WEBVTT - NBCUniversal's Quest to Shake Up Audience Measurement 0:00:06.120 --> 0:00:08.800 There may be no bigger frustration in the media business 0:00:08.800 --> 0:00:11.879 than among TV programmers out to make sure they get 0:00:11.880 --> 0:00:15.520 a fair account of every eyeball they deliver to advertisers 0:00:15.520 --> 0:00:19.520 across screens. That's job one for my next guest, cavitaz Rani, 0:00:19.840 --> 0:00:23.840 executive vice president of Insights and Measurement in NBC Universal 0:00:24.480 --> 0:00:26.760 Accurate measurement is just the top of a list of 0:00:26.760 --> 0:00:32.400 reforms she's helping drive at the company. Tavita, thanks for 0:00:32.400 --> 0:00:34.360 coming in and talk to me. Thanks for having me. 0:00:34.400 --> 0:00:37.720 It's nice to be here. Cool. So you've got a 0:00:37.840 --> 0:00:41.640 pretty big sort of reform agenda when it comes to 0:00:41.840 --> 0:00:45.360 the current state of measurement. Put it out there for me, 0:00:46.240 --> 0:00:50.680 all right. So I think you know that prior to 0:00:50.800 --> 0:00:56.280 joining NBCU, I was a marketer and I was Comcast Yes, 0:00:56.480 --> 0:00:59.520 and I was responsible for a billion and a half 0:00:59.680 --> 0:01:05.440 of paid and owned media across six different brands, and 0:01:05.800 --> 0:01:10.720 every day we were focused on how is our investment 0:01:10.880 --> 0:01:15.880 helping us get subscribers to our business and so that 0:01:16.000 --> 0:01:18.800 is a passion point for me that was really important. 0:01:18.959 --> 0:01:24.320 But the industry was coming in and saying, oh, this worked, 0:01:24.600 --> 0:01:27.960 here's the ratings we delivered, here's you know, here's the 0:01:28.040 --> 0:01:33.320 eyeballs were delivering, here's the impressions, And I always went 0:01:33.400 --> 0:01:37.040 back to, but how did it help my business? So 0:01:37.480 --> 0:01:43.640 coming to NBCU transforming that dialogue internally as well as 0:01:43.680 --> 0:01:46.399 with our clients to say we have a research we 0:01:46.480 --> 0:01:50.520 have a measurement continuum. The first thing is, yes, we 0:01:50.600 --> 0:01:55.040 do need to count impressions because that is the starting point. 0:01:55.040 --> 0:01:58.720 It is the basis of a media plan. And in 0:01:58.880 --> 0:02:03.400 order to do that at because TV is no longer 0:02:03.640 --> 0:02:06.800 the way it used to be, we are content lives 0:02:06.880 --> 0:02:11.560 on television, the linear television screen, and it lives in digital. 0:02:12.000 --> 0:02:17.440 How do we bring that together? So counting unified impressions 0:02:17.480 --> 0:02:21.600 across digital and linear. That was job one, which was 0:02:21.680 --> 0:02:25.320 C flight, and that is you know, going to continue 0:02:25.360 --> 0:02:30.240 to evolve. We launched that with NBC Prime and so 0:02:30.480 --> 0:02:39.600 C Flight essentially is unifying impressions across unifying ad impressions 0:02:39.639 --> 0:02:46.839 that run on linear and digital. But it's not tethered 0:02:46.880 --> 0:02:51.480 to the linear broadcast of the show. So I may 0:02:51.480 --> 0:02:55.800 be watching This is Us on a Tuesday night live 0:02:56.000 --> 0:02:59.440 or on a DVR and I'm caught up on this season, 0:03:00.040 --> 0:03:07.080 but another person might be consuming season one, episode one 0:03:07.639 --> 0:03:13.360 on digital and if an AD impression ran runs during 0:03:13.400 --> 0:03:16.360 that week, we want to be able to count the 0:03:16.400 --> 0:03:19.639 ad impressions. The consumer is that this is us watcher, 0:03:20.360 --> 0:03:26.560 the environment is the same, why shouldn't they be counted together. 