Michael Bloomberg is an activist mayor.

Among other accomplishments, he created public seating areas by altering decades old traffic patterns, outlawed smoking in city parks, legislated saturated fat and sugary soda laws and committed the city to plant one million trees within 10 years. He has used his office to affect change at a rapid pace.

Not everyone reading this post lives or works in New York City and not everyone in New York City loves all of the change that Bloomberg has brought. Still: he has expedited ideas around the greater health of his constituents. The public didn’t vote for these particular causes, but the mayor has used his office to step the city forward according to his own compass. Refreshing in a way. Say what you may, but that’s leadership.

This got me thinking: what if someone played the role of activist mayor for ad tech?

There are many challenges that can impede technological progress: funding that must be appropriated, pipes to be laid, competitive interests, profit to be recognized. While obviously critical inputs, these hurdles stifle the pace of change. What if we could remove these hurdles in the interest of broader progress and the greater health of our constituents? As an exercise, I decided to appoint myself the activist mayor of our industry. With all of that theoretical power, here is what I would do.

Develop the location-based targeting industry. Not much in our business holds the potential of what we might call “human pixeling.” When ad tech fulfills on its promise of enabling message and offer delivery at the intersection of behavior, intent and current location, we will have a solution that both people and brands will love. Various companies are currently addressing the space: Foursquare’s radar product comes to mind. But, I’m looking for scale and ubiquity. My administration will bring together the carriers (for their technology and customer data), the handset manufacturers (for their hardware) and the best & brightest emerging mobile-social graph software solutions to make “in the moment targeting” a reality.

Legislate all sides of the iTV landscape to work out a solution that delivers a cross-platform, interactive video solution within 18 months. As a consumer, I want that immersive all-in-one experience I have been promised since The Jetsons – and has allegedly been “just around the corner” for the last 10 years. The one where I can watch, surf and tweet at the same time. Sure, these experiences exist in one-offs: AppleTV, X-Box, manufacturer Smart TV products and functionality on numerous tablet apps (e.g.: Peel). But each solution is different. As a marketer, I want a single solution to engage my audiences on the first screen. Television still consumes the majority of ad budgets, but it is a relatively cold medium – it’s emotive, but it can’t engage. Interactive television is the new warm. Brands want to engage through television, but we’re just not there yet. Where are the standards from which the next phase of innovation can spring forth? Here again, my administration will bring together the hardware, software and data companies to provide a true converged product.

Standardize mobile advertising. While individual citizens might not care if the ads they see on mobile platforms vary from app-to-app, site-to-site or phone-to-phone, those of us who make a living in the advertising space sure do. While ad unit uniformity – the equivalent of the old 468×60 web banner – might hasten a drop in interaction & response rates, brands won’t spend the way they should in mobile until they feel the industry has adequately addressed creative concept streamlining, trafficking standards and measurement efficacy. Mobile ad spend is predicted to grow 150% by 2014 according to eMarketer, but has even more upside over that time period. To realize its true potential, marketers need to a reason to move more dollars into the space. I would get the largest players together and require that we work out issues related to the industry’s plumbing to maximize the near-term potential of mobile.

Unify measurement across all media. Our industry has always tried to connect multiple media types together, but it is likely more important than ever in today’s marketing landscape. With social, mobile and digital video, there are more options than ever for brands to reach their audiences – and there may just be more metrics of success than there are channels. Instead
of the industry players competing against each other for dominance, I would insist they work together on a solution in best interest of the industry.

Make social commerce a more robust reality. Opportunities to transact in social channels or with the help of social graph technologies are everywhere: Groupon, Gilt, One Kings Lane, Everlane, Karma, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, American Express. What this eco-system is missing is a single killer-app that anyone can use at any time to be inspired and motivated to buy. Like the iTV landscape, there are hundreds of different ways to participate and, while on balance that’s positive (it’s better than none), I’m looking for a player who can aggregate the whole social graph and connect it to my purchase and browsing history. Throw in current location and now we’re talking about a real social commerce opportunity. In fact, this may be more of a business idea than something to be legislated, so perhaps I will give up my mayorship and find a VC to fund the idea.

What would you do if you were the activist mayor of ad tech?

From my post that appeared this morning in the industry blog “The Makegood” bit.ly/TK4clR

For all that we love about social networks, there is a glaring problem we must address: the very platforms that bring us together, also keep us apart.

