Media's new Value Exchange

Well considering it is the tile of my blog I thought it would be a good place to start my posts.

This was a theory I stumbled upon while working on presentation about Mobile media. I was struck by the fact that although mobile phones are probably the pervasive media vehicle in the world, numbering over 6billion (depending on which figures you use) or 1 for every 2 people on earth, there is such limited take up in terms of marketing. And most of this limited take up is due to consumer hostility. Yes mobile service providers attempting to create walled gardens of vertical integration and technology problems have also hampered mobile take-up BUT I believe consumer’s resentment is at the very heart of the matter.

Looking at the results of internal research, consumers were overwhelming against having advertising messages on their mobile phones. But this attitude took a complete about face when the messages ticked either all, or some of the following boxes;
· It was very relevant to them personally
· The advertising subsidised features or content for the consumer, i.e You get $20 free credit/ month, in exchange I get to serve ads from time to time.

It occurred to me that this was really about “buying time” with the consumer. If marketers where willing to give something of value to consumers then consumers would give the marketers some of their time in exchange.

Before, if you put your message out there, consumers would, at the very least acknowledge it. This is no longer the case. The digitisation of media gives consumers even more ability to choose and even switch off of actively avoid marketers messages. Now, consumers must be convinced to spend “time” with brands, or view marketing messages.

In the era of exchange...

Consumers have a finite and fragmented amount of “time” (meaning interest, actual time, bandwidth etc). To gain some “time” marketers must give consumers something of “value” and in exchange consumers give marketers “time” to share messages. One of the most important things to note, is that not all media channels are created equal... Not all media channels require the same level “value” to be exchanged for the consumers “time”.

The above diagram is a simple explanation how the value needed to be exchanged varies by media vehicle. The smaller the screen size or time spent with the screen, the larger the value needed to be exchange. Hence TV with it's large screen and lean back type media consumption requires a relatively small amount of value, whereas mobile with it's tiny screen & lean forward mentality requires more value. Online would fall somewhere in between the two.

The size of the screen is really a bit of an oversimplification. But it is useful as it relates to the way the screens are consumed. TV (large screen) is usually a lean back experience, often shared with friends of family where media messages are not exactly welcomed but are not as intrusive as they take up proportionally less of our time spent with media channel.

Compare this to mobile which has a much smaller screen, and when we use it as a channel for accessing media it is in small snack sized portions. Advertising in this space without value exchange is very poorly received!

So how does value exchange work?

Take ANZ's approach to mobile advertising. Building an application for iPhones so that you have access to your online banking account. In exchange for this value, ANZ gets a prime piece of advertising real estate on your mobile- that most personal of devices. Value of the branding in media terms, I'm sure most sales reps would describe this as a money can't buy opportunity!