All of which makes the old-guard advertising industry a wee bit tetchy. "They take every cliché of every category and put stock photography on them," says Scott Kaplan, a creative director at BBDO, after reviewing some of Spot Runner's ads. "The ads aren't actually engaging," says Jonathan Schoenberg, creative director of TDA Advertising in Boulder, Colorado, who insists he loves the idea of Spot Runner. And whatever they think about the ads themselves, don't even get ad people started on the algorithm driving the placement process. Judging by their reactions, you'd think that silly little piece of code represented a threat to their very existence: "This is the kind of idea likely to appeal to a fairly small, unsophisticated business," says Bennett Griffin of Griffin Media Research, which creates custom reports to help TV ad-sales teams. "It looks very official, but you'll get sounder advice talking to a rep from your local cable company."
"I'm a million times smarter than that computer!" insists one media buyer. "You can't replace gut instinct. That comes from experience."
Then there's Andrea Gallo, VP, regional spot, Carat Americas: "This doesn't scare me in the least," she insists after reviewing Spot Runner's media-buying engine. "This excludes everything that a major advertiser looks for in a schedule. I'd put a big neon sign on Spot Runner saying, buyer beware." Besides, she adds: "I'm a million times smarter than that… that--computer. You can't replace gut instinct. That comes from experience."
Mmmhmm. Tell that to the people fighting Google's robotic, unsophisticated ad machinery. Cheap, targeted TV ads do seem rather sensible, actually, especially in an age that doesn't necessarily need its ads wrapped in high-toned Saatchi-grade packaging. What's more, Grouf and Waxman's algorithms (which use techniques similar to the ones they pioneered at Firefly) actually get smarter: When thousands of Cendant real estate agents begin using the system to calculate an ad schedule, their own successes and failures will be factored in, making them more-effective media buyers. Knowledge, in other words, isn't trapped in the individual. Soulless? Sure. But it does have a certain ring of inevitability to it. Greg Sterling, an analyst at the boutique research firm Kelsey Group, sees the future thusly: "Eventually, everything will be run by a dashboard on the Internet."
In what amounts to a vote of confidence for Spot Runner, Google, which has already begun expanding into print and radio advertising, is also likely to be offering a TV ad service by the time you read this. Like Spot Runner, Google aims to force order on an ad market fractured into thousands of micromarkets. When Google does enter the market, its search engine will give it a tremendous advantage in finally bringing accountability to the business. For example, Patrick Keane, who heads Google's advertising sales strategy, tells a story about seeing a new detergent's name picked up as a search term after P&G ran a series of TV spots. "It's hard to get the loop of the performance of an ad," admits Keane, "but we can get instant feedback." Google could provide an advertiser with data about when its TV ads aired coupled with any resulting Web activity, transforming TV into a lead generator that can be quantified and tracked.
It will be hard for Spot Runner to compete on that scale; indeed, it may have to be part of a larger entity to reach its full potential. "I don't see Spot Runner as a stand-alone company for more than two years," says Sterling. But that doesn't mean it doesn't have a big future. Some observers wonder whether the obscure spot-advertising market isn't just a Trojan horse into a larger opportunity. "Spot Runner and Google are addressing existing market needs now, but they want to be in place to make the transition one day to be the advertising platform to sell ads for mobile TV, TV on the Web, and IPTV," says Allen Weiner, a Gartner analyst. Waxman, while stressing Spot Runner's focus on cable, says, "Ideally, we'll be medium agnostic. As people get more digital, there will be more fragmenting of the audience and therefore more need for a tool like ours."
In other words, Weiner's right. Beats aggregating manicurists.
David Lidsky (dlidsky@fastcompany.com) is Fast Company's senior editor.
Have something to say about this story? Email the editor.
Recent Comments | 9 Total
August 20, 2009 at 5:06am by Jesica Semon
I tend to see things going this way as well. I'm certain this won't stop at drug use and party behavior (which is actually a ridiculous qualifier as some of the best employees I've seen partied hard on the weekends). What happens when you're denied a job because of some political or religious views you espouse on blog that the HR person doesn't agree with? You know, the kind of information they aren't allowed to ask you in an interview setting. If it can't be asked in an interview they shouldn't be allowed to go looking for that info online. But, I guess you can always make your profiles private so only people you want to see them can.
September 25, 2009 at 1:39pm by Christopher Jeschke
Very well written, i enjoyed reading this post
--
Photo Blog
October 25, 2009 at 2:22pm by Le Binh
Marie Curie say: Thank a lot, it is so usefull for me, keep it going on