Google and Facebook Exposed to Disruption via GDPR

Substantial parts of Google and Facebook’s business will be disrupted by the EU’s new GDPR data protection rules that are due to apply in May 2018, according to Dr Johnny Ryan PageFair, a company that specialises in helping publishers monetise their inventory in the face of ad-blocking.

Under the new rules, both Google and Facebook will be unable to use the personal data they hold for advertising purposes without user permission. Ryan says this presents an “acute challenge” as they cannot use a service-wide opt-in for everything, in spite of the fact that many commentators have suggested otherwise. Nor will they be able to deny access to their services to users who refuse to opt-in to tracking.

When a person uses Google or Facebook.com, they willingly discloses personal data. Both companies have the right to process these data to provide their services when one asks them to. However, the application of the GDPR will prevent them from using these personal data for any further purpose unless the user permits.

However, it depends what the data will be used for. As Ryan notes, “it will be necessary to ask for consent, or present an opt-out choice, at different times, and for different things. This creates varying levels of risk.”

To explain the varying degrees of exposure to risk, PageFair have devised “The GDPR Scale”:

Google has a Large Number of Products Exposed to GDPR

PageFair’s estimate of Google, when applied to the GDPR scale, shows a significant range of products at four on the scale. However, some part of that set of products can be modified, which would lower their score from four to one, which would put them out of the scope of the regulation.

read more here:

https://videoadnews.com/2017/08/30/google-and-facebook-are-significantly-exposed-to-disruption-via-gdpr/

Facebook Pages that share false news won’t be able to buy ads

The company has already been working with outside fact-checkers like Snopes and the AP to flag inaccurate news stories. (These aren’t supposed to be stories that are disputed for reasons of opinion or partisanship, but rather outright hoaxes and lies.) It also says that when a story is marked as disputed, the link can can no longer be promoted through Facebook ads.

The next step, which the company is announcing today, involves stopping Pages that regularly share these stories from buying any Facebook ads at all, regardless of whether or not the ad includes a disputed link.

Facebook was criticized last year for its role in helping to spread of fake/false news. (The company is using the term “false news” for now — “fake news” has become heavily politicized and almost meaningless.) Product Director Rod Leathern said the company has been trying to fight back in three ways — ending the economic incentive to post false news stories, slowing the spread of those stories and helping people make more informed decisions when they see a false story.

In this case, Leathern said blocking ad-buying is meant to change the economic incentives. Facebook is concerned that “there are Pages posting this information that are using Facebook Ads to build audiences” to spread false news. By changing the ad policy, Facebook makes it harder for companies to attract that audience.

read more here:
https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/28/facebook-fake-news-ads/?ncid=rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Mayweather vs. McGregor: 239 illegal streams

The Floyd Mayweather vs. Conor McGregor boxing match was not the only competition generating attention this past weekend. New data from digital platform security specialist Irdeto indicates that piracy continues to be a tough contender. Irdeto identified 239 streams that illegally redistributed the bout. Of those streams, 67 were provided via traditional pirate streaming websites.

Underscoring the growth of streaming capabilities on social media, Irdeto also found that pirates exploited multiple channels, including Facebook, YouTube, Periscope, Twitch and others to redistribute this premier boxing event illegally.

Irdeto found that 165 social media streams offered the Mayweather vs. McGregor fight illegally, with six streams available via illicit streaming plugins for the popular media player platform, Kodi. These 239 streams are estimated to have reached approximately 2,930,598 viewers. With both boxing and UFC fans eager to see this matchup, pirates capitalised on consumer demand to provide multiple illegal viewing options for this premier live sports event and reap the profit for themselves.

According to Irdeto, what made this fight unique was that it was the first of its kind to be available to stream live online and it combined two huge viewer audiences: boxing and UFC. While content availability is key, it may have also inadvertently caused some consumers to choose an illegal service over a legitimate service due to confusion and clever marketing. Irdeto has seen an increase in pirates creating professional websites, technology and services, fooling some consumers into thinking they are accessing a legal service.

