Metrics-22

There is a wonderful irony in the current debate about marketing metrics.  For a long time the marketing and media world has used measurement techniques which are far from precise.  However, the industry knew they weren't definitive and established workarounds, whilst calling for greater accuracy.  Now networked media has arrived in full effect and we can measure everything to the nth degree.  But no one can agree on anything - because there is too much detailed data!  And thus the commercial growth of networked media is restricted because people are sticking to the traditional media metrics which aren't as confusing because everyone knows they are inaccurate!  Solving the problem may take a shift in the way we view the market because impressions and page views make less and less sense.  Google changed the game when they moved to CPCs because everyone agrees that paying for the right type of traffic, ie people who have demonstrated an intention, is a good idea.  And now Microsoft and Yahoo are trying to change the rules again to behavioural targeting where by people's clickstreams are constantly analysed to understand what they might be in the market for.  But for now, the old system doesn't work and the new one is too good!

Comments

[casaflora]

I agree, today's marketing metrics can be quite the "catch 22." James Brausch has a very interesting article (http://www.jamesbrausch.com/?p=845) about how we tend to think of "traffic" in the abstract (like metrics) instead of thinking of "traffic" as actual people. Worth a read.