0:03:27.200 --> 0:03:32.680 So we did that with NBC Prime and Sports. Going 0:03:32.720 --> 0:03:36.080 into next year, we're going to expand it across the 0:03:36.200 --> 0:03:42.360 portfolio and continue to UM enhance the measurements. So we're 0:03:42.360 --> 0:03:45.600 looking at how do we look at set top box 0:03:45.720 --> 0:03:49.400 v o D, how do we look at coviewing We 0:03:49.480 --> 0:03:52.320 know people watch together, how do we count all of 0:03:52.360 --> 0:03:57.760 the impressions across all screens and all platforms, and partnering 0:03:57.840 --> 0:04:02.640 with many different UM research measurement partners, so Nielsen being 0:04:02.640 --> 0:04:05.080 a core of them, but there's others that we will 0:04:05.400 --> 0:04:09.320 be talking to to build that capability because we feel 0:04:09.320 --> 0:04:12.119 really strongly that we have to make sure that the 0:04:12.160 --> 0:04:17.279 starting point is as accurate as it can possibly be, 0:04:18.040 --> 0:04:20.800 and when that has developed, it will be open source, 0:04:20.960 --> 0:04:24.120 just like we did with C Flight. One point oh 0:04:24.320 --> 0:04:27.040 it was we met with all of our network partners, 0:04:27.080 --> 0:04:31.600 We met with our clients and agencies to go through 0:04:31.640 --> 0:04:36.200 the methodology in great detail, and we saw success from it. 0:04:36.320 --> 0:04:40.040 The marketers they for them, it was conceptually yes, why 0:04:40.120 --> 0:04:45.960 haven't been doing this? Um for agencies, it was conceptually 0:04:47.000 --> 0:04:49.960 brought it bought in, But you still have to figure out, Okay, 0:04:49.960 --> 0:04:52.520 how do you work now with the current systems that 0:04:52.920 --> 0:04:56.200 a second You r NBC Universal, You're just one of 0:04:56.360 --> 0:04:59.720 a number of programmers out there. Why is it even 0:05:00.120 --> 0:05:02.800 to you to to lead the way here? Shouldn't you 0:05:02.839 --> 0:05:07.200 be deferring to a third party like Nielsen? Well, Nielsen 0:05:07.320 --> 0:05:10.960 is a part of it, but I think as a 0:05:11.040 --> 0:05:15.279 leader in the industry, I think we just got tired 0:05:15.440 --> 0:05:19.279 of having everyone talk about this issue. We had to 0:05:19.320 --> 0:05:22.919 take the first step. Most of the conversations, even in 0:05:23.040 --> 0:05:27.000 my first year, was why you know why this is different, 0:05:27.120 --> 0:05:31.080 or why Nielsen has measured? Nielsen measures television this way 0:05:31.120 --> 0:05:34.320 and digital this way, And no one wanted to just 0:05:35.480 --> 0:05:39.680 take that first step. Yes, it may not be perfection, 0:05:40.200 --> 0:05:42.720 but someone had to take that first step. And I 0:05:42.760 --> 0:05:46.919 would say that the other networks are doing a form 0:05:47.000 --> 0:05:50.120 of it, and they're trying to do it. They may 0:05:50.120 --> 0:05:55.000 not call it sea flight necessarily, but everybody is trying 0:05:55.000 --> 0:05:58.560 to figure out how do you unify impressions within television 0:05:58.720 --> 0:06:03.880 and digital? But doesn't the unification strategy need to be unified. 