Google’s YouTube Pushes Carls Jr. Burgers. 53 grams of fat/870 calories/It’s #1 Video Ad for the Week

Take a look at this YouTube branded ad campaign for Carls Jr.  Look at the nutrition information.  The ad, says Visible Measures, is at the “number one spot on the Top Ad Campaigns chart this week showcases vloggers from the Nigahiga comedy group chomping down for Carl’s Jr.’s How To Eat A Burger campaign, which features the Portobello Mushroom Burger. The campaign grabbed a record-breaking 3.3+ million views…”

MTV uses Neuroscience to Analyze Ads for Games: Examining “the optimal way of connecting to this audience when they’re that rabid and that engaged.”

excerpt:  “…MTVN  conducted a three-day study of more than 60 gamers at a biometrics lab in Las Vegas; they showed the players various ads and games, all while examining stats like heart rate, respiration, movement patterns and visual attention. Interestingly, they found that 15-second pre-rolls were the most effective way to garner a player’s “focused attention”—beating out 30-second spots, in-game display ads, and even overlays. Pre-roll ads commanded up to 85 percent focused attention, MTVN’s study found, meaning that the vast majority of the viewers paid full attention to the ads…“The question we wanted to answer was do ads need to be more disruptive to be effective?” said Jason Witt, GM for MTVN’s Digital Fusion ad unit. “We can always stick a bigger ad in front of somebody. And we found that you don’t have to be more disruptive, by and large. The proof is that 15-second pre-rolls were the most effective.” The study also found that game ads had 8x higher unaided brand awareness over online display ads in general, and fueled a 12x higher intent to purchase…So for us, the goal is to see what’s the optimal way of connecting to this audience when they’re that rabid and that engaged.” 

source:  Need To Reach Casual Gamers? MTV Says 15-Second Pre-Rolls Work Best.  David Kaplan.  paidcontent.org.  June 10, 2009.

Behavioral Targeting Meets Neuroscience: “The ability to tap into psychological and physiological testing for ad targeting is an emerging field”

Here’s an excerpt from the article BT: Can It Mean Behavioral Responses To Ads?:

Companies touting the targeting of online ads to consumers as a mixture of art and science could soon find psychologists employed among their midst…One To One Interactive will open its primary research lab, OTOinsights, to other advertising agencies and research firms… Along with the main lab in Charleston, Mass., a mobile lab that can travel anywhere offers input on eye tracking; click tracking; bio-feedback such as heart rate, respiratory rate, galvanic skin response; neuro-feedback such as EEG/active attention; and facial recognition technology that interprets six fundamental human emotions: happy, sad, angry, surprised, scared, disgusted, and neutral…The ability to tap into psychological and physiological testing for ad targeting is an emerging field…There are between 10 and 15 firms…spearheading efforts. …Neurofocus…focuses on EEG electroencephalographic- (EEG-) based neurological testing that reveals the degrees of attention, emotional engagement, and memory retention that consumers experience at the deep subconscious level of the brain.

source:  Laurie Sullivan.  Behavioral Insider.  June 4, 2009.

Google’s NetPAC and Lobbying

Google’s Andrew McLaughlin is listed as the “designated agent” and “Assistant Treasurer for its “NetPAC” in a Federal Election Commission filing dated March 16, 2009.  It gave out $270,000 to federal candidates for the 2008 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.  It’s a veritable political “who’s who” for those receiving the money, including the leading lawmakers overseeing policies that affect Google’s interest, including privacy and intellectual property. Among the recipients include Reps. Barton, Boucher, [now WH chief of staff] Rahm Emanuel, Markey, Speaker Pelosi, Sens. Dorgan, Durbin, Reid, Rockefeller, Smith, etc.

Money for the PAC came from Google execs such as Sergey Brin, David Drummond, Eric Schmidt, Vint Cerf, Mr. McLaughlin, Hal Varian and others.  It’s worth looking at the Center’s coverage of Google’s contributions.