However, not all of the consumers who chose an illegal viewing option did so unknowingly. Irdeto’s recent Global Consumer Piracy Survey of more than 25,000 adults across 30 countries found that 52 per cent of consumers around the globe knowingly watch pirated video content. With operators and content owners charging as much as $99.95 to watch the fight in the US, compared to only £19.95 in the UK and €24.95 in McGregor’s home country of Ireland, these piracy numbers clearly indicate that consumers may seek illegal means to watch marquee events such as Mayweather vs. McGregor without paying.

Irdeto suggests that with pirates functioning more like full-fledged businesses, criminals are doing market research and are aware that consumers are craving this type of live sports content. In just one day in the week leading up to the bout, Irdeto identified 42 advertisements for illicit streaming devices offering Mayweather vs. McGregor on e-commerce websites, including Amazon, eBay and Alibaba. According to Irdeto, this clearly points to how business-savvy pirates have become, creating a formidable foe for legitimate service providers. Irdeto works on an ongoing basis with sites such as Alibaba to remove advertisements of this nature.

read more here:
http://advanced-television.com/2017/08/29/mayweather-vs-mcgregor-239-illegal-streams/

Ad fraud on exchanges prompts Google to offer advertiser refunds

According to a report in The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), Google is providing refunds to some advertisers that used DoubleClick Bid Manager in conjunction with ads that were placed on sites with fraudulent or invalid traffic:

In the past few weeks, Google has informed hundreds of marketers and ad agency partners about the issue with invalid traffic, known in the industry as “ad fraud.” The ads were bought using the company’s DoubleClick Bid Manager.

Google’s refunds amount to only a fraction of the total ad spending served to invalid traffic, which has left some advertising executives unsatisfied, the people familiar with the situation said. Google has offered to repay its “platform fee,” which ad buyers said typically ranges from about 7% to 10% of the total ad buy.
DoubleClick represents that it offers “industry-leading fraud protection.” While that may be accurate, traffic fraud is a growing problem on programmatic exchanges.

A recent report from The&Partnership, m/SIX and Adloox estimated that invalid traffic and fraud would waste $16.4 billion in ad budgets this year globally. An earlier report from the Association of National Advertisers estimated that fraud would cost advertisers $7.2 billion in 2016.

The WSJ report characterized the fraud behind Google’s refund as “larger than usual.” Google did not release any data on the extent of the fraud or the dollar amount of refunds offered.

The article also reports that Google is smartly seeking to put in place what amounts to a money-back guarantee from exchanges if fraud is found. The notion is that those unwilling to participate would be identified and agencies and brands could avoid those networks:

The company said it is entering discussions with the 100-plus exchanges, ad networks and publishers DoubleClick Bid Manager plugs into and asking them to display to ad buyers whether they are willing to refund the entire media spend if ad-fraud instances occur. Buyers could then opt to filter out the sources of inventory that don’t have such a policy.
Google says the instance of ongoing traffic fraud is small relative to the volume of impressions and spending. However, any fraud creates a kind of stigma that can scare some advertisers away or cause them to be less aggressive in digital than they might otherwise be.

read more here:

http://marketingland.com/larger-usual-ad-fraud-exchanges-prompts-google-offer-advertiser-refunds-222670?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=feed-main

Havas Group Reports Revenue Decline

Havas Group reported first-half financial results today and indicated that the performance was “below our expectations,” as Havas Group CEO Yannick Bollore put it.

The firm posted an organic revenue decline of nearly 1% in the second quarter and 0.4% for the first half of the year. That was below the holding company’s previous forecast of 2% to 3% first-half organic growth.

“Although the Group’s momentum is positive, Havas’ financial performance in the first half of 2017 suffered a slowdown which affected the industry as whole and led to revenue and profitability below our expectations,” Bollore stated.

