Archive

Posts Tagged ‘advertising’

How Twitter Could Steal TV Ad Dollars – Business Insider

April 14, 2013 Leave a comment

How Twitter Could Steal TV Ad Dollars – Business Insider.

First, Twitter’s new Ads API allows companies like TBG Digital to buy promoted tweet campaigns against the nightly TV schedule, as if tweets were like TV ads. Why? Because people like to tweet while they watch TV. Here’s a chart from Twitter ad buyer TBG Digital showing the enhanced effect of advertising that also uses a Twitter campaign:

Second, Twitter recently acquired Bluefin Labs, a social TV measurement company. Twitter believes there is a strong, symbiotic connection between Twitter and TV watching — and it intends to prove that to advertisers with hard metrics.

Third, Twitter did a deal with Nielsen to measure the “brand lift” effect that promoted tweets have on consumers. Nielsen, obviously, is most famous for measuring TV audiences. It measures lots of other things as well, but it is not a coincidence that Twitter is using the company that sets the standard for TV measurement to also measure its advertising.

adam bain twitter

Adam Bain

Lastly, Twitter president/global revenue Adam Bain just told the Adobe Digital Marketing Summit that advertisers don’t need complicated algorithms (hello, Facebook!) to deliver their messages. They can just look at who is tweeting about them: “There is no algorithm standing between you and your audience, if you have worked hard to get somebody to follow your brand… You are what you tweet, who you follow and what you re-tweet, and those are all great signals for what you are passionate about right now.”

Note that Facebook has made a bunch of similar moves. Both companies face the same macroeconomic logic: With the easy money already on their platforms, they now need to attack catagories where very large amounts of ad dollars — budgets that will move the needle into the billions — can be transferred.

And both Twitter and Facebook are making the same argument about “attribution.” Both companies believe they can show advertisers directly which ads are responsible for sales. (Bain told the Adobe meeting, “I’d love to see an evolution of attribution. … We think it could be bigger and better.”) That’s a powerful argument because television, infamously, has difficulty showing advertisers that the people who saw their ads then bought the products because of it.

The difference between Twitter and Facebook, however, is that Twitter needs TV shows to generate topics for people to tweet about. Facebook, however, appears to be leaning toward becoming its own major video platform, like YouTube is, and doesn’t need the traditional TV industry to survive.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/how-twitter-could-steal-tv-ad-dollars-2013-3#ixzz2QPA2mIDI

#Smc040 @ransbottyn’s Experiment: Social Media Product Placement

March 9, 2013 Leave a comment

A good example was the provoking presentation by Cain Ransbottyn (@ransbottyn), famous in Belgium because his life is a ‘soap on social media’ which is well sponsored using product placement. With 85,000 followers on Twitter he is sure that each message he ‘dumps’ there is picked up one way or the other – and it doesn’t matter what way! His lifestyle is covered by his activities in social media, which usually are well planned and analysed. Of course there are many tricks and it is up to you if you like to use ‘white hat’ or ‘black hat’…

Will social TV and the second screen move beyond advertising in 2013? | Econsultancy

January 5, 2013 Leave a comment

Will social TV and the second screen move beyond advertising in 2013? | Econsultancy.

Though the definition of social TV does expand beyond second screening to the advancement of technology in our TVs themselves and the interaction with programming, it still often relates to how consumers use their tablets and mobiles while watching traditional TV programming.

With the rise of video in 2013, it is only natural that we will continue to look at our relationship and interaction with all of our devices. As the use of mobile while watching TV is steadily increasing, 2013 may bring more overlapping content that moves beyond advertising.

But what do other industry professionals expect from Social TV in 2013? Will it be limited to advertisers or will content creators create more interactive experiences in this space?

Nick Adams, Head of digital development at Mindshare

Three things are coming together to create a perfect storm for social TV in 2013.

  • Penetration of tablets will increase dramatically thanks to cheaper 7” versions
  • TV producers are developing programming where complementary second screen experiences are baked in to the overall concept
  • Viewers are increasingly voicing their opinions about programming on social networks

Expect to see broadcasters offering more opportunities for viewers to interact with and influence live programming via the second screen, and expect to see more collaboration between Twitter and broadcasters.  Media planners will start to cherry-pick TV spots for their social impact as much as for their reach.

Sean O’Neal, Global CMO, The Daily Mail Online

Although television studios have attempted to develop compelling second-screen experiences,  it is the online entertainment news publishers who perhaps have the greatest potential to capitalize on this opportunity.