Clearly, corporations and individuals have a right, within limits, to donate to campaigns.  But to me, Mr. McLaughlin’s role running Google’s PAC–as recently as this Spring–illustrates why such activity should be addressed by the White House’s new “Ethics Commitments” for personnel. This isn’t about Mr. McLaughlin or Google.  But no top political operative should be able to make a quick revolving door trip into a federal job that will be connected to their private sector role.

Behavioral Targeting Merges with Social Media Marketing for Individual Profiling [Annals of Behavioral Targeting]

As a growing number of people recognize (and taking advantage of), behavioral targeting is part of the social media marketing business model.  Such an approach illustrates why policymakers across the globe must address what is a largely stealth commercial surveillance system.  It has implications for the collection of data on individuals by government as well [my bold].

Here’s a excerpt from a recent announcement by WPP owned 24/7 Real Media Inc.:  “the leading global digital marketing company, has begun a pilot program to integrate social media engagement metrics into its behavioral targeting application. These social media engagement metrics will augment existing behavioral targeting attributes to drive robust advertising response and conversion.  Working with companies such as NuConomy, an innovator in social media measurement, select 24/7 Real Media advertisers are now leveraging non-traditional metrics such as comments, ratings, video plays, and link sharing to customize advertising, increase responsiveness and drive purchases.”

and Nuconomy says that:
By tracking engagement and site activity at the individual user level, NuConomy’s module automatically builds rich behavioral profiles, or interest maps, for each user – such as who is posting comments on bikes or sharing music recommendations with friends. This level of detail gives publishers a deeper understanding of user behavior so they can optimize their sites and marketing messages for different audience segments, even different individuals.”

PS:  We see that the folks over at the AT&T, Yahoo, AOL, etc. backed Future of Privacy Forum has engaged WPP to help its new research effort designed “to develop a variety of [privacy] notices that will resonate with consumers and begin to test them with users.”

We suggest that as its initial effort, the Forum require WPP to make public all the various methods it uses to collect data from consumers.  Such a list includes WPP’s ad networks, online games, mobile, cable broadband platforms, social media, etc.  That would provide the research initiative a good place to begin, if its effort is to be taken seriously.

AT&T, Time Warner, Microsoft and Facebook Join New Business Group with Ties to Obama Administration

In the age of social media marketing, what may lobbying look like when the Lincoln Bedroom meets Web 2.0?  This new “progressive” business group will also have to address the special interest agendas of its members, including online marketing and data collection.

excerpt via PR Week about the launch of Business Forward:  The group’s wide-ranging roster includes AT&T, Facebook, Hilton, IBM, Microsoft, Pfizer, and Time Warner and was founded by Democratic strategists… The goal for Business Forward is to provide consistent support for President Barack Obama and the Democratic Congress.

National Journal reports that: Rather than lobbying, Business Forward’s initial aim will be hosting events around the country to focus on maximizing funds in the $787 billion economic stimulus package…It will be led by political operative Jim Doyle; former Viacom lobbyist David Sutphen, whose sister is Obama’s deputy chief of staff; former Obama media consultant Erik Smith; former Obama campaign staffer Julie Andreeff Jensen; and Hilary Rosen, former head of the Recording Industry Association of America. Business Forward’s founding members will pay up to $75,000 per year for a membership…

In a letter in Politico, Mr. Doyle explains that “We plan to spend our time encouraging business leaders to discuss how America can make the most of clean energy investments in our current budget, reduce hospital costs through better health care information technology and reform schools so that today’s students are better prepared for tomorrow’s jobs.”

Video Metrics: “gauged by the millisecond” [Annals of Social Media Marketing]

The Obama Administration’s use of social media and analytics should trigger a serious debate.  How much information on citizens and others do we really want the government to have?  As part of the discussion, consider this excerpt from social marketing company’s RockYou’s pitch to advertisers and others [our bold].  This about the Feds tracking as you watch government-funded videos:

“…Social Video Ads and Cross Platform Video Distribution on the RockYou Ads Network…Looking at the landscape of online advertising – on social networks and beyond – it’s obvious that video advertising is the medium of choice for brands and marketers who have a story to tell…Video metrics go far beyond impressions. Audience interactions (views, stops, rewinds, sharing) are gauged by the millisecond and response can be measured, in real numbers. Advertisers who can combine that data with behavioral or demographic profiling, to reach exact targets, get amazing results. 

