Originally appeared on MarTech Series
Marketing’s understanding of identity has evolved rapidly over the past decade, much like the shifting media landscape itself. From the early days of basic direct mail targeting to today’s complex omnichannel environment, identity has become both more powerful and more fragmented. Each era has brought new tools, challenges, and opportunities, shaping how brands interact with their customers.
We’ve moved from traditional media like mail, newspapers, and linear/network TV, to cable TV, the internet, mobile devices, and apps. Now, multiple streaming platforms dominate, creating a far more complex media landscape. As a result, understanding the customer journey and reaching consumers across these various touchpoints has become increasingly difficult. Managing frequency and ensuring effective communication across channels is now more challenging than ever.
This development has led to a fragmented view of the consumer, making it harder for marketers to ensure that they are reaching the right audience at the right time while also avoiding oversaturation. Marketers must now navigate a fragmented customer journey across multiple channels, each with its own identity signals, to stitch together a cohesive view of the customer.
Let’s break down this evolution, era by era, to understand how identity has progressed—and where it’s headed.
2010-2015: The rise of digital identity – Cookies and MAIDs
Between 2010 and 2015, the digital era fundamentally changed how marketers approached identity. Mobile usage surged during this time, and programmatic advertising emerged as the dominant method for reaching consumers across the internet.
The introduction of cookies and mobile advertising IDs (MAIDs) became the foundation for tracking users across the web and mobile apps. With these identifiers, marketers gained new capabilities to deliver targeted, personalized messages and drive efficiency through programmatic advertising.
This era gave birth to powerful tools for targeting. Marketers could now follow users’ digital footprints, regardless of whether they were browsing on desktop or mobile. This leap in precision allowed brands to optimize spend and performance at scale, but it came with its limitations. Identity was still tied to specific browsers or devices, leaving gaps when users switched platforms. The fragmentation across different devices and the reliance on cookies and MAIDs meant that a seamless, unified view of the customer was still out of reach.
2015-2020: The age of walled gardens
From 2015 to 2020, the identity landscape grew more complex with the rise of walled gardens. Platforms like Facebook, Google, and Amazon created closed ecosystems of first-party data, offering rich, self-declared insights about consumers. These platforms built massive advertising businesses on the strength of their user data, giving marketers unprecedented targeting precision within their environments.
However, the rise of walled gardens also marked the start of new challenges. While these platforms provided detailed identity solutions within their walls, they didn’t communicate with one another. Marketers could target users with pinpoint accuracy inside Facebook or Google, but they couldn’t connect those identities across different ecosystems. This siloed approach to identity left marketers with an incomplete picture of the customer journey, and brands struggled to piece together a cohesive understanding of their audience across platforms.
The promise of detailed targeting was tempered by the fragmentation of the landscape. Marketers were dealing with disparate identity solutions, making it difficult to track users as they moved between these closed environments and the open web.
2020-2025: The multi-ID landscape – CTV, retail media, signal loss, and privacy
By 2020, the identity landscape had splintered further, with the rise of connected TV (CTV) and retail media adding even more complexity to the mix. Consumers now engaged with brands across an increasing number of channels—CTV, mobile, desktop, and even in-store—and each of these channels had its own identifiers and systems for tracking.
Simultaneously, privacy regulations are tightening the rules around data collection and usage. This, coupled with the planned deprecation of third-party cookies and MAIDs has thrown marketers into a state of flux. The tools they had relied on for years were disappearing, and new solutions had yet to fully emerge. The multi-ID landscape was born, where brands had to navigate multiple identity systems across different platforms, devices, and environments.
Retail media networks became another significant player in the identity game. As large retailers like Amazon and Walmart built their own advertising ecosystems, they added yet another layer of first-party data to the mix. While these platforms offer robust insights into consumer behavior, they also operate within their own walled gardens, further fragmenting the identity landscape.
With cookies and MAIDs being phased out, the industry began to experiment with alternatives like first-party data, contextual targeting, and new universal identity solutions. The challenge and opportunity for marketers lies in unifying these fragmented identity signals to create a consistent and actionable view of the customer.