0:06:03.960 --> 0:06:06.839 In other words, shouldn't just be standardize you all have 0:06:06.920 --> 0:06:09.599 the same exact approach. Yes, And I think that was 0:06:09.720 --> 0:06:14.640 part of Linda's State of the Industry, Linda Yaquarina's State 0:06:14.680 --> 0:06:19.640 of the Union last year during Thanksgiving, where she said 0:06:19.680 --> 0:06:24.320 the industry must come together, and so we bought all 0:06:24.400 --> 0:06:26.599 of the network partners. We bought all of the major 0:06:26.680 --> 0:06:30.080 networks and said this is the methodology. So I know 0:06:30.200 --> 0:06:35.960 that you know, decisions are happening internally. You know, obviously 0:06:36.040 --> 0:06:39.720 not everyone may call it see flight, but the concept 0:06:39.800 --> 0:06:45.280 of unification of impressions is something that all I think everybody, 0:06:45.320 --> 0:06:50.279 including marketers, are taking seriously because they're trying to understand, Okay, 0:06:50.279 --> 0:06:53.960 I'm buying all this media across all of these platforms, 0:06:54.640 --> 0:06:57.680 and I have this number from one place, another number 0:06:57.720 --> 0:07:01.159 from another place. No one's make it easier for me 0:07:01.240 --> 0:07:05.800 to understand what that is. Got it? So just one 0:07:05.880 --> 0:07:08.239 last question before we moved to yet the other things 0:07:08.279 --> 0:07:12.200 on your list of reforms. What is what are the 0:07:12.280 --> 0:07:17.360 obstacles that are preventing this from happening? Why in really 0:07:17.400 --> 0:07:21.720 isn't this already happening? Well, I think part of it 0:07:21.840 --> 0:07:26.240 is just legacy. You know, I don't know what else 0:07:26.280 --> 0:07:29.280 to call it. UM. I think it was something as 0:07:29.280 --> 0:07:33.560 a marketer we we were challenged with, is how can 0:07:33.600 --> 0:07:38.600 we get a unified number? And at the end of 0:07:38.640 --> 0:07:42.200 the day, as a marketer, we said, okay, we'll take 0:07:42.280 --> 0:07:46.920 what every media company gives us as their number, but 0:07:47.120 --> 0:07:50.800 we're going to add our own lens. And being at Comcast, 0:07:51.000 --> 0:07:54.680 you know, we had a lot of insight into our 0:07:54.840 --> 0:07:59.080 consumer into our consumer behavior, what people are watching. So 0:07:59.160 --> 0:08:01.800 that was a you know, that's the benefit we had. 0:08:02.200 --> 0:08:05.960 But we said, here's what we're investing, here's the media mix, 0:08:06.160 --> 0:08:11.440 and we applied very sophisticated models to understand what's the 0:08:11.520 --> 0:08:17.360 role of that mix in driving our results subscriber results. 0:08:17.360 --> 0:08:19.120 So we went, you know, we said, okay, what's the 0:08:19.160 --> 0:08:22.080 outcome that we're trying to accomplish. And that's you know, 0:08:22.160 --> 0:08:25.560 that's part of the rest of the continuum of measurement, 0:08:25.760 --> 0:08:29.000 counting to assigning credit, to measuring our O So let's 0:08:29.000 --> 0:08:31.520 go to assigning credit. What's the problem there and how 0:08:31.560 --> 0:08:35.120 are you personally affective? Well, I, you know, I think 0:08:35.120 --> 0:08:39.840 this is something that TV has to solve. UM from 0:08:39.920 --> 0:08:44.040 a campaign measurement standpoint. You know, for the digital players, 0:08:44.120 --> 0:08:48.040 it's really really easy in terms of you see an ad, 0:08:48.080 --> 0:08:50.880 you're right at you know, whether your device or your computer, 0:08:51.440 --> 0:08:53.320 and you can click and you can take an action 0:08:53.360 --> 0:08:57.319 and that action gets recorded and there you have it. 0:08:57.440 --> 0:09:02.840 For a medium like television, it doesn't work as seamlessly. 