Will the 30-second spot as we know it survive the inevitable adoption of PVR technology – or is it already in the early stages of its demise?

Our collective clients spend $3 billion annually in television advertising, the bulk of that spending in the form of the 30-second spot, arguably the brand-building workhorse of our industry. The opportunity to capture 30 seconds of a viewer’s time and attention in order to connect them to a brand message is what has driven this significant investment in the medium.

Until now, we have had a somewhat co-dependant relationship with the television viewer: allow us to interrupt your favorite show with a commercial break and, in turn, you can enjoy the latest episode of Friends or CSI free of charge. But with the coming reality of ‘viewer as programmer,’ this relationship is no longer reliable. The ease with which viewers will be able to avoid commercials with PVR technology is extraordinary. The 30-second skip feature is the highest-ranked benefit that consumers consider when making this purchase.

The viewers, while happily obliterating ads like nasty ants at a summer picnic, will still expect to see the programs they love as they always have – when they want it, how they want it, free of charge.

There are those who tout product integration as the silver bullet. By its very nature, product placement or sponsorship is effective in enhancing a brand’s image or stature, but in isolation it will not build complete brand understanding as it is far too subtle. Product integration cannot provide the repetitiveness of exposure that creates mass awareness and leads to purchase and re-purchase. I would also argue that there is certainly not $3-billion worth of Canadian product placement, sponsorship or convergence to replace the work currently being done by the 30-second spot.

Our industry should be very concerned about this coming reality, as we continue to doggedly work to a model that has been in play since the early days of television. We need to begin a dialogue, starting right now, which will prepare us for the fact that we will no longer be in control of when, where or if our consumers see advertising. The $3-billion question for the future is: Will we still be able to connect with consumers using traditional commercial units, and indeed, will anybody be watching? We have less than the next three to five years to address this issue.

I will categorically state that this dialogue needs to begin by changing the currency with which we negotiate and evaluate television media. Today’s buyers and planners only have access to program audience data. While commercial audiences are tracked and recorded, they are not made available to the media-buying community. The broadcast industry, which contributes a disproportionate amount of the cost of fielding the research, has a strong voice in whether commercial audience data is made available to the buying community or not.

Regardless of the money that the broadcasters have invested in this data, arguably the $3 billion our advertisers place in television every year represents an equally strong vote. This demand for a change in currency is absolutely vital in understanding our way to planning and executing television campaigns in the future.

There are still some on our side of the business – particularly the self professed digital gurus – who go on the record to state that PVRs are not the ‘Great Satan’ and claim that the PVR will only increase overall program viewing. Such positions miss the boat and concern me tremendously. This kind of head in the sand response, I fear, is an attitude that’s pervading our industry right now.

Access to commercial audience data is our only means of understanding and confronting the two most significant areas of impact going forward: time shifting and ad avoidance.

Time shifting will have a significant impact on many clients’ need for immediacy and timeliness. I can only look to my retail clients, who operate in time-sensitive promotional windows and wonder how time shifting will affect our ability to deliver the right amount of weight to a campaign within the desired time frame. Whether it’s retail or seasonal campaigns, or politicians running for election, we will need to know, or be able to predict, what will be viewed in real time and what may be saved for future viewing.

Access to commercial audience data is the only means by which we can pre-plan the programs that would be most appropriate for these various campaign types. For example, are programs that generate a lot of water cooler talk more likely to be viewed in real time than a drama series? Possibly.

More importantly, we will need to reconsider how we plan television campaigns in the future, as there is a relatively good chance that some proportion of the schedule may be saved to be viewed another time. Our current approach of developing a schedule of flights with weekly GRP objectives is looking a bit naïve right now.

Ad avoidance is the other area of concern. We have conditioned our television viewers extremely well. They have developed a sixth sense about when the commercial break will occur and can time their switching neatly into 30-second increments without even thinking. We have become predictable – which is why the ‘skip feature’ is 30 seconds and not 40.

Embedded technology to prevent skipping is a necessity, but how can we do this when viewers believe they have a God-given right to avoid advertising? Why can’t we start entertaining the use of some unconventional commercial units? The broadcast industry has been very reluctant in the past to accept anything other than :30s without significant premiums. What about 5- or 40- second ads? Is there anything that would be skip proof?

This is the coming reality. Our industry must step up to the plate if we hope to resolve these issues, and we should start now.

I recently made a presentation to a large group of our clients on the impact of fragmentation and technology on the way we communicate. While everyone in the room understood the promise of new technology, from its interactive capability to the ability to geo-target, they also knew the downside.

Some in the room actually owned PVRs and provided testament to the group that television viewing will indeed change like we have never imagined it. Then a marketing manager at the back of the room stood up and made the most compelling contribution of the day by asking: ‘Where is the discussion happening right now, in your industry that will help all of us understand this impact better and help us plan our approach for the future?’

I think that’s a very good question.