2025: The omnichannel imperative
Looking ahead to 2025 and beyond, the identity landscape will continue to evolve, but the focus remains the same: activating and measuring across an increasingly fragmented and complex media environment. Consumers now expect seamless, personalized experiences across every channel—from CTV to digital to mobile—and marketers need to keep up.
The future of identity lies in interoperability, scale, and availability. Marketers need solutions that can connect the dots across different platforms and devices, allowing them to follow their customers through every stage of the journey. Identity must be actionable in real-time, allowing for personalization and relevance across every touchpoint, so that media can be measurable and attributable.
Brands that succeed in 2025 and beyond will be those that invest in scalable, omnichannel identity solutions. They’ll need to embrace privacy-friendly approaches like first-party data, while also ensuring their systems can adapt to an ever-changing landscape.
Adapting to the future of identity
The evolution of identity has been marked by increasing complexity, but also by growing opportunity. As marketers adapt to a world without third-party cookies and MAIDs, the need for unified identity solutions has never been more urgent. Brands that can navigate the multi-ID landscape will unlock new levels of efficiency and personalization, while those that fail to adapt risk falling behind.
The path forward is clear: invest in identity solutions that bridge the gaps between devices, platforms, and channels, providing a full view of the customer. The future of marketing belongs to those who can manage identity in a fragmented world—and those who can’t will struggle to stay relevant.
Latest posts
In the digital age, print coupons are dinosaurs, right? Not one bit. In fact, according to Experian Simmons, users of printed coupons — those obtained from newspapers, magazines, mail, etc.—outnumber users of digital coupons by a margin of almost 3-to-1. As of February 14, 2011 (the latest date for which data was available at the time of this post), 68% of all U.S. adults said their household uses print coupons, a number that has remained relatively unchanged during the past five years. 68% of all U.S. adults said their household uses print coupons, a number that has remained relatively unchanged during the past five years. By comparison, Experian Simmons also reports that 22% of all U.S. adults say their household uses digital coupons obtained from email or the Internet. That figure may be lower than the usage reported for any measured type of print coupon, including those handed out in or near stores, but adoption of digital coupons is growing: in 2005, just 12% of American adults used digital coupons. Smartphones adoption will continue to propel digital coupon use to historic highs in the months and years to come. According to an analysis featured in the 2010 U.S. Household Consumer Trend and Benchmark Report, 34% of U.S. iPhone owners use digital coupons compared with just 21% of non-iPhone owners. Interestingly, use of print coupons among iPhone owners doesn’t suffer a bit. In fact, as of February 14, 2011, 68% of iPhone owners reported that their household used print coupons versus 64% of non-iPhone owners, making it obvious that merchants should give their customers an option of using both print and digital coupons. For further consumer insights, download the 2010 U.S. Household Consumer Trend and Benchmark Report, which includes trends on economic outlook by household income, charitable contributions and planned automobile purchases.