0:09:03.240 --> 0:09:07.280 And when you're engaged in a one hour content that's 0:09:07.760 --> 0:09:12.320 emotional and connecting with you, you may not be as 0:09:12.480 --> 0:09:15.320 likely so that consumer behavior is not as likely to 0:09:15.360 --> 0:09:19.760 pick up the phone or go to a site right away. Um, 0:09:19.880 --> 0:09:24.800 Whereas if you're watching a ten minute video of putting 0:09:24.800 --> 0:09:27.800 me how to put Makeup on and you see a 0:09:27.880 --> 0:09:30.880 makeup ad, you might be likely to click. So the 0:09:31.040 --> 0:09:36.800 experiences are different. And um, we have to figure out 0:09:36.800 --> 0:09:39.080 how do we how do we capture the true power 0:09:39.200 --> 0:09:42.880 of television And it has to start with that closed loop. 0:09:43.240 --> 0:09:46.600 What does that closed loop look like for television? But 0:09:46.679 --> 0:09:49.600 what we don't want to do is tie it just 0:09:49.840 --> 0:09:54.600 to the moment the ad ran because television works differently. 0:09:55.080 --> 0:09:58.640 We want to be able to see the short term 0:09:59.040 --> 0:10:03.760 impact as well as the long term impact of that 0:10:03.840 --> 0:10:07.400 ad exposure that runs on television. So what I'm trying 0:10:07.480 --> 0:10:11.640 to build across the organization is a full funnel measurement 0:10:11.760 --> 0:10:17.240 solution which consists of the stuff that we are doing 0:10:17.280 --> 0:10:20.679 in terms of measuring brand impacts. So whether you work 0:10:20.760 --> 0:10:25.240 with a Millward Brown or other partners are working directly 0:10:25.280 --> 0:10:29.600 with the advertisers to measure the brand impact in terms 0:10:29.600 --> 0:10:33.440 of consideration, purchase intent, and those metrics. But then to 0:10:33.559 --> 0:10:36.160 take it down a level deeper and say, okay, now 0:10:36.160 --> 0:10:41.040 how do I connect the dots of advertising running and 0:10:41.120 --> 0:10:45.920 moving it to the next step? Is that demand generation 0:10:46.080 --> 0:10:51.120 in terms of site visits or or store traffic or 0:10:51.640 --> 0:10:55.640 just searches, you know, what does that look like? And 0:10:55.679 --> 0:10:59.480 then at the very end is the sales or people 0:10:59.600 --> 0:11:04.520 actually really transacting and buying a product once they get there. 0:11:05.240 --> 0:11:10.360 So in order to do that, there are third party 0:11:10.400 --> 0:11:13.760 partnerships we can have where we can get third party 0:11:13.840 --> 0:11:16.880 sales data. You can do that for some categories, you 0:11:16.960 --> 0:11:20.280 can't do that for all categories. So this is where 0:11:20.360 --> 0:11:24.679 the partnership with the client and the advertiser becomes super 0:11:24.720 --> 0:11:28.640 critical to build that full funnel for that campaign, and 0:11:28.720 --> 0:11:31.640 that gives us a pulse of okay, how did the 0:11:31.720 --> 0:11:35.559 campaign perform? But then to get to the next step, 0:11:35.559 --> 0:11:37.680 which is the harder work that we're doing, and it 0:11:37.880 --> 0:11:41.480 is literally in a proof of concept and building stage, 0:11:41.800 --> 0:11:47.480 is if an advertiser is spending ten million dollars with us, 0:11:47.520 --> 0:11:51.800 and they've been doing that for several years, how do 0:11:51.880 --> 0:11:56.400 we demonstrate that that that investment is working for them 0:11:56.440 --> 0:12:00.880 in terms of their business outcomes as well as give 0:12:01.000 --> 0:12:05.800 them insight into