PubMatic’s associate director, customer success, Tim Purss, explains why the future of programmatic will be more transparent and more like old-fashioned linear TV ad buying.
A major selling point of linear TV inventory is the information that comes with it. Linear buyers are able to pick specific genres, shows and even episodes.
Publishers have been hesitant to introduce the same level of transparency for programmatic CTV. The worry is that the combination of audience targeting and content targeting could give brands the ability to “cherry-pick” premium inventory and it might lead to competition with their direct sales teams’ efforts.
But brands should be able to get more transparency on programmatic CTV. Just as importantly, publishers should get something in return for sharing this information.
In advertising, as in life, there is no such thing as a free lunch.
The programmatic turning point
Transparent content object signals – information passed in the bid-stream about the show, such as title, genre etc. – are the keystone that will bring the best of linear advertising together with the best of programmatic advertising.
However, publishers have some legitimate concerns; primarily they are concerned that brands, armed with so much information, will target a much smaller, more specific number of impressions, leaving them with an undervalued, picked-over asset that ignores large amounts of less-desirable placements.
For a long time, programmatic was the fast-food joint of the restaurant world. Brands wanted scale at low prices. This was the hallmark of display advertising for years. Sellers gave it to them, but the industry was opaque, overly complex and plagued by fraud. At the peak of this cycle, brands were buying “target audiences” that were dramatically larger than the actual number of people in that real-life audience. High frequency and bad data fuelled the problem.
Today, there’s more transparency, more accuracy and much less fraud. Our industry is now a fine-dining establishment. We’ve done such a good job that brands are actually willing to pay extra to get the audiences that matter to them on good, quality content. That’s worth repeating… Brands are willing to pay more.
In return, though, they are asking for content signals to inform their CTV media buys. This isn’t the equivalent of asking for extra pickles on a cheap burger. They’re in a nice restaurant. And they are essentially asking for extra caviar. If publishers have the caviar, they should sell it – at the right price.
Publishers might push back here and say this is their secret sauce. But there is a way forward that can give advertisers transparency, whilst most importantly, ensuring publishers maintain the value of their entire content portfolio.
Brands crave content signals
One approach is using programmatic guaranteed (PG) deals to package specific inventory at a specific price. Rather than go to open auction, publishers can dip a toe and get comfortable with just how much information to share and at what price. The demand is there and in Australia, there is an ongoing shift towards CTV being bought via PG so it is a familiar buy type.
Many aggregator publishers run into complexity because of contracts with content creators who limit the amount of transparency that can be provided. Publishers can use this to their advantage. If they know that sharing content signals using the “content object” field can bring in new demand, that can be used as a bargaining chip in future agreements. Over time, more contracts will include specific stipulations that make it easier for publishers to be more transparent with buyers.
We’ve arrived at a major moment for programmatic. Linear TV dollars are shifting, leaving opportunities up for grabs for publishers that make the right moves. Brands want it. Publishers can benefit from it. It’s time to get serious about making it happen.
