In a comment on last week’s post, an anonymous reader named Chuck (Can you be anonymous and sign your name?) provided some interesting fodder for discussion. Chuck made two interesting points. The first was this:

“Instead of focusing on name changes DPAA nee OVAB should focus on credentialization. And not just a methodology, but a gold seal.”

This is a good point, although maybe not on DPAA’s radar. Last October, I took a shot at suggesting that such a trend was forthcoming in this post. So far, it hasn’t occurred, but Chuck’s comment would seem to indicate that others have thought about what is needed and what would be helpful to all entities in this business. It may make the most sense for an entity such as Nielsen or Arbitron to take on the task of certifying networks, report formats and software platforms, since the people most interested in such a certification will be the advertisers. They would almost certainly charge for the effort, and publish standards and a certification process to lend additional credibility to the program. For their part, DPAA is primarily concerned with driving advertising revenue to their members. Their establishment of standards is an effort to certify their members as worthy of advertiser trust and investment. Providing a certification service to non-members might be problematic for those who pay the very hefty dues levied by DPAA. So Chuck, it likely won’t be DPAA, but you are certainly on to something there.

The second comment was a bit more provocative. Chuck questions the status and future relevance of the digital signage industry itself in light of projected technology advances (emphasis added by me):

“I think we all know where it will go in the next 2-5 years with internet-ready flat screen TVs in American houses and geo-targetable smart phones in our hands. The question is whether OVAB (doh! DPAA) and this space we mistakenly call an industry want a more integrated role or to be jumped as an afterthought.”

I am ambivalent on this one. It is hard to argue that the natural progression of consumer televisions will not include integration of internet capabilities. This, combined with advances made by the cable industry will make many televisions addressable and potentially interactive. I read that smartphone penetration in the U.S. is going to take a giant leap forward in the next 15 months. It is also hard to argue against the thought that people are going to be targetable at home and on the go. I think the nuance here is that targetability in and of itself is terrific, but it is not the end game. Closing the deal is the end game.

One way to look at the different channels of traditional and digital media is through a lens that filters them on two axes: contextual relevance and ability to finish. Contextual relevance would be a measure of the relevance of any message received via that channel, given the context in which it is received. Ability to finish would be a measure of how easy or possible it is to act upon the message immediately. A take on how print, broadcast, online, DOOH and mobile media might map out on these axes is shown here (click to enlarge):

 

 

Messages delivered via print media generally have low contextual relevance. While the reader has opted-in and decided to receive the message, the context of the impression will only be relevant either randomly (Advil ad read while riding the subway) or in very specific circumstances (beer ad in the program at a ball game). In most cases, the message and the context will be disconnected. The ability to act on a printed ad generally requires specific actions: a phone call, a trip to a mall, a walk to a beer stand.

At the other end of the spectrum, online messaging is often optimized to to be contextually relevant. Enough is known about the nature of the site or page in question for advertisers to be reasonably smart about placement. And in an online scenario, the ability to finish is very high, even if the gratification is often delayed.

Digital signage by its nature has very high contextual relevance. Because messages are targeted to the environment they appear in, this is one of the real advantages of narrowcasting. Think about the laundry detergent ad in the grocery store, the beer ad in the convenience store, or the pharmaceutical ad in the medical office. Each is relevant in the context of the location of the display itself. The ability to finish for digital signage will vary, however. In retail environments, it is fairly high. In public areas, it is somewhat less. Chuck’s assertion regarding the need to integrate may not be far off base, at least as it relates to smartphones. It does seem clear that integration of mobile handsets and apps will be important to increase digital signage’s relevance and ability to finish. It will also extend the experience beyond the point of impression. His point that broadcast television will slide to the right in the chart above as TVs become internet-enabled is well taken. It is important to remember the mantra that digital signage exists along a continuum of media channels, and is not an end unto itself. I’ll disagree with Chuck and say that we are correct to call ourselves an industry, even as we struggle to find identity and leadership. But we’d be foolish to think of ourselves as an island. Thanks for the input, Chuck. Keep it coming.

 Long weekends are always a good time to decompress, reconnect with family and friends and to catch up on reading. I did a lot of reading, both for business (online) and pleasure (Kindle). Three streams caught my attention, and while they seem only tangentially related at first, connecting the dots results in some usable insights.