how it could work better? Are they 0:12:05.840 --> 0:12:09.360 investing in the right areas of the platform? And can 0:12:09.440 --> 0:12:13.520 we can we start to shift to a different conversation 0:12:13.600 --> 0:12:17.800 and saying we're not going to We believe in our 0:12:17.880 --> 0:12:22.079 models so strongly and we're building enough confidence and predictive 0:12:22.080 --> 0:12:25.560 power on that in those models that we're actually willing 0:12:25.600 --> 0:12:30.800 to transact on outcomes versus age, gender, And do marketers 0:12:31.400 --> 0:12:35.080 have a say in your approach? Here? Are you sort 0:12:35.120 --> 0:12:37.800 of opening the tent to them to get their input 0:12:37.840 --> 0:12:40.120 as to I mean, because they're ultimately the people you're 0:12:40.120 --> 0:12:44.040 trying to please. Correct. So for the proof of concept, 0:12:44.320 --> 0:12:49.079 we're building it and we're you know, my goal is 0:12:49.160 --> 0:12:53.679 to be completely transparent around that because I think you know, 0:12:53.720 --> 0:12:55.920 as a marketer, that was my pet peeve is I 0:12:55.960 --> 0:12:58.640 don't want a black box if you're doing analytics about 0:12:58.640 --> 0:13:01.000 my business. I want to understand how you're doing it 0:13:01.080 --> 0:13:03.560 to make sure you have the right context, so the 0:13:03.679 --> 0:13:06.400 same I I think our approach is going to be 0:13:06.520 --> 0:13:08.760 the same. And at the end of the day, we're 0:13:08.760 --> 0:13:11.520 gonna need them to partner with us on providing their 0:13:11.559 --> 0:13:15.920 business outcomes. And what are those business outcomes? Are those sales? 0:13:16.160 --> 0:13:19.360 Are those brand health? You know, help define what that 0:13:19.520 --> 0:13:22.880 is so that when we build models that are going 0:13:22.920 --> 0:13:26.959 to have that predictive power, we're measuring the right things 0:13:27.120 --> 0:13:31.040 and it's going to vary advertiser by advertisers, So you know, 0:13:31.080 --> 0:13:35.720 the solution that we're looking to build UM, we're talking 0:13:35.760 --> 0:13:38.840 about how can that be scaled because we don't want 0:13:38.840 --> 0:13:42.600 to apply what works for one advertiser in the AUTO 0:13:42.640 --> 0:13:49.920 category to all advertisers and multiple categories, because that's that's 0:13:49.960 --> 0:13:56.679 not a UM sustainable UM and a accurate view of 0:13:57.080 --> 0:14:00.840 you know, let's say the CpG category. So and different 0:14:00.880 --> 0:14:04.679 factors affect those businesses. So in auto you might see 0:14:05.280 --> 0:14:09.760 gas prices affecting sales. In CpG, that's not as much 0:14:09.760 --> 0:14:12.160 of a factor. So we want to make sure that 0:14:12.200 --> 0:14:14.679 we build it in such a way that it is 0:14:14.920 --> 0:14:22.280 relevant to the advertiser. This all sounds horrifyingly complex and nuanced, 0:14:22.400 --> 0:14:25.720 and frankly has me asking like, are you almost chasing 0:14:25.720 --> 0:14:29.200 some sort of brass ring that can't be reached? The mirage? 