Havas is the second holding company this week to disclose disappointing results — along with WPP, which posted its first-half results Wednesday, sending its shares down about 12%. Havas traded a fraction of a percentage point higher Friday on the Paris exchange. It released results after the close of the market.

Like WPP, Havas said the weak results were partly due to less spending by clients. Havas also cited “pressure” on fees from clients and economy-related woes in some markets like Brazil, Mexico, India and China.

In North America, first-half performance was “down slightly,” although the U.S. ended up in positive territory despite clients like IBM cutting back on ad spend. WPP noted Wednesday that package goods clients in particular — many of which saw organic declines themselves in the first half” — notably cut back on spending.

Bollore indicated that the Group is hoping for slight improvement in the second half of the year, but that “we are unable to confirm” the company’s earlier full-year organic growth forecast of between 2% and 3%. At this point, Havas has not issued revised guidance.

Havas’ reported first-half revenue was up 1.9% to a little more than 1.1 billion euros (about $1.3 billion at today’s exchange rate). Operating income was down 27% to 100 million euros ($119 million).

read more here:

https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/306303/havas-group-reports-organic-revenue-decline-for-th.html

The OTT Takeover

A few months back, the Streaming Media and Unisphere Research teams released a report on the current state of over-the-top (OTT) video. The report, “OTT Video Services—Innovation, Opportunity, Maturation & Technology Trends in OTT Delivery,” generated significant press around the idea that OTT viewing would exceed traditional broadcast TV viewing within the next five years.

While that projection was certainly interesting, what may have been missed in all the coverage of the report, which was sponsored by Level 3 Communications, is the fact that OTT viewing has moved from an also-ran position to one that arguably offers higher quality and more consistent delivery than traditional over-the-air (OTA) broadcast or even cable distribution.

This week, we’re presenting an updated version of the same report, as well as an accompanying infographic (see below or open in a separate window here) that illustrates a few of the key points about OTT’s hearts-and-minds campaign to displace tradition OTA and cable delivery.

The infographic highlights a few key differentiators between the nimbleness of OTT delivery options. One such point centers on the delivery of high-dynamic range (HDR) content: More than two-thirds of the respondents that offer OTT services signaled an intent to deliver in either deeper color depth (HDR) or higher frame rates (HFR).

While traditional broadcast is also moving towards 10-bit color depths, allowing for deeper blacks and brighter whites, the cost of implementing OTA broadcast gear is daunting—although, perhaps, not as daunting as the challenge of doing the same thing in cable distribution, since 10-bit delivery would require an update to infrastructure and cable set-top boxes

A few pieces of the HDR puzzle are falling into place, thanks to impending mass adoption of HEVC through operating systems—Apple’s macOS 10.13, also known as High Sierra, will support HEVC in its fall 2017 release—and upgraded internet streaming boxes such as the Chromecast Ultra.

A recent firmware update for a prototype Apple product, inadvertently released by the company on a public server, shows that an upcoming Apple TV product will support both 4K and HDR.

What’s interesting about the HDR options, as pointed out by iOS developer Gulherme Rambo in tweets about the new firmware’s references to the upcoming Apple TV device, is that multiple standards have emerged for HDR. The industry standard is HDR10 (for 10-bit delivery), but Dolby has also released Dolby Vision. In addition, it appears the upcoming device will also support Hybrid Log-Gamma, a royalty-free HDR standard developed jointly by the BBC and NHK as part of the advanced television standard (ATSC 3.0). (For a look at the competing HDR formats, see “The State of 4K and HDR 2017.”)

The fact that a relatively inexpensive internet streaming box can add in not just one but three HDR options should drive the point home clearly: OTT delivery is now the place to innovate, rather than relying on OTA innovation as had been done in years past.

Another trend the infographic highlights is a move towards multi-region delivery of OTT. While responses in past years had tended to balance between an equal number of survey respondents offering single-country OTT delivery versus regional or global delivery, this year’s responses show a marked shift away from single-country OTT offerings.

read more here:

http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/Editorial/Featured-Articles/Infographic-The-OTT-Takeover-119777.aspx

Roku’s Share of Streaming Market Rising

As streaming becomes more popular as a way to consume TV programming, Roku is increasing the number of homes in which its devices are used, according to a new report from Parks Associates.
In the first quarter, Roku’s leading share of the streaming media player market in the U.S. grew to 37% from 30% a year ago.