TV studios are good at producing content for TV.  Independent online publishers, however, can tap into deep editorial teams who develop content that compliments the television programming on a second screen in a unique way – in real-time, on the fly.

Mike Knowlton, Murmur

I expect to see a continued growth in Second Screen viewing, we’ll see a new move to better integration social activity into TV content.

Right now second screen is disconnected from the show. Any attempts to integrate social functionality into video narrative have been trivial. I look for this integration to really blossom in 2013/2014.

Andrew Der, Digital Strategy and Innovation

Social TV is too intriguing of an opportunity to build a community around content and drive commerce at the same time. With multiple startups and apps operating in these spaces – community building (eg, TV Dinner,GetGlue, and Yap.TV) and commerce (Shazam, WiOffer, and Viggle) – I expect both content producers and advertisers to leverage these capabilities to engage more viewers and drive sales of the products being advertised both during commercials and within the TV shows themselves.

Sean W. Bohan, Co-Founder, Decahedralist Strategic Consulting

The user doesn’t call this “Social TV” – they call it their normal behavior. Apps that create more enhanced experiences (synching to the audio from the TV, timed with the show, etc.) will create new opportunities for sponsorship and revenue.

Expect Networks and Shows to have competing apps as timeshifting/streaming continue to change how, where and when we watch (FOX owns the app for Sons of Anarchy  while the show is on the air, Producers own it when it is moved to DVD/Streaming).

Kunur Patel, brand strategist, Percolate

As the landscape for check-in apps for TV shows begins to consolidate, keep an eye on the major social platforms integration with networks, programming and especially talent.  Given that adoption of TV-only mobile apps like Viggle are still nascent, it’s the likes of Twitter and Facebook that will rule continue to social chatter about TV.

Twitter especially has become the world’s real-time water cooler for major televised events. While its pages to collect all tweets around the Olympics and NASCAR drew cries that Twitter wants to be a media company, broadcasters especially will enter into cooperative relationships with the social network.

If you’re looking for power plays, watch the celebs and actors using social media to corral their fans and drive live tune-in. Here’s where a starlet’s huge online following will soon translate into even bigger paychecks.

RTBs and Ad Networks Riding High for Online Video Advertising

December 2, 2012 Leave a comment

RTBs and Ad Networks Riding High for Online Video Advertising.

state of video industry advertising 2012 200x144 RTBs and Ad Networks Riding High for Online Video Advertising

In the recent Adap.tv Q4 State of the Industry Survey on Digital Video Advertising they looked at how video advertising is being bought and sold. Since it’s Black Weekend, or whatever the unstoppable retail machine is calling it these days, I thought it would be appropriate to talk about selling stuff.

As always I like to give you some methodology so you have some idea of the scope of the research we’re talking about and so we can analysis, albeit briefly, the validity of the information.

Methodology

A survey of 700 digital marketing and media professionals was conducted in October 2012 on current attitudes and practices regarding digital video advertising. Participants were contacted via email, and asked to take an online survey. Participants were first asked to identify their companies as brands,
agencies, trading desks, publishers, ad networks or DSPs. They then answered a survey of roughly 20 questions regarding their perceptions and practices relating to the buying and selling of digital video advertising.

The results were then compiled, compartmentalized, analyzed and then reported to us. The hard thing to determine is what percentage of the overall industry does 700 digital marketing and media professionals represent? Since we don’t have a valid answer for that we have to simply attach a grain of salt to the reports.

Buy Buy Buy!

So how are those 700 representatives of the industry purchasing inventory for their video advertisements? Compared to last year there have been some drastic changes in exactly that. TV upfronts saw a massive dip this year compared to last as did direct buying. That’s because trading desks nabbed a pretty big piece this year, DSPs saw large-scale growth along with exchanges and ad networks got a good bump as well.

where buy q412 RTBs and Ad Networks Riding High for Online Video Advertising

Direct seems to have lost a little steam along with the TV upfronts. Since more advertisers are starting to plan TV and online video campaigns together it’s a pretty telling statistic. It also shows that if you’re employing a full on ad sales force you might be better off having them use some of the automated tools that the trading desk, DSP and exchanges provide.

