded in pages) are the ones that advertisers don’t trust. Nielsen, Comscore, Hitwise, and their ilk are notoriously inaccurate, particularly for small sites. We have frequently compared their figures to our actual numbers, and found them off sometimes as much as a factor of four.

But developing good and externally verifiable audience measure techniques is essential. Jarvis misses the point (”advertisers need not care how big the site is, only how often the ads they pay for get served”). A company isn’t an advertiser until it buys an ad. And why would someone buy an ad on a site? Because it reaches a critical mass of the desired audience. So once someone is running the ad, they get fulfillment information from DoubleClick or other ad servers, so Nielsen becomes irrelevant at that point of the relationship.

If ABC or someone could figure out a way to audit a site’s Omniture/SiteCensus/Urchin/whatever set-up on a regular basis, we’d then have great audience numbers for major sites. Sure, the little, itty-bitty sites won’t have audience, but advertisers aren’t interested in them anyhow.

]]> By: paul http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/08/28/numbers-game/#comment-118935 paul Tue, 29 Aug 2006 00:56:30 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/08/28/numbers-game/#comment-118935 Forbes has been telling advertisers that they are attracting Business decision makers, but in reality it’s the Mom what’s for diner demographic that’s doing the clicking. Forbes has been telling advertisers that they are attracting Business decision makers, but in reality it’s the Mom what’s for diner demographic that’s doing the clicking.

]]> By: CaptiousNut http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/08/28/numbers-game/#comment-118717 CaptiousNut Mon, 28 Aug 2006 13:27:37 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/08/28/numbers-game/#comment-118717 What is <em>odd</em> about the NYT attacking a capitalist icon? What is odd about the NYT attacking a capitalist icon?

]]>