0:14:29.280 --> 0:14:32.000 In other words, are you're trying to give marketers everything 0:14:32.040 --> 0:14:34.440 they could possibly dream of wanting. Maybe there's a reason 0:14:34.480 --> 0:14:38.240 they don't have it it's impossible to get. Yeah, well 0:14:38.360 --> 0:14:40.720 you know it is. I will say it hasn't been 0:14:40.760 --> 0:14:44.440 an easy task, you know, doing you know, at at 0:14:44.720 --> 0:14:49.480 Comcast as a marketer, I had all of my data 0:14:50.000 --> 0:14:52.320 in front of me. So whether that was my sales 0:14:52.400 --> 0:14:55.080 data or how much I spent in every single tactic, 0:14:56.240 --> 0:15:01.080 all of that was available to us. On the NBC side, 0:15:01.320 --> 0:15:05.480 we don't have everything we but we do know what 0:15:05.520 --> 0:15:09.880 we have across our portfolio, what an advertiser spends across 0:15:09.920 --> 0:15:14.840 our portfolio. So that is the starting point, um most 0:15:15.080 --> 0:15:21.440 you know, and I've I've been doing MMM models for 0:15:21.520 --> 0:15:23.640 a long time, and I want to be clear, this 0:15:23.720 --> 0:15:29.840 is not that because nothing media mixed modeling media mixed models. 0:15:31.200 --> 0:15:34.680 A lot of advertisers have their own what I call 0:15:34.840 --> 0:15:39.360 method to madness of allocating spend two different tactics and 0:15:39.400 --> 0:15:44.080 then measuring the effectiveness of those tactics. UM. Some use MMM, 0:15:44.280 --> 0:15:47.720 some use just a Okay, last year, I spend X. 0:15:47.800 --> 0:15:50.200 This year, I'm going to spend X plus three percent 0:15:50.960 --> 0:15:54.000 UM and you know everyone has that. So it's not 0:15:54.120 --> 0:15:57.120 meant to replace that, but it is meant to help 0:15:57.240 --> 0:16:01.160 provide more insight into those UM and a lot of 0:16:01.360 --> 0:16:06.680 MMM medium mixed models don't UM go down to a 0:16:06.840 --> 0:16:11.680 very tactical level like to NBC. They may go down 0:16:11.720 --> 0:16:15.400 to a television level and a digital level, but not 0:16:15.760 --> 0:16:19.840 television and then NBC, ABC, CBS and so on and 0:16:19.880 --> 0:16:25.840 so forth. So we're trying to create value and UM. 0:16:25.960 --> 0:16:29.440 Ultimately the proof of this is going to come from 0:16:29.480 --> 0:16:33.320 the advertisers that, Okay, if they're seeing results within their 0:16:33.360 --> 0:16:38.120 analytics in a certain way, this should be close to it, right, 0:16:38.160 --> 0:16:39.880 And that's why they're They're going to be a key 0:16:39.960 --> 0:16:44.720 part of this. What about the advertising experience in and 0:16:44.800 --> 0:16:48.600 of itself? You know, I know NBC for instances experimented 0:16:48.640 --> 0:16:52.520 with these prime pods making a little more selective. I mean, 0:16:52.560 --> 0:16:54.800 are we going to see much more evolution on that front? 0:16:54.840 --> 0:16:57.560 How much is needed? Yes? UM, So I think that's 0:16:57.560 --> 0:17:03.400 also an industry industry problem, right, clutter exists. I mean, 0:17:03.400 --> 0:17:06.359 if you look at the digital ecosystem, there's a lot 0:17:06.680 --> 0:17:12.240 of clutter um with with what our attempt with prime 0:17:12.320 --> 0:17:16.760 pods was to really create an environment that was good 0:17:16.760 --> 0:17:20.240 for consumers right in a way that they would stay 0:17:20.240 --> 0:17:23.560 engaged with the content longer. And we're seeing that, right. 0:17:23.600 --> 0:17:27.679 It's early, it's about it's been about six weeks of 0:17:27.760 --> 0:17:31.480 data that we're looking at, but we're seeing promising results 0:17:31.560 --> 0:17:37.040 from that. But because a consumer is more engaged, then 0:17:37.160 --> 0:17:41.879 an add that runs within that is going to perform better. 