Earlier this month I talked about Programmatic Buying Key to Integrated TV and Online Video Ad I was also referencing this same report. But what is programmatic buying? Well, that depends on who you are, but a large portion of buyers and almost one-third of sellers think real-time bidding and remnant inventory. Buyers also believe it to be buying a particular “audience” while sellers think less so. Maybe sellers need to start rethinking what programmatic means in order to align their thinking with that of the buyers they’re trying to woo.

programmatic q412 RTBs and Ad Networks Riding High for Online Video Advertising

Where the Buying Gets Done

So if that’s really the case in terms of programmatic buying then it’s good to know where everyone is turning for their RTB transactions and who is doing it the most. As it turns out, the trading desks are all using real-time bidding while everyone else is far, far behind. Agencies have the second highest adoption rate of RTB and they’re just at 52% with brands a close third at 48%.

RTB usage q412 RTBs and Ad Networks Riding High for Online Video Advertising

Now if we look at the above where we saw what everyone was using to buy video advertising, we can then compare it to where everyone is selling their video inventory and see there’s a slight disconnect.

how sell vidoe q412 RTBs and Ad Networks Riding High for Online Video Advertising

Publishers are trying to sell more at the TV Upfronts, but the buyers are using them less.

Sales teams have taken a hit which lines up with the lower direct buying and ad networks are the clear winner with both buyers and sellers, which makes me believe that the RTB offerings that major online video ad networks rolled out early this year (and which I thought would be a major trend) have indeed had an impact.

That’s a Wrap

So, if you’re a buyer looking to find inventory, or a seller looking to fill inventory, you need to get on the same page. Ad networks and real-time bidding exchanges are definitely a strong force in the marketplace right now. If you’re not utilizing video ad networks or RTB exchanges, you are probably losing out and that could be why you’ve got 50% fill rate or lower. You’re selling in the wrong place, like ice cream in Antarctica. Sellers need to shift their focus to where the buyers are, and now, with this recent research, you can do that because you have a general idea of where they are looking when they want to buy ad inventory.



Source: RTBs and Ad Networks Riding High for Online Video Advertising http://www.reelseo.com/rtbs-ad-networks-riding-high-online-video-advertising/#ixzz2DsHNLNjc 
©2012 ReelSEO 

Analysis: In scare for newspapers, digital ad growth stalls | Reuters

June 8, 2012 Leave a comment

Analysis: In scare for newspapers, digital ad growth stalls | Reuters.

Thu Jun 7, 2012 3:01am EDT

(Reuters) – As more newspapers cut back on print to reduce costs and focus on their websites, a troubling trend has emerged: online advertising sales are stalling.

A pre-World War I advertisement introduced Was...

A pre-World War I advertisement introduced Washington’s coffee to the public. Advert from The New York Times, February 23, 1914. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In the first quarter, digital advertising revenue at newspapers rose just 1 percent from a year ago, the fifth consecutive quarter that growth has declined, according to the Newspaper Association of America, a trade organization.

A flood of excess advertising space, the rise of electronic advertising exchanges that sell ads at cut-rate prices, and the weak U.S. economy are all contributing to the slowdown, publishing executives and observers say.

For an industry savaged by the erosion of print advertising dollars, significantly boosting digital revenue is necessary for survival. But the double-digit online growth rates that many newspapers used to enjoy — and on which their hopes for a prosperous future rest — could be a thing of the past.

At the New York Times Co digital ad revenue at its news sites, including nytimes.com and bostonglobe.com, fell 2.3 percent to $48.5 million in the first quarter from a year earlier. At the Washington Post Co, the decline was even worse, with revenue dropping 7 percent to $24.2 million, mainly at the website of its namesake newspaper and online magazine Slate.

“The online share that newspapers are getting is smaller even though it’s the greatest goldmine of advertising growth we’ve seen in a generation,” said Ken Doctor, an analyst with Outsell Research.

Last week, ratings agency Moody’s issued a report calling the U.S. newspaper industry’s outlook “negative” because of the “relentless” declines in overall revenue.

“At this point, there is no evidence digital strategies are returning most daily newspapers to positive growth,” wrote Moody’s senior credit officer John Puchalla. “It is merely a way to moderate revenue declines.”

Newspaper executives have long touted digital advertising as a bright spot in an industry plagued by declining print readership. For instance, New Orleans will become the largest U.S. city without a daily newspaper this fall, as the New Orleans Times-Picayune prepares to print just three days a week to cut distribution costs and to focus online.

Some publishing executives are still optimistic about the long-term outlook for digital, blaming the slowdown on the economy.

Scott Heekin-Canedy, president and general manager of the New York Times Co, said digital advertising is becoming just as sensitive to economic swings as print. “We actually saw a dip associated with uncertainties,” he said. “We heard it from advertisers and saw it in the spending patterns.”