Online Behavioral Profiling & Targeting of Individuals Based on their Political Interests: Privacy Safeguards Are Required for Interactive Marketing

This week an online marketing company called Resonate Networks “announced the first online ad network built for political and public affairs advertising.” According to the company, “Resonate’s ad network is powered by its proprietary Attitudinal Targeting platform that, for the first time, provides public affairs and political advertisers with the ability to identify, persuade, motivate and organize like-minded audiences online and drive them towards an actionable step—whether it is joining a campaign, contributing to a cause, or supporting an initiative.”  Resonate’s platform, they say, was “[D]eveloped by world-class research and online industry experts, Resonate’s Attitudinal Targeting platform incorporates extensive and proprietary algorithms, data modeling and analysis to map Web users’ attitudes and issue positions against their online behavior.  Attitudinal data that advertisers can leverage include…Targeting highly influential individuals with a history of taking action related to an issue of interest…”   “It’s really drilling down to people’s beliefs and where they stand on issues,” Resonate’s CEO told MediaPost.

Resonate told the Washington Post’s Cecilia Kang that the company’s approach doesn’t raise any privacy concerns.  But they are wrong.  How citizens and others are tracked, analyzed, profiled and targeted based on their political views is a privacy (and consumer protection) issue.  Both Congress and the FTC need to look closely at the growing role online profiling and targeting is playing in the political and policy arena.   

Financially backed by well-known political campaigners from both parties,  Resonate also explains that it “has developed one of the most advanced engagement models available, with the ability to not just understand who is influential, but where you can find influentials who care about specific issues.”   Here are excerpts of its pitch to corporate advertisers:

“For the first time, corporate advertisers and agencies have the power to precisely pinpoint and reach web users whose attitudes and issue positions make them most receptive to certain messages and calls-to-action…Micro-Targeting Means Higher-Performance Campaigns: Resonate Networks delivers higher concentrations of your target audiences, translating into greater exposure for your campaign among the right mix of people…Message Segmentation: The success of your campaign may require reaching different audiences with different messages: A supportive audience may receive a direct response offer, while others who are unaware of your products or their benefits may receive an educational message designed to nurture their interest over time. Reduced Budget Waste:  Resonate offers the ability to reach web users that are pre-disposed to your message or product based on their attitudes or beliefs. Conversely, Resonate can help avoid those who hold opposing or conflicting beliefs.”

In addition, Resonate says that it uses “Rich Attitudinal Data:

  • Resonate targets campaigns based on layers of detail on a range of audience attitudes, including:
    • Issues and issue positions
    • Engagement/influencer status
    • Ideology
    • Media consumption
    • Religiosity
    • Partisanship
    • Vote history”

Memo to Acting FCC Chair Michael Copps on Cable TV “Branded Storytelling”: A Tour of Embedded TV Advertising

Dear Mr. Chairman:

We are emailing you the link to this week’s Advertising Age’s story called “Designing a Custom Fit: Cable Offering more integrated, multiplatform deals.”  If you needed any additional evidence that the business model that further merges programming content with advertising requires scrutiny, debate, and safeguards (especially in the youth market), we offer the following article excerpts as evidence.  Clearly, the comedy writers are creating the marketing strategies for some of the cable programming networks.  But I’ve put a few of the best lines in bold:

Call it extreme sponsorship.

As advertisers look for maximum returns on their media investments, cable networks are offering an increasing number of creative, customized and multiplatform ways to partner with marketer brands—and to make sure viewers are paying attention.