0:17:42.320 --> 0:17:45.600 And that's the hypothesis, right, that's the hypothesis, and so 0:17:45.680 --> 0:17:51.080 far we're seeing positive results in terms of how ads 0:17:51.080 --> 0:17:55.760 are performing. What we want to continue to do is 0:17:56.119 --> 0:18:01.000 understand what is the role of the creative of an 0:18:01.040 --> 0:18:05.520 advertisers creative within that prime pod. If it is just 0:18:05.760 --> 0:18:09.119 the same old creative that they've been using for a 0:18:09.200 --> 0:18:13.520 year or so, does that have an impact on performance? 0:18:13.600 --> 0:18:18.320 And if it is a highly um emotional ad in 0:18:18.359 --> 0:18:23.239 a non emotional show, what impact does that have. So 0:18:23.280 --> 0:18:25.919 we're really trying to elevate the conversation to be not 0:18:26.080 --> 0:18:29.080 just about the prime pods itself, but also what's the 0:18:29.160 --> 0:18:34.240 advertiser message that runs within the prime pod. Um. And 0:18:34.280 --> 0:18:36.960 so we're looking at, Okay, what shows perform better? Is 0:18:37.000 --> 0:18:38.439 it better to have it in the front of the 0:18:38.480 --> 0:18:41.199 show at the back of the show? Um? And so 0:18:41.240 --> 0:18:45.399 we're going through just digging into the deep. The data 0:18:45.440 --> 0:18:48.280 in six weeks is not enough to you know, I say, 0:18:48.320 --> 0:18:51.560 to make a trend. Um. But yeah, we are definitely 0:18:51.600 --> 0:18:56.280 exploring on ways to just improve the consumer experience. I mean, 0:18:56.320 --> 0:18:59.680 we have a great experience on our FVP, but VP 0:18:59.880 --> 0:19:03.080 is a full episode player which is on our digital 0:19:03.280 --> 0:19:07.840 Sorry all of the internal terms, um, but you know 0:19:08.400 --> 0:19:13.199 it's a better ad experience than television. But um. But 0:19:13.280 --> 0:19:17.600 when you think about the entire ecosystem of media and fragmentation, 0:19:18.160 --> 0:19:21.439 there is clutter and it's getting harder and harder for 0:19:21.520 --> 0:19:25.560 advertisers to really stand out. And so they're trying to 0:19:25.600 --> 0:19:29.560 invest in how do you connect on a more relevant basis, 0:19:30.240 --> 0:19:36.480 how do you, um create experiences that go beyond you know, 0:19:36.520 --> 0:19:39.560 a thirty second spot. So we're trying to just test 0:19:39.600 --> 0:19:43.400 out and expand some of those capabilities. The flip side 0:19:43.440 --> 0:19:46.640 of this is wondering about is for advertisers just the 0:19:46.720 --> 0:19:51.159 process of buying the ads, placing the ads. I assume 0:19:51.240 --> 0:19:54.800 there's plenty of innovation to be done. There plenty of innovation, 0:19:54.880 --> 0:19:57.960 but I think, you know, the if you if you 0:19:58.119 --> 0:20:03.359 build that continuum of measurement in the right way, a 0:20:03.400 --> 0:20:07.200 lot of that could happen ahead of time in terms 0:20:07.280 --> 0:20:13.040 of planning the most optimal media by across our portfolio. 0:20:14.000 --> 0:20:17.159 And then it is a matter of just sitting down 0:20:17.200 --> 0:20:20.639 with advertisers and yes, there's a little bit of you know, 0:20:20.720 --> 0:20:24.280 the work that advertisers have to do to retool how 0:20:24.320 --> 0:20:27.760 they think about creative and there's a lot of work 0:20:27.800 --> 0:20:29.800 that we have to do on our end to make 0:20:29.840 --> 0:20:35.560 sure that we have the right data capabilities, the AI 0:20:35.920 --> 0:20:39.600 to help with those well with those processes and making 0:20:39.640 --> 0:20:44.800 them making them easier. So there's a lot of big plans, 0:20:44.840 --> 0:20:47.959 a lot of big changes. I'm just curious how concrete 0:20:48.000 --> 0:20:49.760 they are. In other words, do you have some sort 0:20:49.760 --> 0:20:52.280 of roadmap of here's what the next ten years of 0:20:52.400 --> 0:21:01.400 change looks like? I do in my head almost soon enough. 