The New York Times Co gets 10 percent of its revenue from digital ad sales and 35 percent from print ads. Print and digital subscriptions generate 48 percent of revenue, while miscellaneous sources account for the rest.

Steve Hills, president and general manager of Washington Post Media, labeled the falloff a “temporary slowdown” in a weak economy and a technology issue related to how content on its websites is published.

But there’s another problem that is less temporary: the rise of ad exchanges that put downward pressure on ad prices.

BEHIND THE SLIDE

Advertising exchanges are electronic platforms that allow buyers to bid on and purchase advertising space at drastically reduced prices. Many websites — not just newspaper sites — rely on these exchanges to sell unclaimed advertising spots, known in industry parlance as excess inventory. The thinking is it’s better to get something than nothing at all.

But it also trains ad buyers to expect lower advertising prices. “It’s like a publisher trying to sell me an Armani suit for $3,000 but I can walk around the corner and buy it from Google for 90 percent less,” said Shawn Riegsecker, chief executive of Centro, an agency that specializes in buying and selling digital ads, and counts many newspapers as its clients.

Advertisers “are buying audience instead of context and they don’t care what sites they are on,” said Gordon McLeod, president of Krux, a company that helps websites interpret data.

News Corp’s Wall Street Journal, which does not use advertising exchanges, enjoyed double-digit growth in digital ad sales for the quarter ending March, according to Michael Rooney, chief revenue officer at Dow Jones’ Consumer Media Group. He declined to say how that compares with historical trends.

Robert Dickey, president of U.S. Community Publishing at Gannett Co Inc, the largest U.S. newspaper publisher, acknowledged there is pressure on ad prices. But he argued that advertisers want to be associated with strong news brands.

“What we show our advertisers is that our audience and our performance for them is higher than what they are going to find at other types of sites,” he said.

HAVE AND HAVE NOTS

At Gannett, its national paper, USA Today, fared better in the first quarter than did its local properties. USA Today’s digital revenue rose 25 percent in the first quarter, with video becoming a big drawer of ad money, said newly appointed publisher Larry Kramer. That compared with 11 percent growth in Gannett’s U.S. Community Publishing division.

Overall, however, the newspaper industry’s share of online advertising dollars is shrinking. U.S. online advertising revenue is forecast by research firm eMarketer to rise 23.3 percent to $39.5 billion this year, on growth in video advertising and Web search ads.

Auto dealers, retail clothing stores and other local advertisers still use newspaper websites to reach people online, but that segment is also facing insurgent competitors such as daily deals site Groupon Inc, search giant Google Inc, and e-commerce leader Amazon.com Inc.

“If you look at the top 20 companies that made all the money in local Internet advertising, more than two-thirds … have nothing but advertising … It’s not about the news.” said Gordon Borrell, CEO of Borrell Associates, citing websites like Autotrader, Yellowpages.com and Groupon.

Some newspapers are trying out new formats and experimenting with different types of ads on their websites to try to goose advertising spend.

“Newspaper companies have acknowledged those trends and there is a lot more innovation on the online side that’s not immediately reflected in the numbers,” said Caroline Little, CEO of the Newspaper Association of America.

(Reporting by Jennifer Saba; Editing by Peter Lauria and Steve Orlofsky)

Newspaper fire orange

Newspaper fire orange (Photo credit: NS Newsflash)

Three in 10 Display Ads Go Unseen by Internet Users – eMarketer

April 10, 2012 Leave a comment

Three in 10 Display Ads Go Unseen by Internet Users – eMarketer.

Brand advertisers are accustomed to paying for views—both on TV and online. In the digital world, impressions have long served as a proxy for views, but findings from comScore and ad verification solutions company AdSafe Media found that paying for raw impressions is costing brand advertisers money not correlated to effectiveness.

To better understand the true number of display ad impressions seen by internet users, comScore analyzed the display ad campaigns of 12 major brand advertisers. The study found that an average of just 69% of ads were in-view. By comScore’s definition, to be in-view, a user had to have seen 50% of an ad’s pixels for at least 1 second.

The larger the website, the greater the percentage of in-view display ads. The top 50 sites for each brand’s industry vertical, as classified by comScore’s MediaMetrix ratings, had the highest in-view percentage (77%). That number declined when broadening to the top 100 sites (74%) and top 500 sites (70%).

US Display Ad Impressions that Are In-View*, by Site Category, Dec 2011 (% of total display ad impressions)

The fact that larger publishers’ sites tend to have greater quantity and variety of premium ad inventory space could be one influencing factor. And additional data from AdSafe Media showed publisher sites had a greater percentage of in-view ads than ad networks and exchanges.