Spiders, Rams, Seminoles, Golden Eagles, and Bulldogs. This is one way to describe the diverse collection of Cinderella teams that have advanced to the Sweet 16 in this year's NCAA men's basketball tournament. Four of these teams, the University of Richmond, Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU), Florida State, and Marquette, take their double-digit seeds to the next round in hopes of reaching the Elite 8. Butler, last year's Cinderella story, is seeking a visit to the Final Four for the second straight year. Interestingly, Richmond, VA is the home market for two of the Sweet 16 teams. These are the University of Richmond and VCU. Even more interesting is the fact that these two teams are on a collision course. With wins in the next round they would meet in the Elite 8 for a prized spot in the Final Four. With their surprise victories in the tournament so far, what these teams have in common is being labeled “bracket busters.” A more extensive market analysis uncovers other similarities, plus some notable differences. Here are highlights from profiles of the home market areas for this year's Cinderella teams using data from Experian's Mosaic consumer lifestyle segmentation system and Experian Simmons market research. The following statistics are based on the home markets of the five Cinderella teams. All four Cinderella teams hail from markets with above average interest in college basketball. Milwaukee, home of 11th seeded Marquette, has the highest concentration of adults who are interested in college basketball (28.1%). This is 11 percent relatively higher than percentage for the total U.S. Milwaukee also has the highest percentage of adults who said they watched last year's men's NCAA Division I tournament (17.3%). This is a relative six percent higher than the total U.S. The 10th seeded Florida State Seminoles hail from Tallahassee, which has the second highest percentage of adults with an interest in college basketball (26.9%). Richmond, where both 11th seeded VCU and 12th seeded Richmond are based, is just behind Tallahassee when it comes to the percentage of adults who are interested in college basketball (26.7%). Indianapolis has the lowest percent of residents who are interested in college basketball (26.3%), but that's still a relative four percent higher than the U.S. as a whole. Although interest should be very high this year, Richmond and Indianapolis (15.8% each) have the lowest percentage of adults who watched last year's tournament. Cinderella Team Market Snapshots Richmond, VA Home market of: Richmond Spiders, VCU Rams Sweet 16 opponents: Kansas, Florida State The top two segments in Richmond representing 30% of the market's households are: Metro Minority Communities (18.1%) comprised of married couples and single-parent minorities earning above average incomes from a mix of service industry and white-collar jobs in transportation, health care, education, and public administration. Urban Commuter Families (11.5%) comprised of upscale, college educated Baby Boomer families and couples living in single detached homes in city neighborhoods on the metropolitan fringe. Other interesting facts: Most over-represented segment is Metro Minority Communities (3.8 times the national average) Percent of adults with interest in college basketball is 26.7% Percent of adults who watched last year's men's college basketball tournament is 15.8% Tallahassee, FL Home market of: Florida State Seminoles Sweet 16 opponent: VCU Rams Similar to Richmond, the top two segments in Tallahassee are Metro Minority Communities (14.8%) and Urban Commuter Families (6.9%). The two segments that account for the next highest share of households are: Struggling City Centers (6.7%) comprised of young, single and single-parent minority renters living in low-income city neighborhoods. Rural Southern Living (6.5%) comprised of lower-income blue-collar couples and families living in sparsely settled mobile home communities. Other interesting facts: Most over-represented market segment is College Town Communities (6.2 times the national average) Percent of adults with interest in college basketball is 26.9% Percent of adults who watched last year's men's college basketball tournament is 16.8% Milwaukee, WI Home market of: Marquette Golden Eagles Sweet 16 opponent: North Carolina Tarheels The top segment in Milwaukee representing 11.2% of households is Urban Commuter Families (as described above). The two segments that account for the next highest share of households are: Small-town Success (10.5%) comprised of white collar, college educated, middle-aged working couples living in newly developed subdivisions outside the nation's beltways. Steadfast Conservative (9.3%) comprised of high-school educated mature singles and couples living in middle-class urban blue-collar neighborhoods. Other interesting facts: Most over-represented market segment is Successful Suburbia (3.6 times the national average) Percent of adults with interest in college basketball is 28.1% Percent of adults who watched last year's men's college basketball tournament is 17.3% Indianapolis, IN Home market of: Butler Bulldogs Sweet 16 opponent: Wisconsin Badgers There are four equal size segments that account for just over 30% of Indianapolis households. These include Steadfast Conservative (8.9%), Urban Commuter Families (7.8%), and Small-town Success (7.1%). All three of these segments are also among the top five in Richmond, Tallahassee, and Milwaukee. What makes Indianapolis unique from the other three markets is a higher percentage of New Suburbia Families (7.2%). These are young, affluent working couples with pre-school children concentrated in fast-growing, metro fringe communities. Other interesting facts: Most over-represented market segment is Successful Suburbia (2.8 times the national average) Percent of adults with interest in college basketball is 26.3% Percent of adults who watched last year's men's college basketball tournament is 15.8%
Tournament play begins this week in the 2011 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament, which means office productivity is likely to take a hit as fans jump online to watch live streams of games being played during working hours. With online viewing options expanded to mobile and other digital platforms this year, fans have more avenues than ever to get their March Madness fix. In fact, according to a recent estimate by Challenger, Gray & Christmas, total online tournament viewership during work hours is likely to reach 8.4 million hours during this year's tournament. In this latest installment of Experian Marketing Services' continuing March Madness consumer coverage, we'll profile the work life of online game streamers. Is there one down the hall or in the next cube? The answer is almost certainly “yes,” but the “who” may surprise you. According to Experian Simmons, just over 5% of all U.S. adults and nearly a quarter of adult NCAA men's tournament viewers (24%) qualify as likely online game streamers. For the purpose of this analysis, likely online game streamers is defined as those U.S. adults who watched the last NCAA men's basketball tournament who also sought out sports information online or watched online video in the last 30 days. These likely online game streamers must have also visited either cbssports.com or espn.com in the last 30 days. Fully 79% of likely online game streamers are employed either full-or or part-time, with 59% working 40 or more hours a week. Department managers and IT staff-have reason to be concerned about a loss in productivity during March Madness: fully 79% of likely online game streamers are employed either full-or or part-time, with 59% working 40 or more hours a week. Don't be so quick to suspect that colleague who always shows up late and goes home early as a game streamer. A safer bet would be the guy who's always at his desk when you get in and still there when you head out. In fact, one-in-ten adults who work more than 40 hours a week (11%) are likely online game streamers, meaning they're more than twice as likely as the average adult to be checking out the game online. Remote employees who work at home often get a bad rap with office “suits” sometimes assuming their pajama-clad colleagues fall prey to distractions. Actually though, Americans who work from home are no more or less likely to be likely online streamers than those who don't work from home. Likewise, the self-employed are no more or less likely to be online game streamers than laborers who work for “the man.” Interestingly, Experian Simmons found a direct correlation between company size and a worker's chance of being a likely online game streamer. Specifically: Those who work in companies with fewer than 100 employees are 17% less likely than the average American worker to be likely online game streamers. Those who work in companies with between 100 and 499 employees are just two percent less likely than average to be likely streamers while those employed by companies with between 500 and 999 employees are eight percent more likely to be online game streamers. Employees of companies with 1,000 or more employees are the most likely culprits with the group on average being 17% more likely to be likely online game streamers. As such, it's no surprise that Fortune 500 companies are the most at risk of having offices full of online streamers during March Madness. Employees of Fortune 500 companies are fully 66% more likely to be online game streamers than those who Americans employed by a non-Fortune 500 company. Finally, the best insight into whether your office mates are streaming basketball games online instead of working is by looking at their paycheck (not that we encourage that of course). Specifically, as income rises, so does one's chance of being an online game streamer: Employed Americans who personally earn less than $25,000 annually are the least likely to be online game streamers, scoring 50% below average on this metric. Those who earn between $25,000 and $49,999 are only 15% less likely to be game streamers. If you know or suspect that your colleague earns upwards of $50,000 a year, it's a good idea to keep an eye on them for the rest of the month; workers with incomes between $50,000 and $74,999 are 33% more likely than average to be likely game streamers and those who earn between $75,000 and $99,999 are 75% more likely to be likely game streamers. Your colleagues earning $100,000 or more annually are the most likely to be streaming online, with those personally taking home between $100,000 and $149,000 being a whopping 164% more likely than the average employee to be streaming games online. And those earning $150,000 or more annually being fully 176% more likely to be online game streamers. Moreover, one-in-five adults who earn $150,000 a year or more fall into our likely online game streamers segment compared with just 5% of all U.S. adults. The first match-up to be played during the traditional workday tips off at 12:15 EDT on Thursday March 17th when West Virginia takes on the winner of the second round-one play-in game. Armed with this information, you should be able to catch-or join-your office's online game streamers in the act.