0:21:02.320 --> 0:21:06.320 But you know, I think we'll be coming out with 0:21:06.359 --> 0:21:09.600 more of that in the next next few months. I mean, 0:21:09.640 --> 0:21:12.800 I think part of the problem we're sorry the opportunity, 0:21:13.440 --> 0:21:18.400 the challenge is that you're trying to reform something that 0:21:19.119 --> 0:21:22.639 from a broad business perspective is still in such a 0:21:22.680 --> 0:21:27.359 state of flux. You're it's like changing the tires while 0:21:27.400 --> 0:21:31.000 the car is being modeled beyond running. It's like like 0:21:31.040 --> 0:21:36.000 the pit crew at NASCAR. Yes, yes, so, and apologies 0:21:36.040 --> 0:21:41.840 if you guys don't have rights to Nascar. But has 0:21:41.880 --> 0:21:44.760 that been something that has figured into the challenge here 0:21:44.800 --> 0:21:47.160 where it's like you think you've got something figured out, 0:21:47.200 --> 0:21:49.959 it's like, oh wait, that's that already just changed? Yeah? Um, 0:21:50.240 --> 0:21:54.119 you know that's the innovator's dilemma, right, you have to 0:21:54.240 --> 0:21:59.239 keep the current machine running because you we all have 0:21:59.400 --> 0:22:03.520 revenue to targets to hit. But how do we continue 0:22:03.640 --> 0:22:09.439 to focus on innovation and pushing that agenda? Um, I 0:22:09.480 --> 0:22:12.560 think we have no choice but to push that agenda 0:22:12.640 --> 0:22:16.960 because marketers are demanding so much more from us in 0:22:17.080 --> 0:22:20.600 terms of you know, yes, we know you have great shows, 0:22:20.640 --> 0:22:24.359 but what is it doing to deliver on results for me? 0:22:24.640 --> 0:22:27.840 So well? Have we have to do it? We just 0:22:28.000 --> 0:22:30.360 I think as an industry, we just have to do it. 0:22:30.520 --> 0:22:33.760 And we're bringing agencies along in that process because I 0:22:33.840 --> 0:22:40.040 think agencies are also under the same pressure that UM 0:22:40.160 --> 0:22:44.600 that marketers are under to drive impact, and so we 0:22:44.720 --> 0:22:49.200 keep you know, the internal mantra is around. We want 0:22:49.200 --> 0:22:55.760 to shift from counting impressions to delivering impact, and so 0:22:55.840 --> 0:22:58.359 we just keep saying that. When there's a roadblock in 0:22:58.680 --> 0:23:03.240 a measurement solution or technology, or we can't get resources, 0:23:03.280 --> 0:23:05.560 we just keep saying, this is our this is our vision. 0:23:05.880 --> 0:23:08.640 We've got to get there. Well, it sounds like you've 0:23:08.680 --> 0:23:12.920 got a very busy ahead of you. We'll have to 0:23:13.040 --> 0:23:15.280 check back in at the end of the year then, 0:23:15.359 --> 0:23:18.080 and and and see how far you've come. Thanks for you, 0:23:18.400 --> 0:23:22.639 Thank you for having me. It was really fun. This 0:23:22.720 --> 0:23:26.040 has been another episode of Strictly Business. Tune in next 0:23:26.040 --> 0:23:29.800 week for another helping a scintillating conversation with media movers 0:23:29.800 --> 0:23:32.439 and shakers, and please make sure you subscribe to the 0:23:32.480 --> 0:23:36.560 podcast to hear future episodes. Also leave a review in 0:23:36.640 --> 0:23:38.680 Apple Podcast let us know how we're doing.