The options for integrated marketing have gone far beyond a title sponsorship or a simple product placement. Today the buzzwords are “content-mercials,” “intromercials,” “branded storytelling” and custom marketing. Network series stars are featured in marketers’ commercials—and marketers’ products have a starring role in hit series…USA Network’s approach is to treat an advertiser’s brand as a supporting character in its multiplatform “Characters Welcome” credo. “Our network is not about one genre or one demographic. We are about characters. We celebrate the character of your brand,” says Chris McCumber, exec VP-marketing, digital and brand strategy for USA Network…

USA’s hottest show right now is “Burn Notice.” In its inaugural season, “Burn Notice” partnered with Saab 9-3 for an online game, “Covert Ops,” that allowed users to “drive” a virtual Saab all over Miami…In “Covert Ops,” “while you are playing the game, you are using the elements of Saab. The game drew more leads to Saab.com than the number of cars available to sell,” Mr. McCumber says. “The gaming area has incredible opportunities for brand integration.”…USA’s on-air integrations include using Hoover vacuums to “sweep” graphics off the screen during “Clean House.”…

On A&E Television Networks’ History, Subaru is a presenting sponsor for the upcoming “Expedition Africa: Stanley & Livingstone.”…

“We provided the explorers at certain points in the expedition [in four episodes] with the Subaru—where it made sense,” says Mel Berning, exec VP-ad sales for A&E Television Networks.

The integrations highlight features such as trunk space capacity and vehicle toughness off-road. Thirty-second “content-mercials” will run in every episode…AMC is promoting its Branded Storytelling—a way for advertisers to tell their brand stories through AMC’s programming, says Bill Rosolie, AMC exec VP-sales….Examples include: Takeovers, where marketers can own an entire episode, movie or day with their messages; Matching Moments, where AMC breaks the action with a sponsored pod that directly follows relevant content; and “Matching Attributes,” where brands’ messages are connected to key movie content by using custom creative to run within the film…

Nickelodeon has made multiplatform integration central to its ad sales efforts. This year Nick teamed with Walmart for an integrated effort celebrating the 10th anniversary of the No. 1 kids show, “Sponge Bob Square Pants.” The plan included TV, print and online media backed by in-store support. The Happy Place inside its Walmart stores offered exclusive Sponge Bob merchandise. A microsite (www.spongebobhappyplace.com) requests a sign-on code, only available at Walmart stores, to allow visitors access to exclusive content.

In 2008 Nick and AT&T joined efforts on a Web site where kids could text “iCarly,” get an iCarly ringtone, view cool gadgets (such as the Palm Centro or the AT&T Slate) and see a sneak peek of the iCarly movie “iGo to Japan,” which aired last November.

source:  Designing a Custom Fit.  Nancy Coltun Webster.  Ad Age.  May 4, 2009

Federal Gov’t (GSA) Refuses to Make Public Agreements with Facebook, MySpace, etc. Is data from individuals seeking gov’t information going to these sites?

Today we asked the GSA to make public the negotiated agreements (terms of service) it has made with social networking companies such as Facebook and MySpace (it has also made deals with Google’s YouTube, etc., see below).  The GSA has been negotiating with a number of new media companies so that federal agencies can provide information and services on such sites (GSA says it has been doing so to help answer “President Obama’s call to increase citizen participation in government”).  One central question we have is whether these private commercial providers are going to have access to citizen and other public data when we use these sites.  We also want to know if the Federal government will be provided information, such as web analytics, about citizen/public use of these services.  We have concerns about enhancing the ability of the government and private companies to gain access, and analyze, our information.  Here’s what the GSA press office emailed me back:

Thank you for your interest in the new media agreements.
At the request of the providers the agreements themselves will not be shared with the public.
However I can share some more details about what was negotiated. Hope this helps!

Terms of Service Agreements with Social Media Providers
Frequently Asked Questions

1.  Why is the government working on these Terms of Service (TOS)?
Over the past six months, a coalition of federal agencies (led by GSA’s Office of Citizen Services) has been working on Terms of Service agreements with a broad range of social media providers who offer free services to users. The objective is to resolve issues with the existing standard Terms of Service that are problematic to federal agencies (see list of issues below). Having these agreements means that, if an agency chooses to use various social media sites, they won’t have to start from scratch on negotiating a special TOS.

2. Which social media providers are you working with?
We’re negotiating tailored TOS with a broad range of providers. We’ve completed agreements with YouTube, Facebook, Myspace, Blist, Slideshare, AddThis, Flickr, and Blip.tv. We’re hoping to negotiate agreements with additional providers, including Yahoo Video, Vimeo, iTunes, and others.

Regarding Twitter, several agencies’ attorneys have advised that there are no issues in signing their standard Terms of Service; thus, we’re not negotiating any special TOS with them.