 

The first stream was a series of Manolo Almagro's pieces on user-generated content (starting on November 19th, here). Manolo is particularly wired into the UGC trendsphere both from a personal and professional perspective, and his travels expose him to trends well beyond North America, especially in Asia. So his insights and enthusiasm have a strong foundation. His presentation last month at the Strategy Institute conference in Chicago provided a number of excellent examples of how UGC can make the transition from online to OOH seamless for the person he defines as the "new, new consumer". In his presentation, Manolo pointed out that the new consumer:

 

 - Seeks out new and different experiences with brands

 - Prefers active engagements vs. passive

 - Ruthlessly filters messages, seeks to personalize

 - Expects 2-way conversations with brands

 - Consumes or creates some form of digital media on a daily basis

 

In subsequent posts, he advocates for UGC and moderated content filtering, while making sure that readers take note of the very real ubiquity and dominance of mobile devices. New consumers armed with powerful smartphones consume and create media in addition to consuming brands. They want those experiences to be integrated. Hold on to those thoughts for a moment, we'll get back to them.

 

The second stream related to a presentation given by Danah Boyd at the Web 2.0 Expo in New York. Ms. Boyd is a well-regarded Social Media Researcher, and her work in academia and business has associated her with brands like Microsoft, Harvard, MIT and Berkeley. She is a frequent and sought-after speaker on social media. Her presentation was a new pitch titled, Streams of Content, Limited Attention: The Flow of Information Through Social Media. It was remarkable for two reasons. First, it provided some terrific thoughts that can be applied to the digital media space; and second, the presentation itself was reportedly a debacle, as a giant screen behind her was used to post tweets from the audience in real time, which flustered her and took her off her game. It seems the audience had issues with the speed or her delivery, and the comments degenerated into personal attacks. Ironically, the social media expert was being skewered by unfiltered UGC delivered via Twitter! The show producers did something (real time twitter backchannel) to force interactivity in a forum designed for one way delivery. It backfired.

 

Boyd's talk, which got somewhat lost in all the controversy over the presentation, was actually quite thought-provoking, and has some elements that relate to DOOH. Here are some notable points:

 

 - She introduces the idea of "…content streams, streams of information. This metaphor is powerful. The idea is that you are living inside the stream: adding to it, consuming it, redirecting it."

 

 - We have transitioned from "…an era of broadcast media… to an era of networked media."

 

 - In this era of networked media and living in the stream, we are "consuming (content) to understand, producing (content) to be relevant."

 

 - "…what matters is not the act of distribution, but the act of consumption. Thus the power is no longer in the hands of those who control the channels of distribution, but those who control the limited resource of attention."

 

The third stream was Paul Flanigan's take on Black Friday, which was really a reflection on his time at Best Buy and how he watched the metamorphosis of the big day. Paul is yet another person who falls under the heading of "Totally Gets It". He shares some observations:

 

 - Best Buy (and other retailers) let the customers make a bigger deal out of it than it really was. Corporate definitely paid attention, but the customers themselves are what drives the advertising.

 

 - By leaking deals, you get them to wait in line at your store. Once in line, they stay there… They have made the commitment.

 

 - I have seen the customer change because it is no longer about the deal, it is about the event.

 

Paul goes on to observe how Black Friday is no longer about item discounting, because retailers are discounting year round these days. Instead, it has become "a cultural event". Black Friday may as well be renamed Campout Thursday, to more accurately reflect what it is now all about: the experience.

 

Now connect the dots: New consumers want to connect with brands in new ways… the power belongs to those that control the limited resource of attention…. the experience matters more than the deal. These observations were made in wholly different contexts, yet cobbled together, there is something to take away. We are facing seismic cultural and technological shifts that should be regarded as game changers to an industry that wants to position itself as legitimate alternative media distribution channel.

 

Clearly, as producers of this emerging channel of content distribution, DOOH network operators must be mindful of the dual concepts of the stream and the experience, and make efforts not to dead-end their evolving consumers. If we think that the stream begins and ends with DOOH content or ads, without allowing consumers to somehow engage, link or produce within our stream, then we may be taking their precious attention for granted. In today's networked culture, that might be a big mistake.

 

There is no silver bullet for achieving relevant consumer engagement. While mobile-fed and moderated UGC is appropriate for Times Square billboards and bars, it is probably not quite as appropriate in medical environments or branch retail outlets. QR codes, NFC and Bluetooth show promise for serving up links and new opportunities to connect with brands and content producers. Social media tools will find their way into the stream, perhaps through links or portals for UGC where it makes sense. In any case, DOOH networks need to find a way to become part of an experience that is relevant to their audience, leveraging the attention the consumers grant them. To ignore that imperative would put them in danger of suffering the limitations of broadcasters.