Recently Media Monitors launched a product enhancement to the quantitative metrics we provide to clients. We invest significantly in audited audience data for press and broadcast media and know that clients value this data. We also needed to provide that same quality of data for internet content. Hence we partnered with comScore to incorporate internet audience data into our products.
We also provide advertising space rates (ASR) to those clients that require this metric. This is a calculation that indicates the cost an organisation would incur to purchase an advertisement in a specific media outlet for a particular position, expressed as currency. We have provided ASR metrics for press and broadcast for many years. What was new was providing ASR calculations metrics for internet content.
Following the launch there has been some robust debate on various sites, particularly Mumbrella, on the validity or otherwise of our ASR metrics.
I think it is important to absolutely reiterate Media Monitors’ position. We do not, nor have we ever endorsed advertising value equivalents as a measure of the value of public relations.
How we position ASRs are as a basic quantitative output metric, which some clients can use to benchmark coverage, as they can also do with volumes of coverage, press circulations or broadcast and internet audience data. There is strong client demand for this data.
The distinction may seem like semantics, but we at Media Monitors take utmost pains to ensure that we do not portray ASRs as representing public relations value, impact, influence, engagement or particularly return on investment. ASRs are just a calculation of media space and cost.
I genuinely welcome this debate, because I and Media Monitors would love to see media measurement progress far beyond AVE/ASR. We have over 60 staff providing high level qualitative analysis services to clients across the Asia-Pacific region and have won a number of AMEC Communication Effectiveness Awards for the quality of our media analysis. We take pride in and enjoy offering insightful analysis of media coverage, to assist clients with the evaluation and formation of strategy.
We constantly strive to inform communication professionals on the value of in depth qualitative analysis and have internally commissioned a number of case studies to showcase this, plus holding client events to explain the value of detailed media analysis.
Some clients however do not require, or see the value in business outcome related research, and prefer output based data and metrics such as ASRs. The reality is they expect us to provide those metrics.
Recently I was in Barcelona for the Second European Summit on Measurement, organised by the international Association for the Measurement and Evaluation of Communication (AMEC). Media Monitors is a member of AMEC, and I’m proud to say that I’m also a Board Member. AMEC’s mission is to improve the standards, quality and position of media measurement as an industry.
A key part of the Summit was determining the “Barcelona Declaration of Research Principles” to achieve a global standard for the measurement of communication. This is hugely positive as it established the key elements and direction for the media measurement industry.
Barcelona Principle 3 was “AVEs do not measure the value of Public Relations and do not inform future activity”. The addendum to this was that AVEs (or ASRs) measure the cost of media space, and no more.
As a delegate to the Summit I absolutely agree with that principle, and I do not believe that Media Monitors undermines that by providing ASRs. We do not claim they are measuring value, only cost.
What would be great is if we can all, and I’m committed to this, embrace the other principles, namely:
- Goal setting and measurement are fundamental aspects of any PR programmes.
- Media measurement requires quantity and quality – cuttings in themselves are not enough.
- Social media can and should be measured.
- Measuring outcomes is preferred to measuring media results.
- Business results can and should be measured where possible.
- Transparency and Replicability are paramount to sound measurement.
There is clearly a range of opinion on this issue and as a member of the communications community, we would like to help facilitate further discussion. We are hosting a panel discussion on, July 22nd, with more information and rsvp available here.
July 13: Since posting, AMEC has release their own statement regarding this issue.