The government is working with a broad range of social media providers and is showing no favoritism. Nor do we expect any favoritism once agencies are able to sign up to one or many providers. We’ve chosen to start with these providers since they’re some of the most high-volume sites on the Web.

3. Will these agreements allow government agencies to use social media tools such as YouTube and Facebook?

Yes, having these pre-negotiated agreements that have been accepted by other federal agencies should make it easier for the government to use a wide range of social media tools. While we believe having these agreements will remove legal barriers to use these tools, you’ll still need to work with your agency attorneys before signing the agreements. Most importantly, you’ll need to think strategically how you’ll use these tools to accomplish your agency’s mission.

4.  Can any federal agency use these TOS?

Yes. But you need to work with your agency attorneys and any other key stakeholders to be sure your agency can agree to the legal provisions of each agreement. Because several agencies helped to negotiate these agreements, it’s expected and hoped that most other agencies will find the language acceptable.

If you’re at a sub-agency or bureau with a cabinet department (for example, CDC or FDA), you should work with contacts at the cabinet department-level (that is, HHS). This is important since, in most cases, a single agreement is being negotiated and signed for the entire department.

5. What about state or local agencies?

At this point, the agreements we’re working on only cover federal agencies. However, some of the providers are looking at negotiating special TOS for state agencies. We’ll post updated information as soon as it becomes available. If you’re a state agency and already have an agreement with a social media provider that other state agencies can use, please feel free to share.

6. Are the TOS the same for each provider?

No. Each agreement is different. Since these are free services, we lacked the leverage to impose a one-size-fits-all agreement, and instead worked to modify, in a consistent way, each company’s pre-existing TOS. Your agency will need to sign a separate agreement with each provider. However, we’ve attempted to negotiate agreements that are as similar as possible and achieve the same goals for each social media site, such as deleting material agencies cannot agree to (the indemnification clause, governance law, etc.) and inserting provisions that protect the culture and status of agencies (restricting advertising, avoiding the appearance of endorsement, etc.). See a fuller list of issues below.

7. Can agencies negotiate their own Terms of Service?

The goal behind this effort is to create a standard Terms of Service (for each provider) that can work for all federal agencies. So the preference is for agencies NOT to negotiate their own TOS. Understandably, in the absence of monetary incentive, the social media providers don’t want to negotiate different TOS with dozens (or hundreds) of different agencies, since that would be a costly effort. It’s also not efficient for the government to negotiate dozens of different agreements.
[In the particular case of YouTube, the arrangement calls for only ONE Terms of Service to be used by all federal agencies. Google, the parent company of YouTube, does not intend to negotiate separate agreements for individual agencies].

8. How can I get a copy of the agreements?

Because some of the providers prefer not to publish the tailored federal TOS on a public website, we won’t be posting them on WebContent.gov.

The issues and solutions we’ve collectively negotiated include:
•    Indemnification and limited liability:  in negotiating the various agreements, we’ve been seeking to remove the indemnification clause (because agency officials cannot agree to tie their agency to unlimited liability in violation of the Anti-Deficiency Act), and to ensure that liability is limited and covered by federal law.
•    Jurisdiction and choice of law:  the proposed agreements must be governed by the law of the United States and by the relevant state law only in the absence of other federal law.
•    FOIA:   the proposed agreements recognize that we adhere to the Freedom of Information Act.
•    Intellectual property:  the proposed agreements recognize that our content is in the public domain
•    Advertising:  providers have assured that they will eliminate or minimize advertising and that they have no intention of adding advertising that they do not currently display.  On YouTube, for example, they plan to remove the “Promoted Videos” module on playback pages.
•    Grandfather arrangements:  In the case of YouTube, previous “click through” agreements will be superseded by new agreements, making it possible to “cover” existing accounts, avoiding the need to close old accounts and rebuild content from scratch.
•    Free Service:  in every case so far, providers will not charge federal account holders for the use of their services.  These are not contracts; they are no-cost agreements.  While fee-based “premium” services may be available from the same provider, those are separate arrangements for which the agency should proceed under traditional “procurement” processes.