ps- Hoping this is a time in history where adults are making the choice to be Child-free as they are ditching the gulit of patriarchy and in-laws.
No child should be brought into the world out of guilt... either for a government, or for an elder generation to gloat/show photos.  
If government and "brands" so worried that 8 billion people is not enough, maybe they should campaign for single men to adopt children, creating a new family subset.

So you are saying it's the wealthiest adults that are having the kids?
"These parents have the means and desire to provide their kids “nothing but the best,”

And NOT? the most frequent Target and Walmart shoppers (that are heving the volume of kids)?

I'm not convinced that the luxury outlay for kids and the thought (want good stuff for my kids) equate to high volume for LUX brands.  The over simplification seems far to easy. If that easy, there would be no marketing issue at all.

AFAIK, Threads has no counterpart to the very effective "Community Notes" on X. Instead we learn Meta "hasn't shared any further details about ... which organizations make up Meta's fact-checking partners." And therein lies the problem.

Using an average quarter hour net reach number across any and all media is the one KPI to rule them all if we want to be completely honest and comparing apples to apples.   It's really that simple.    

Looking at that table again, I find it difficult to accept an average unaided recall level of 38% for "TV" when past  studies conducted by phone immediately after a break have found that only 1-2% of the "audience can name a last advertised brand. And that was over 20 years ago. Most commercial research testing companies will tell you that very few viewers can name what brand was advertised, let alone replay the message's main selling point shortly after exposure without prompting---so one is left to ask what methodology was used in this study?

Wayne, you are going to find that very few national TV  branding advertisers will buy into the notion that a 6-second pre-roll commercial is as effective as a 15-second commercial in generating sales lifts---especially if that 15-second commercial is in an in-show break in a TV sitcom, drama, football game,  etc. As for the claim that 70% of "advertisers" already "sell" products on social media I wonder what that's based on and how the term "advertiser" was defined---national branding, local, search, direct response, etc???

Wayne, even though "legacy TV"---broadcast and cable----is slowly declining in total viewing time while streaming is slowly inching upward, the Nielsen numbers, when analyzed as they might apply to national advertising still tell a very good linear TV story for advertisers---especially those with mass usage products and services. As it happens,we are slicing and dicing the stats and filling in missing breakdowns with reasonable estimates, including the proportion of viewing time that is ad-supported, the proportion that is devoted to national content and the amount of ad clutter per hour on each service. When you do that and confine yourself only to ad viewing time that a national advertiser might consider, streaming generates about a fifth of the available GRPs, not 38% as some believe based on the overal streaming share of viewing. This  exclusive report will be avaiable to our MDI Direct subscribers shortly.

Of course there are variations by age groups and the streaming percentage rises  considerably for advertisers who are only targeting 18-34s---except very few advertisers derive 100% of their sales from this group and zero from adults aged 35+. So the best mix for now, in most cases, is probably linear TV first, with an overlay of streaming, not the other way around.

With this in mind, our subscribers will, no doubt, find our breakdown of the percentage of GRPs attained by the five top "legacy TV" programmers combined via linear TV and streaming of particular interest. Stay tuned, folks.

I have no interest in watching the debate I'd rather watch paint dry than watch the debate I'll just get the hilights from local news, on News Nation, Fox News, maybe BBC News etc.

With due respect to dentsu's efforts, that video didn't strike me as compelling... not
much "sizzle" there.

Dave, if there were two separate upfronts as I have proposed---one for corporate, CPM-driven, eyeball tonnage buyers and the other for individual brands with higher CPMs and attempts at better targeting, better environments, etc. then what you are describing as the new wrinkles makes sense---at least for the brand by brand upfront. Unfortunately, it's not going down that way. As before, a very high percentage of the buys are going to be "must buys"---it's already decided that those dollars will go into sports, news, specials and prime time entertainment shows on the broadcast TV networks As for the rest, they will still be mostly 18-49/25/54  GRP buys with prearrainged dispositions by network type, platform type, daypart and in some cases by program genre. Most of the upfront hoopla is, as in past upfronts,  fluff --- light entertainment for the time buyers and client media execs-- and it's the "fun" part of the upfront. Soon the hard part begins and most of it will be done the same old way---- I'm sorry to say.

Interesting--but perplexing, Tony.

If appears that the ARF is melding together atentiveness to an ad---whether a member of tthe assumed "audience" looked at the ad message for a certain amount of time,with impact---what was the outcome. By doing that they are precluding such metrics from becoming standard in TV audience surveys not only because the sellers, who control the surveys, won't allow it but also because it goes beyond what can be resaonably expected of a media seller. While it's fair for a media buyer to consider factors like engaging program content. the degree of ad clutter in a break, whether a viewer is potentially interested in the product being promoted, etc. it's unreasonable for the seller to guarantee that the viewer will buy into whatever claims the advertiser is making and purchase his product ---or switch from their current brand to the one advertised. While the two--attentiveness and outcomes--- are, obviously reslated in that one comes before the other, if any of this is meant to have future application to national TV audience surveys, attentiveness should be dealt with first---and separately. 