The gain puts Roku further ahead of competitors including Amazon, Google and Apple.
“Roku emerged early as a U.S. market leader for streaming media players, and the company has held firmly to that position,” said Glenn Hower, senior analyst at Parks Associates. “Higher-priced devices, such as the Apple TV, have not been able to keep up with low-priced and readily available Roku devices, which can be found at Walmart for as low as $29.99.”

Amazon’s Fire TV increased it share to 24% from 16% in the quarter. Google’s Chromecast dropped to 18% and Apple TV fell to 15%, according to Parks.

“One-third of U.S. broadband households own a streaming media player,” Hower said. “The growth of the U.S. OTT market provided consumers with unprecedented ease of access to video content. These streaming media devices make for quick and easy access to the top OTT libraries.”

The Parks report, Reinventing CE: Transforming Devices to Service Platforms, looks at how the CE industry has migrated from producing and distributing hardware to distributing OTT content and leveraging advertising models.

CNN launches daily show on Snapchat

CNN this week kicked off a new daily second-day news program on Snapchat.

“The Update” will air weekdays at 6 p.m. ET and will feature news and updates from CNN staff reporters.

“Since launching content on Snapchat, we have believed in the importance of giving our community access to accurate and authoritative news coverage, and CNN has played an important part in that from the beginning,” said Sean Mills, senior director of content programming for Snapchat, in a statement.

“In today’s news environment, people are hungry for news and they want a quick update of where things are at within one tap of their phone. So, we’re serving that up, speaking their language and delivering it in beautiful, vertical, mobile friendly video,” said Samantha Barry, executive producer for social and emerging media at CNN, in a statement.

CNN’s daily news show comes after NBC already earlier this year launched its own daily news program on the platform.

“Stay Tuned,” which airs on NBC at 7 a.m. and 4 p.m. EST on weekdays and 1 p.m. EST on weekends, has already reportedly had success in attracting a large audience. The companies last week announced that the show has pulled in 29 million unique viewers since launching in July.

For NBC, the Snapchat show launch coincides with the company’s $500 million strategic investment in Snap.

NBCU CEO Steve Burke called the Snap investment part of the company’s strategy to invest in digital growth, which includes NBCU’s recent $400 million investment in BuzzFeed and $200 million investment in Vox.

read more here:
http://www.fiercecable.com/broadcasting/cnn-launches-daily-show-snapchat

Smart TV users watch 36% less than streaming box users

Most TVs shipped in the US are smart and increasing numbers of consumers are connecting them and using them to stream video. However, will they catch up to, and overhaul, the market leading streaming media players?

Smart TVs the norm when purchasing a new set

Smart TVs are now the default choice for consumers when purchasing a new set. 70% of all televisions shipped in North America in 2016 were smart. A third of total smart TV sales have gone to Samsung, with Vizio close behind with 30%. The rest of the market is divvied up between multiple manufacturers. LG secures the third spot with 10%, Sony is next with 7%.

Smart TV and streaming media player benefiting from OTT growth

Streaming media player (SMP) and enabled smart TV penetration has grown strongly over the last four years. In Q1 2014 just 10% of TV homes had a smart TV and 15% had a streaming media player. In Q1 2017, smart TVs have narrowed the gap on SMPs as penetration has grown to 29% and 31% respectively.

Both devices growth reflects how video streaming has moved into the mainstream. Between Q1 2014 and Q1 2017, Netflix U.S. streaming subscribers have grown from 36 million to 52 million. Moreover, services like Netflix put a strong emphasis on the television as the primary viewing platform. This trend seems likely to accelerate as consumers continue to move traditional television viewing to online platforms.