THE CURRENT DYNAMIC

Before we experienced a total proliferation of media choices – before cable television, specialized websites and Google news feeds gave way to social networking streams – we were compelled to consume information meant for the masses.

In the 1960s and 70s, Americans learned about important news from sources like Walter Cronkite on CBS.  In the 1980s, we tuned-in for nightly sports scores on SportsCenter.  Even our political pundits – those who shared their opinions with a following well before we all did – delivered their product in broad forums such as Meet The Press or Crossfire.

Back then: the various networks and news outlets scheduled the programs and chose the stories & guests.  Today: we do that job for ourselves.  We are each our own network executive that green light what we see.

Due in large part to our use of social channels, we can now choose the particular outlets we want to see in our feeds each day.  If someone cares deeply about college football, alternative energy or Justin Bieber, their Twitter feed can deliver dozens of different sources on each of those subjects – and potentially, just on those subjects.

Net-net: We can each create incredibly targeted and customized feeds depending on our tastes and interests.

WHY IS THIS A PROBLEM?

As we pick and choose the various sources of information we care most about, those sources deliver a stream of information that fits into our narrative of choice.  While that can be good, it also has downside implications for which we should be aware – especially now in the middle of an important political season.

Here is an example.  I have a Facebook friend who is a gun owner.  I detest guns.  In fact, I post about this point-of-view whenever our country experiences another high-profile shooting.  This friend often times replies to my posts with a rebuttal of his own (something to the effect of: guns don’t kill people, people kill people).  It riles me when he does this – to the point that I have considered unfriending him.  I typically think to myself: What right does he have to populate my news feed with his ignorance?

I am not alone.  We are increasingly removing voices that make us uncomfortable.  According to a recent study, the single biggest reason that people unfriend one another on Facebook is due to comments that the unfriender finds polarizing – the study suggests that quite often these polarizing comments are political in nature.

We tend to subscribe to (and maintain) sources of information that reaffirm our thinking rather than challenge our beliefs.  We follow streams on: Facebook to hear stories that keep us current with the friends we already have; on Twitter to provide us with information we use as currency with our colleagues; on LinkedIn to anchor us to our chosen careers; on Pinterest to see images that appeal to us; on Tumblr to be impressed by articulations of topics for which we care.

While it is human nature to gravitate towards people who share common interests and values, we have never before received so much of our information – including hard core news – from these very sources.  It is becoming more difficult to be persuaded by outside influence.  We setup a world that we care about and, at times, shut the rest of it out.

2012: A POLITICAL ODDESY

My first job out of college was at a political consulting firm.  I remember learning a rule-of-thumb early on in campaigns: 40% of the electorate will definitely vote for your candidate and 40% will never vote for your candidate – it is the 20% in the middle that you must persuade.  Based on polls during the last two Presidential election cycles, there is good reason to believe that today this rule should probably be expressed as 45/45/10.  Or worse.

Consuming greater portions of our content diet on social networks is certainly driving part of this polarization.  We filter in that which provides us with the short-term stimulus we need to make us feel validated and arm us with the social currency to share amongst our friends and followers.  We filter out everything that makes us think harder than we may want to, lest it not fit into the memes that we have set for ourselves.

As we consider how we gather information in an election year, we should be mindful of how exposed we are to the content that may persuade us.  We should – in theory, anyway – be responsible for listening to all sides before we make our judgment.

Social networks mirror democracy itself.  It is a very American ideal to choose what we consume and how we consume it.  Yet like our own democracy, we must test ourselves regularly to ensure we are doing it correctly.

From my post that appeared this morning in the industry blog “The Makegood” (http://bit.ly/Rpt4wG)

This is another in a long line of unsolicited Marissa Mayer suggestion pieces from around the Internet.  I will stay away from parenting tips as she seems to be getting enough of those.  This one is about business.

From my post that appeared this morning in the industry blog “The Makegood” (http://bit.ly/PQnllq).

TANGIBLE LANDSCAPE COMING INTO FOCUS

As we head into the next phase of digital growth - one that might as well be called the post-Facebook-IPO, NewFront-is-the-new-upfront, smartphones-at-critical-mass world of digital marketing - a tangible landscape is finally coming into focus.  Forget “So-Lo-Mo.”  With a small but important tweak to that moniker, we now finally have our three emerging categories quickly becoming the new establishment of digital marketing: SOCIAL, VIDEO and MOBILE.

As with all things digital, each of these three areas overlap to both confuse the picture yet create more potent tools for marketers.  Let’s start by looking at the world that lives at the intersection of each:

Data could be called out as a fourth major focus area and that wouldn’t be wrong.  But, for the purposes of this discussion, we should assume that data is an ever-present, always-on layer that affects the entire landscape.  It is a layer that sits beneath Social, Video and Mobile to ensure their success.  Data raises all boats.

THE NEXT THREE YEARS WILL FLIP DIGITAL MARKETING ON ITS EAR

Of The Big 3, Social is off to the strongest start.  According to eMarketer, $3.6B was spent on social network ad spend in 2011.  That’s the largest expenditure of the three categories.  Video is second and Mobile is third.  But in the three year spending projections made by eMarketer, the categories flip.

Through 2014, significant growth is predicted in all three categories, but pay specific attention to Mobile as its ad spend is predicted to increase 150% for that three year period.

Each of these categories will have a significant affect on the others.

How would Video grow without Social?

How would Mobile grow without Video?

How would Social grow without Mobile?

The answer to all of these questions is: they won’t.  They will each have material impact on the others.

Still, to understand why each category is where it is today and to predict where it will go from here, we need to look at the factors unique to each.

SEVEN FACTORS DRIVING GROWTH

There are seven factors that drive growth in each category:

• Content.  Is content being created for the category?  Is it premium?  Do users want to consume it?  Is it valuable to them?  Is there an abundance of it?
• Back-End Technology.  Does the category physically work for both users and marketers?  Is there quick load time?  Are there industry standard solutions to traffic ads and make things run?
• Data/Targeting.  Are there norms in place that enable brands to reach their audience efficiently and effectively the way they have become accustomed to in other channels?
• Standardization.  Is there a currency in which brands can buy media?  Are there ad units common from publisher to publisher?
• Measurement.  How do we measure success?  Are those measures accepted by the marketplace?  Are those measures driving business outcomes?
• Scale.  How many people are active users in the space?  Are they truly engaged?
• Dollars.  While all of these factors are indicators of whether dollars will be spent in the category, ad spend begets more ad spend.  Are dollars flowing into this category?

Each factor helps to make the market and until most of those factors reach critical mass, it is difficult for a big business-model to truly breakout along the lines of traditional display, paid search or television.

In order to determine where each category will go from here, it is instructive to look at how The Big 3 are doing against these 7 factors.  To illustrate, I have ranked each factor on a scale of 1-10.  When factors are at 3, we still have a way to go.  When they reach 5, we’re witnessing a tipping point — essentially the start of critical mass.  When they elevate to 7 or beyond, we are looking at a category in maturity.

The goal for each category is to reach 5 across factors in order to make it easier for brands to rationalize the category for their marketing spend and for publishers/providers to monetize it.

5 is a tipping point.  Digital display advertising hit that milestone in the late 90s and Search hit it in the early 00s.  Each is now a very big business.  How will Social, Video and Mobile reach their tipping points?

(**My numbers are subjective, of course.  But I would hope that they would generate agreement at least directionally.  I welcome thoughts and comments to this post.**)

SOCIAL: LEADING THE PACK

Category score: 5.6

What’s working: Since social networks are essentially made up of user-generated content and third-party professional content being shared friend-to-friend, the Social category has been driven by a close relationship between content and scale.  The more people on the platform, the more content is generated.  Facebook has over 800 million users and Twitter has over 400 million.  All of those social networkers create content every day that drives the ability for this category to prosper.  And they aren’t just coming once a month — many Americans are extremely active in their social communities.  The result is a huge amount of monetizable inventory that is nowhere close to sold-through.

Data/targeting is also ranked high in social.  Mapping the interest graph and harnessing it for ad opportunities has been a business for about to five years now.  An ecosystem of networks and third parties companies have been able to harness social data for brand use.

Areas to address: Measurement will have to improve in order for brands to move more dollars into the space.  The old adage applies: “nobody ever got fired for buying more television.”  Until the industry can demonstrate consistent performance in social channels, this category will continue to be an emerging category instead of the main event.  The recent press around lack of performance on Facebook is doing nothing to help this along.

[Note: Social may be off to the biggest start of The Big 3, but it may be an even larger business than the eMarketer number suggests.  While the best available figure is $3.6B, that statistic is defined as ad spending on social networks.  It is not, apparently, inclusive of the other dollars spent in support of social: listening & monitoring, community management, app builds on Facebook, content creation and the like.  With those areas factored in, investment in this space is probably 3x or more.  This is important because it’s hard to distill down the entirety of the category to just paid media spend because that entirely misses the point of the Social space.]

VIDEO: ABOUT TO HAVE ITS DAY

Category score: 5.1

What’s working: The number one factor that video has in its favor is scale.  Americans are looking for ways to consume video digitally regardless of method: through YouTube, Hulu Plus, Apple TV, Netflix, X-Box and many others.  All of that user trial results in user hours and user hours yield inventory opportunity for sellers.

Measurement is also gaining a head of steam as broadcast and digital video buyers look to convert impressions to classic GRPs.  While buying against a GRP isn’t the most efficient way to look at the digital video space, it will prove to propel the marketplace forward since it’s the currency favored by the $70B TV industry vs. the nascent $3B digital one.

Areas to address: Standardization is critical because building video units has typically been an expensive proposition for brands.  Asset creation doesn’t have to be expensive, but current production norms make it so and this will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.  In order for marketers to make a bigger investment in video content production, standards will have to be put in place (e.g.: the 15 second interactive pre-roll) to enable builds to be streamlined.

Dollars are another issue.  While I am making the argument that reaching critical mass against each of the other six factors will help drive ad spend, brands should not be let off-the-hook for moving dollars into a category for testing.  Social has seen a solid level of “trial investment.”  Video has not been blessed with that kind of pioneering spirit.  Given the strength of available measurement capabilities and the results of various metrics themselves (especially compared with broadcast TV), video is woefully and surprisingly under-represented in marketer budgets today.

Finally, while there has definitely been an uptick in content production, more premium content will be needed to truly see dollar shift from broadcast to digital video.  This is coming in a big way, but we haven’t reached critical mass for this factor just yet.

MOBILE: THE BIGGEST GAME CHANGER OF THEM ALL

Category score: 3.6

What’s working: U.S. smartphone penetration passed 50% last year.  Most of us rarely have our mobile device more than a few feet beyond our reach, so not only do we have critical mass penetration, we also have a highly engaged audience.  Therefore, scale is present - audiences are there for the taking.

Beyond scale, there’s not much to laud about mobile…yet.

Areas to address: Where to start?  Content creation - relative to Social and even Video - has been abysmal.  The greatest success story in Mobile is likely the apps ecosystem fostered by Apple where hundreds of thousands of apps are available for download.  This content hasn’t been created from the typical professional producer community, it has instead been made by a network of developers - from amateur to pro - who have taken it upon themselves to build for the space.  While there’s nothing wrong with this as a starting (and ending) point, we have only seen the beginning of efforts from digital content producers and we have barely heard at all from movie studios and TV networks regarding their efforts for mobile.  But we will.

Standardization has also been holding mobile back.  Due to the number of handset makers, carriers and mobile ad networks, we haven’t been able to align on ubiquitous ad units to carry brand messages.  And that might just be the point.  The current crop of display ad units on mobile devices are intrusions.  The coming revolution of location-based marketing will make display look quaint - to both user and marketer alike.  Imagine the moment when we will be served messages based on the intersection of our demographic profile, mobile browsing history and current location?  Those instances will be ripe with value for both the messager and the messagee.

OUTLOOK FOR THE BIG 3

1. The Big 3 will drive the marketing industry for many years to come.  So much so that five years from now, we will hardly use terms like “Social” and “Video” and “Mobile.”  Why would we when all of it will be seemingly everywhere?  Television and digital video will morph into one another.  Mobile and the web will be synonymous even if their very definitions change.  Social will be a catalyst to even more content production and consumption - and will continue to drive usage of other media as well.
2. Brands that understand the interplay between the three will succeed.  Those that don’t, will wither.  In this new world order, we don’t build Social, Video or Mobile strategies, we build marketing strategies with the knowledge that people consume in these channels in unique and multifaceted ways.  Today’s landscape is eerily reminiscent of the early days of digital (circa 1996) when traditional advertising began to lose its crown to the broader approach of marketing.  The Big Three are creating another inflection point where we must relearn what we thought we knew.
3. Plumbing will drive growth.  Some of the less obvious (and perhaps less sexy) factors will be the biggest catalysts for growth.  Don’t discount back-end technology, data/targeting, standardization and measurement in pushing each category towards critical mass.  These are, after all, the factors that expedite decisions by marketers because they provide a rational safe haven for budget shift.