On average, publisher ads were more likely to be in-view than those from the other two inventory sources: Just 24.3% of publisher ads were never in-view, compared to 45.5% of platform and exchange ads and 41.3% of network ads.

Cumulative Time that Digital Display Ads Worldwide Are In-View, by Platform, Q4 2011 (% of total)

The size of the ad unit also appeared to affect how frequently the add was in-view. comScore found leaderboard ad units—728×90 units displayed across the top of a page—were in-view most often: 74% of the time. Medium rectangles were in-view 69% of the time, and wide skyscrapers—ads that typically span vertically down the page—had the lowest in-view rate (66%). This is unsurprising, given that users must often scroll down the page to see these ads in full.

US Display Ad Impressions that Are In-View*, by Ad Size, Dec 2011 (% of total display ad impressions)

Regardless of ad size and placement, it’s undeniable that a good portion of all display ads served never make their branding impact. The digital ad industry is working to correct this problem through the Making Measurement Make Sense (3Ms) initiative. Among their many goals, the group aims to standardize digital branding measures so advertisers can better quantify the true impact of display advertising efforts. Such standardization could also affect future ad-pricing models as well as expectations that inventory providers’ should show greater accountability and transparency for units sold.

Why Ad Execs Are FURIOUS At P&G For Saying Exposure On Facebook Is ‘Free’

February 7, 2012 Leave a comment

Why Ad Execs Are FURIOUS At P&G For Saying Exposure On Facebook Is ‘Free’.

On Jan. 30, I wrote an item describing how Procter & Gamble CEO Bob McDonald was going to “moderate” — i.e. reduce — his $10 billion global ad budget because his brands can get ”free” impressions on Facebook and Google.

The article enraged some ad execs, who were livid at the notion that advertising on Facebook is “free.”

It’s not, they insist. The kind of exposure generated by P&G campaigns like the Old Spice Guy only comes after a significant amount of old-fashioned media is bought by the company’s ad agencies, much of it on Facebook.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-ad-execs-are-furious-after-pg-ceo-said-hits-on-facebook-are-free-2012-2#ixzz1lfX1PcvK

 

Well, sure.

This issue of whether social media platforms are increasingly creating spaces where clients that once required massive media expenditures can now get exposures for free is worth picking apart. It goes to the heart of the existential crisis facing the ad agency business right now: What if there comes a day when agencies are no longer needed because advertisers really can reach everyone they need free of charge?

More than 336,000 people read the story in the last seven days, and about 155 people debated it in the comments section underneath. I also received a small number of angry emails. One reader, Steve Hollingsworth, wrote to say, “In my experience it certainly is NOT FREE!  Could you clue me in?”

First, let’s recap what McDonald actually said on his Q4 earnings call (emphasis added):

… with things like Facebook and Google and others, we find that the return on investment of the advertising, when properly designed, when the big idea is there, can be much more efficient. One example is our Old Spice campaign, where we had 1.8 billion free impressions.

My interpretation is that McDonald is aware that on Facebook and other social media, like Twitter and Google+, brands can get plenty of free impressions through Likes, sharing, email forwarding, blog links and so on. Ten years ago, P&G would have had to pay publishers and broadcasters for every single one of those impressions. Now, millions of them are literally free. For instance: It cost $0 to upload Old Spice Guy to YouTube. And this Old Spice video has had 40 million views.

That argument, however, went down like a badly mixed martini among ad execs:

Bob Hoffman, president of GearonHoffman in Boston, said in an email:

Twitter and Facebook advertising is not free … Social media programs are not free.

Far from it. In fact, managing and maintaining digital advertising And creating and monitoring social sites takes roughly twice the manpower as broadcast and online display advertising.

Clients don’t like it, because digital advertising and social campaigns require more people to manage, track, analyze, optimize, slice etc. These people are paid salaries. In dollars. Sheesh … Check your facts.

Zack Barnett, director of web communications at the University of Oregon said:

While P&G might be cost cutting and concentrating resources on digital ads, FB advertising is not free. By contrast, for the company to have a presence on Facebook would be free. The headline, which perhaps the copy desk wrote, is not right, however, and should be amended.

You can read the comments section for yourself: Dozens of people, many of them clearly employed in the ad business, were annoyed at the notion that it’s “free” to advertise on Facebook.

OK, I get it. The biggest branded social media campaigns — like Old Spice — are indeed supported by media dollars and then managed and tracked by agency staff.

