\u2018May you live in interesting times\u2019 is often quoted as an ancient Chinese curse. Google\u2019s AI facility questions that, claiming it is more likely British, and not a curse. Whatever, the word \u2018interesting\u2019 is in some interpretations seen as suggesting a time not only of instability but of creativity and growth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We are at an \u2018interesting\u2019 moment in the story of advertising supported media channels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Back in simpler times there existed a virtuous circle. Publishers, editors, broadcasters created stories of interest and appeal to an audience. Whether it was drama, opinion, documentaries, news, entertainment, sport the aim was to attract and engage an audience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Advertisers wanted to reach that audience and so they advertised within the editorial content. The more engaging the content, the more attention was paid to both it and the ads within it. The more attention, the more successful the ads.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The money generated from the advertising funded more of the same; hence the virtuous circle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There was editorial, and there was advertising. The line between them was clear and both sides knew where it was. An advertiser may choose not to spend with a particular channel because of a disagreement over editorial content, but it was rare for advertisers to try to pressure editors to change tack; and when they did in by far the majority of cases it didn\u2019t work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What did work was advertiser pressure on structures. To make up an entirely hypothetical case if the TV companies suddenly decided not to publish audience research data, and not to release the data for analysis then advertisers would complain, loudly. The TV companies would most likely reconsider their decision in the light of advertiser pressure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There were rules, and regulations. They kept the media safe for audiences and advertisers, they stopped the excesses, they made sure the channels worked for all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Whilst the simpler times have gone for ever, it is no great exaggeration to say that advertising still plays an important role in our cultural life via the channels that it funds or part-funds. Not only are we entertained and informed by TV, radio, podcasts and print, however and wherever delivered, but also bus shelters are built, and city centres are brightened.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Today, 50% of UK ad funds goes to the giant US platforms. That figure will increase as about 70% of incremental spending finishes up in the same place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Marketing budgets are finite. Double the availability of media and you don\u2019t double the money available to fund them. This simple fact often catches start-ups by surprise. Many a prospectus claims: \u2018we will be funded by advertising\u2019 without explaining how and why. To get money you have to take it from someone else.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Spend a $ with META and you have a $ less to spend with Channel4.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As spend migrates to the US platforms our homegrown channels suffer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nobody expects advertisers to act philanthropically but it makes sense to stop for a moment and consider the consequences of spend decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There are many advertisers who state they \u2018wish to do good\u2019 in one shape or form; who have corporate guidelines around the non-acceptability of certain ingredients, and rules around how their raw materials are harvested \/ farmed \/ processed \/ handled \/ shipped.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There are debates around how we treat people within the supply chain, how we ensure a diverse and inclusive workforce, how we pay those working for us.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And quite right too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What these advertisers say in ads and publicity is important and is subject not only to a great deal of internal scrutiny but also to various regulations designed both to inform the public and also protect them from misinformation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Shouldn\u2019t these same principles apply to where the ads and publicity material appears?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yet advertisers regularly express shock and disappointment when some of their materials end up in deeply inappropriate places. Many pearls are clutched, public comments expressing surprise and ignorance are made and no doubt behind the scenes a lot of shouting goes on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And then life continues much as before.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On June 11th<\/sup>, Advertising: Who Cares? is hosting an event called Who Cares Wins at Prospect\u2019s offices in Central London to discuss two interlinked topics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The threat to content created and distributed locally on news-sites, TV channels and the rest as ad funds migrate to the platforms, and the broad implications for all of us. And the concerns over online safety \u2013 first and foremost to consumers, and then to advertisers \u2013 and what sort of legislation and regulation is appropriate for how we consume media today.<\/p>\n\n\n\n