All good, Joe. Thanks for the conversation and debate! 

Putting tariffs on China isn't racist and xenophobic after all?

@Bill Duggan: Apologies if my observation was not clear, but by representativeness, I was citing industry estimates that there are more than 12 million brands in the world, most of which are small and medium size businesses. So even if I take the ANA's total membership base -- 900 -- that would equal 0.000075 percent of the total universe, numerically speaking. Not denegrating the importance of ANA members, just pointing out that the vast majority of brands in the world ARE using principal media, because they are the principals buying it directly themselves.

Also appreciate that the ANA defines principal media buying only as agencies serving as the principal with media suppliers.

If those figures represent the percent of the "audience" that looks at an average commercial, without regard to its length, I'm not surprised to see "TV" faring much better than social video. But typical TVision findings for TV are considerably higher ---based on watching for at least two seconds. so I, too, wonder about the source for this chart. Perhaps they had to watch for a number of seconds to qualify. Or, maybe, some other dimension is included---like getting the message as well as attentiveness.

Joe, regarding the comment on the report, “… it is incomplete and not representative of the greater world of media-buying, because it is only shows what the biggest U.S. advertisers know and think about the practice.” ANA membership is comprised of approximately 900 client-side companies.  Yes, that includes many of “the biggest U.S. advertisers.”  But it includes many, many small and mid-sized companies as well.  As an example, going to the list of ANA Client-Side Marketer member companies under “A” you’ll find big companies including AB InBev, Allstate, and American Express. Yet there are many small and mid-sized companies including Alabama Power Company, American Red Cross, and ASPCA. Further, the respondents to the ANA survey that was featured in the report reflected this diversity. One-quarter of respondents had 2023 annual U.S. media budgets less than $50 million.

Regarding the comment, “The reality is that in the digital media-buying world, the vast majority of all buys are based on a principal buying the media: long-tail small and medium size advertisers who buy it directly from the platforms themselves.” The ANA member survey asked, “Over the past year, roughly what percentage of your company’s total media budget do you estimate to be comprised of principal media or other forms of non-transparent media activity?” The finding – principal media represents a fairly low percentage of a company’s total media budget for most respondents — under 10 percent of the total media budget for 55 percent of respondents. Only 8 percent allocate 50 percent or more of their total media budget to principal media. For most ANA member companies who use an external agency, those agencies are primarily buying as agents. Yet principal-based buying is on the rise … hence the need for our report.

Steve, Joe, and George:

Interestingly, Nielsen just released the audio version of "The Gauge," called "The Record," powered by Edison Research. The visual depicts the share of time spent to...AD SUPPORTED AUDIO. 

https://www.nielsen.com/insights/2024/nielsen-the-record-audio-listening-trends/

"The Record" permits media agencies and brands to better understand the audience shares of audio platforms where they can actually purchase audio ads. The Persons 18+ Shares of Ad-Supported Audio for Q1 2024 are: AM/FM Radio 67%, podcasts 20%, ad-supported music streaming (Pandora, Spotify, etc.) 10%, and 3% Satellite Radio. 

In the case of audio, the Nielsen/Edison "Share of Ear" data reveals three-quarters of Spotify's music streaming audience listens to the subscription service, which does not accept ads. An "Ad-Supported Video Gauge" would be a highly valuable resource for marketers, sales teams, and agencies.

Pierre

Which will be a flop Christmas games should be on CBS, Fox, & NBC those networks should demand those games. TNF is a flop on Amazon which should also air live on NFL Network and not replayed at late at night. NFL needs to be on over the air for the national games as I have said NFL games on streaming only have clealy been flops since the NFL & streaming service spin the numbers the viewers aren't there I don't count views for those that just scroll from those sports and have no interest in them.

The source says this is from 2018 - is that correct??  6 years ago?

The broadcast and cable networks have been pitching this idea for decades. No one is actually interested, but it's proof that you can fool some of the people all of the time.

I already hear the cries of, "But it's different this time!" 

This is a good request of Nielsen, which I agree with.  MRC doesn't audit the Gauge report or the new Media Distributor Gauge (perhaps we should), but it appears this break-out makes sense to better inform both the buy and sell sides.

@Steve Lanzano: Makes sense that an ad trade bureau would question that, but the reality is those numbers are relevant to marketers, because they're trying to reach people who may or may not be watching ad-supported television. Nielsen has other ways of tabulating data, too.

1. I hope it works.
2. It's a pretty stupid campaign. Instead of using celebrities, which many will see as "them", the campaign should have used real people. I have countless friends who have brothers, sisters and even parents who are either gay or have come out of the closet. Show that LGBTQ+ people are nothing to be "afraid" of, but, rather, you, me, family members, people like us, just normal people trying to have a normal and happy life.