So, will smart TVs continue to catch up to, and overtake, SMPs as the preferred device for online streaming? Maybe not looking at usage data.

Smart TV usage is mixed

When it comes to usage smart TVs come with a natural advantage. When the TV is turned on many smart TVs start from the devices web portal. Moreover, many smart TVs make content and app suggestions in the opening screen. These advantages impact how often an owner uses that functionality. According to Nielsen, enabled smart TVs were used on 20.8 days between December 26th, 2016 and January 29th, 2017. Game consoles were used 15.3 days and SMPs 14.9 days.

When it comes to raw viewing hours the smart TV is well behind other devices. For example, game consoles are used for 4.4 hours per day, though that usage is likely dominated by gameplay rather than video viewing. On the other hand, SMPs are used for 3.6 hours per day with most of that usage dedicated to streaming. Enabled smart TVs are used for 2.3 hours, over an hour less than devices like Roku and Apple TV.

read more here:
http://www.nscreenmedia.com/smart-tv-watched-less-streaming-media-player/

How long will YouTube TV be priced at a loss?

YouTube TV reaches 50% of US population

YouTube TV announced it has launched in a further 14 markets, adding to the original five markets it previously supported. The new markets are Baltimore; Boston; Cincinnati and Columbus, Ohio; Jacksonville-Brunswick, Fla.; Las Vegas; Louisville; Memphis; Nashville; Pittsburgh; San Antonio; Seattle-Tacoma; Tampa-St. Petersburg-Sarasota; and West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce, Fla.

The company says it will launch in further 17 markets in the coming weeks. With a total of 36 major metropolitan markets covered, its reach will increase 64% of the population.


New broadcaster affiliate agreements benefit YouTube TV

YouTube TV’s progress is remarkable considering the company promised it would not launch in any market that it could not deliver the top four local broadcast channels. Previously, negotiating the appropriate licenses was a Herculean task.

A licensor would have to go market-by-market negotiating with each independent affiliate separately. Also, it would have to negotiate with big affiliate groups such as Sinclair Broadcasting and Hearst Television. Then it would have to further negotiate with the big four networks to get their owned-and-operated station.

However, YouTube is the beneficiary of a new approach by the broadcasters. ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC have reached an agreement with many of their affiliates to negotiate a deal on their behalf with licensors such as YouTube TV. Stations can opt-out of these agreements if they like, but looking at YouTube TV’s rapid progress, it appears most are choosing not to.

YouTube TV is certainly making a loss

YouTube TV channel bundle cost
The lowest cost of YouTube TV’s channel bundle
Being able to get the licensing done is one thing, but getting a good deal is quite another. The best license rate that YouTube TV could have expected to get from content providers is what traditional pay TV operators currently pay. Using estimates for those numbers, the 48 channels I receive from YouTube TV in San Francisco Bay Area would cost $34 a month.

However, YouTube is likely paying more than big operators like Comcast. Bob Iger, Disney’s CEO, mentioned that the license fees he sees from vMVPDs like YouTube TV are slightly higher than for regular operators. How much more is anyone’s guess, but even a 5% premium means YouTube is paying more in license fees than it is receiving in subscriptions.

YouTube TV can probably sustain these losses while subscriber numbers remain low. However, if the service takes off, things could get very ugly for the service.

About the estimates

Many of the channel license fees I obtained from SNL Kagan estimates for 2014. I corrected these numbers by applying a 35% increase. ESPN license fees increased from $6.04 in 2014 to $7.86 this year, a 30% increase. Comcast content license fees increased 35% between Q2 2014 and Q2 2016, while Dish’ increased 80%.

I also consulted the site whatyoupayforsports.com for current estimates of the license fees paid for major sports channels. I also used other SNL Kagan estimates for retransmission fees paid to owned-and-operated and affiliates of the major four broadcasters. These numbers gave an average cost for the four broadcasters ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC.

read more here:

http://www.nscreenmedia.com/youtube-tv-making-loss/