That’s not the point.

The issue is that if a client chooses to, and if the idea behind the campaign is compelling enough, a company can, in theory, do a huge amount of advertising on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and YouTube while spending almost nothing. In fact, if you can only make your digital properties go viral by spending huge sums, that’s an indicator they’re not very good. A good ad will go viral on its own — for free.

At Business Insider, for instance, we promote all our headlines on various Facebook and Twitter accounts. A huge portion of our traffic — which generates revenue from our advertisers — comes from social media. The P&G story, for instance, went viral inside Linkedin, which is why so many people read it. We don’t pay a dime for any of that marketing, and I’d be laughed out of the office if I suggested we hire an ad agency to get more of that traffic for us.

Not every company is in the editorial content business, naturally. If you’re selling detergent or canned goods, social media is a much bigger challenge. But the point remains: Companies can promote themselves on Facebook for free if they want to (through their branded Pages) and need not pay Facebook a dime for further exposure.

So why are ad execs so angry about this truism?

The answer, I suspect, is contained in Point 2 of this comment made by Steve Parker Jr., the founder of Levelwing, a full-service digital advertising agency (emphasis added):

1. Kudos to Mr McDonald – clearly there is abundant waste in advertising and media and most brands are still turning a blind eye on making it more efficient or being at all accountable to their creative and media budgets. Looks like a semi-positive step in the right direction at P&G – who arguably waste more in advertising than most.
2. Internet advertising and social et al are NOT FREE, come on Jim – don’t perpetuate that argument - it hurts the industry. It is not nearly even close to free – perhaps more measurable and effective and many criteria would be a sound statement. But not free.

“It hurts the industry.” Precisely. P&G’s McDonald is about to reduce his ad budget, or restrain its growth, and that is by definition going to reduce the fees P&G pays to the hundreds of ad agencies attached to its brands. Meanwhile, P&G will be asking its remaining agencies to come up with more, better, cheaper ideas that generate greater free impressions in social media.

The trend is obvious. P&G can advertise for free on Facebook, if it wants to. And that’s a threat to agencies whose business models rely on heavy media expenditures by their clients.

Please follow Advertising on Twitter and Facebook.
Follow Jim Edwards on Twitter.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-ad-execs-are-furious-after-pg-ceo-said-hits-on-facebook-are-free-2012-2#ixzz1lfWrN4cG

100 Bullet Points from #CannesLions 2011 by @jessedee

July 4, 2011 Leave a comment

The History of Advertising on Facebook [INFOGRAPHIC]

July 3, 2011 Leave a comment

The History of Advertising on Facebook [INFOGRAPHIC].

s Facebook has grown from a collegiate social network to a site that gets action from 7.3% of the world’s population, it has also evolved into a marketing tool. One report estimated that advertisers will spend $4 billion on Facebook advertising this year.

Facebook didn’t come out of the gate as a marketing-friendly product in 2004, and it has conducted a fair share of failed experiments in its efforts to become one. We’ve chronicled its evolution in the infographic below.

Click to enlargeInfographic design by Emily Caufield.

Havas Media Brussels is looking 4 a Digital Expert

June 22, 2011 Leave a comment
Havas Media is the POE (Paid, Owned, Earned) media agency, specialized in communication strategies, planning and buying for clients such as Peugeot, Citroen, BNP Paribas Fortis, Reckitt Benckiser, Orangina Schweppes,…. We are part of a worldwide network (presence in more than 100 countries),And this year we won the Media agency of the year AMMA award.

Description

As Digital Expert, you are responsible of the digital media strategy, planning and buying for specific clients. You are in charge of the tactical planning of digital campaigns (Channel & site recommendations, buying, campaign follow-up, etc). Based on the campaign results, you provide learnings & insights to the clients. You constantly explore innovative opportunities for your clients and keep informed of the latest market evolutions.

Profile

- You are French speaking and fluent English, with basic knowledge of Dutch- You have 3-5 years experience in digital advertising, experience in other media is a plus

- You are well organized, enthusiastic, curious, a good team player and you’re not afraid of numbers
- You have a healthy interest in media & new technologies

Offer

- a Full-time contract with extra-legal benefits- Join a very dynamic agency in a sector in constant evolution
- Work in a young atmosphere with a very professional team

 

 

Contact

Send an email to Julie Tinant – Julie.Tinant@be.havasdigital.com

Havas Media

Rue Maurice Charlent 53

1160 Auderghem

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,059 other followers

%d bloggers like this: