Why do dayparts exist?

Historically advertisers exhibited preferences for different kinds of programming b? and the potential for impactful brand association in that programming b? at different times of day. This led to each broadcast network to program light news in the morning, soap operas in the afternoon, harder news in the evening, general entertainment at night and late night comedy/talk shows. .

The notion of dayparts also existed because of significant differences in the potential reach of television during those different times of day and significant differences in the profiles of viewers watching throughout the day.

There was indisputable logic to the daypart convention in the three network-world that existed in the United States prior to the 1980s. And since most advertisers were seeking the broadest reach with the fewest number of buys on the highest quality (read: most expensively produced) programming, there was a disproportionate focus on the daypart which we now call prime time.

Of course, there is still tremendous value in associating brands with certain programming for contextual impact – considered strategic programming choices. But such activity can occur equally well at any time of day given the breadth of programming options available to advertisers in the modern era.

But more critically, fragmentation of viewership has impacted dayparts’ presumed ability to most efficiently reach target audiences or specific viewer profiles. For example, while prime time is still the widest viewed daypart, this metric, reach, is no longer by itself sufficient to justify a prime time buy (instead, strategic activations are arguably the best justification for prime time purchases). Few advertisers choose to purchase the same kind of reach in a given day that they bought in the 1960s or 1970s, as it would require purchases across scores of networks today, compared to purchases across three networks forty years ago. Consequently, advertisers focus on accumulating reach over the course of a campaign that may play out in different dayparts.

As a result, it is no longer necessary to accumulate reach within only one daypart given the rise of better tools b? especially through the use of set-top-based viewing data , but also through more sophisticated models of audience viewing using conventional panel-based data b? for finding the audiences which contribute to extending reach beyond the core strategic programming an advertiser requires. Further, many sources of data and data modeling techniques allow advertisers to better understand the relationship between brand and audiences well beyond age and gender-based metrics.

Conventions are typically created for very good reasons. But conventions can only persist as long as a critical mass of market participants agrees to continue it. While it is unlikely that all advertisers will stop using the convention of the daypart in the near term, it is highly likely that increasing numbers of advertisers will look beyond this convention to reassess the ways in which they find the audiences which drive their business goals.

The chart below demonstrates the benefit of using Simulmedia Segmentsb” targeting in promotional plans, based on results of an internal study of recently launched programs. Using anonymous set top box data, we first examined promotion exposure by segment during the eight weeks prior to the showbs original air date. We then looked at the first episode of the program and examined average tune-in for two different groups: Overall audience exposed to the promotions, and Simulmedia Segmentsb” exposed to the promotions and previously designated as the most receptive to these programs.

Results show that Simulmediabs data-driven predictive models consistently have a higher response rate than existing promotion plans. Furthermore, the targeted and untargeted exposed groups watched the same amount of the given network in the preceding eight weeks, suggesting that the response discrepancy is, indeed, the result of our targeting rather than simply the result of differences in television consumption.

Targeted advertising works, and moreover, the benefits are widespread.B Advertisers clearly benefit, as they can efficiently target their desired audiences rather than wasting money on audiences that are unlikely to respond to the promotions.B Viewers benefit as well.B They are reminded about shows that they already like and are informed about new shows that they would probably enjoy.B Targeted advertising even helps the TV networks that carry the promotions, since viewers are less likely to change the channel during a commercial, and potentially not return to that network, if they are intrigued by the programs advertised in the promotions.

The key remaining question, particularly for advertisers, is how to most efficiently target the desired audiences.B Online advertisers can pinpoint specific individuals who just bought a dog, or a home, or just got married, and can advertise accordingly, spending money to reach only the users who are most likely to respond to the ads.B Television advertising is more difficult.B Target audiences can be located and reached, but only by also reaching viewers who are less likely to respond.B Everyonebviewers, advertisers, networksbloses when advertisements are shown to the wrong people.B Through continued data collection and analysis, we can work to reduce this waste and improve the situations of numerous parties in the television world.

The promotional response rate is calculated by using this formula: