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
Published in MediaPost With the explosion of smartphones and digital tablets and the steady rise of Internet-connected televisions, gaming consoles, and more, consumers are increasingly watching online video when and where they want. New research from Experian Marketing Services on cross-device video found that as of October 2013, 48% of all U.S. adults and 67% of those under the age of 35 watched online video during a typical week, up from 45% and 64%, respectively, just six months earlier. At the same time, the share of households considered “cord-cutters” — those with high speed Internet but no cable or satellite TV — is on the rise, and that has a real impact on marketers and on the medium of television, the recipient of the largest share of advertising dollars. While the growing trend in cord-cutting is understandably disturbing to cable and satellite companies and disruptive to the television advertising revenue model overall, the growth in online viewing creates opportunities for marketers. Online video viewers can be more easily targeted and served up advertising that is more relevant, responsive and measureable. Marketers can also be more confident that their online ad was actually seen given that viewers are typically unable to skip ads. And while CPMs for online video ads may generally be lower than those of TV, marketers can use that savings to negotiate costs based on clicks or transactions rather than impressions, giving them a better picture into audience interest and insights to inform their budget allocation. Expect “Cutting the cord” to continue Today, over 7.6 million U.S. homes or 6.5% of households are cord-cutters, up from 5.1 million in 2010 or 4.5% of households. One thing enabling consumers to cut the cord is the rise in Internet-connected TVs, which allows viewing of Internet video on demand without sacrificing screen size. In fact, a third of adults (34%) now have at least one TV in the home that is connected to the Internet either directly or through a separate device like an Apple TV or Roku, up from 25% in 2012. With the launch of devices like Google’s Chromecast and the Amazon Fire TV, those numbers are sure to rise even more in the months and years ahead. Cord-cutters like the bigger screen Our analysis found that the act of watching streaming or downloaded video on any device is connected to higher rates of cord-cutting but the act of watching on a television is the most highly correlated. In fact, adults who watch online video on a television are 3.2 times more likely than average to be cord-cutters. Those who watch video on their phone (the device identified in the analysis as that most commonly used for watching online video) are just 50% more likely to be cord-cutters. Millennials are more likely to be cord-cutters We found that households with an adult under the age of 35 are almost twice as likely to be cord-cutters. Throw a Netflix or Hulu account into the mix and the rate of cord-cutting among young adult households jumps to nearly one-in-four. Given these surprising stats, many Millennials may be cord-cutters without ever having “cut” a cord. And that’s an important trend to watch since it means a significant portion of this generation will never pay for TV. Millennials are also the most device-agnostic, with over a third saying they don’t mind watching video on a portable device even if it means a smaller screen. That’s more than double the rate of those ages 35 and older. This decentralized viewing can create headaches for marketers who need to start a relationship with Millennials during this stage of their lives when they’re most open to trying out new brands and have yet to settle down. On the plus side, marketers who do manage to reach this audience will find them much more open to advertising than average. In fact, Millennials are more than four times more likely to say that video ads that they view on their cell phone are useful. So while the challenge is big, so is the potential reward.
Published in AdExchanger. “Data-Driven Thinking" is written by members of the media community and contains fresh ideas on the digital revolution in media. Today’s column is written by Tom Manvydas, vice president of advertising strategy and solutions at Experian Marketing Services. The proliferation of connected electronics has spurred new interest in device-recognition technologies even though they have been in use since the 1990s. As we enter the “Internet of Things” era, device recognition will significantly impact the ad tech ecosystem. Many network advertising technologies are becoming obsolete as cookie blocking grows and the Internet becomes more mobile and device-centric. Device recognition will be yet another technology challenge for marketers but has the potential to overcome many key tracking, measurement and privacy issues with which data-driven marketers have struggled. By leveraging device recognition technologies, marketers can protect their investments in Web 2.0 ad tech, like multitouch attribution, and improve their overall digital marketing programs. Device Recognition Vs. Cookies Device recognition attempts to assign uniqueness to connected devices. By focusing on the device, you are able to “bridge” between browsers and apps, desktop to mobile and across OS platforms like iOS and Android. Device-recognition IDs function like desktop cookies for devices but with four important differences: 1. Coverage: Device-recognition methods are largely immune from cookie limitations. About half of mobile engagements on the Web do not involve cookies, while third-party blocking impacts up to 40% of desktop engagements. 2. Persistency: Device-recognition IDs can be more persistent and less fragmented than most desktop cookies. For example, Apple’s UDID or Android ID are permanent, and network node IDs like MAC addresses are near-permanent. Proxy IDs such as IDFA are persistent but can be updated by the device owner or ID provider. 3. Uniqueness: Devices are unique and cookies are fragmented. The digital media industry incurs substantial overhead cost and loss of efficiency when dealing with fragmented profiles and obsolete data caused by cookie churn. However, device-recognition methods are limited in their ability to recognize multiple profiles on shared devices. 4. Universality: Device-recognition technologies are universal and generally work across devices and networks. However, interoperability issues across device operating systems, such as iOS and Android, can limit the universal concept. There are many types of device-recognition technologies but two basic approaches to device recognition: deterministic and probabilistic, each with their pros and cons. Deterministic Approach: Accurate And Persistent But Complicated Deterministic device recognition primarily uses the collection of various IDs. While the mobile developer is familiar with the variety of IDs, it’s important that marketers become better-versed in this area. Examples include hardware IDs (including serial numbers), software-based device IDs (such as Apple’s UDID or the Android ID), digital data packet postal codes or proxy IDs (such as MAC addresses for WiFi or Bluetooth, IDFA for both iOS and Android and open-source IDs). Deterministic methods improve the accuracy of tracking, targeting and measurement over current cookie-based methods. They can improve the ability to more persistently manage consumer opt-outs. But the proliferation of device types limits the universality of deterministic device recognition. Without uniform standards across platforms, marketers need to account for multiple ID types. Also, deterministic device-recognition methods are not well developed for desktop marketing applications. The lack of interoperability across deterministic device IDs makes execution too complicated. Deterministic device IDs were meant for well-intentioned uses, such as tracking the carrier billing for a device. However, they present privacy and data rights challenges, leading to blocking or limited access by companies that control IDs. Probabilistic Device Recognition: A ‘Goldilocks’ Solution Probabilistic device recognition may be the ideal solution for a connected world that does not rely on cookies nor wants to use overly intrusive deterministic device recognition. Probabilistic device recognition is not a replacement for deterministic IDs. Instead, it complements their function and provides coverage when they are not available. The probabilistic approach is based on a statistical probability of uniqueness for any single device profile. This approach creates a unique profile based on a large number of common parameters, such as screen resolution, device type and operating system. This process can uniquely identify a device profile with 60% to 90% accuracy, compared to 20% to 85% accuracy for cookie-based identification methods. Probabilistic IDs are more persistent than cookies with better coverage, but less persistent than deterministic device IDs. The natural evolution of the device takes place over time and prevents persistent identification. Probabilistic device recognition can be universal and is not impacted by interoperability issues across platforms — the technology used to generate a probabilistic ID on one network can be the same technology on another network. Unlike some deterministic device recognition approaches, there is no device fingerprinting. Probabilistic device recognition accurately identifies profiles in aggregate, rather than a single device. That’s the inherent beauty of probabilistic device recognition: It can generate more accurate targeting results than cookie-based methods without explicitly identifying single devices. This is more than good enough for most marketers and significantly better than what’s available today. Another benefit is the absence of any residue on the device — no cookie files, flash files or hidden markers. Probabilistic methods can work on devices that block third-party cookies or connect to the Web without using any cookies. For example, you might have a hard-to-reach but valuable audience segment. Probabilistic device recognition could effectively increase your reach on this segment by 40% to 50% and increase the overall targeting accuracy by two times. Let’s say the actual population for this segment is 100,000 members. The typical cookie-based approach might reach 28,000 members but the typical probabilistic device-recognition approach could reach 65,000 members. A Decline In Hardware Entropy If you take a close look at the emitted data from today’s devices, it is not easy to analyze it for device identification. That’s because the data footprint of one device looks a lot like another. Device recognition augmentation methods can address this, such as device usage profiles, geo location clustering, cross-device/screen analytics or ID linkage for first-party data owners. In the short term, device-recognition technologies, particularly probabilistic methods, can greatly improve today’s digital marketing programs. Marketers should become fluent in their use cases and benefits. If 2013 was the year of mobile, I think we’ll see a surge in marketing applications based on device-recognition technologies in 2014. Follow Experian Marketing Services (@ExperianMkt) and AdExchanger (@adexchanger) on Twitter.
According to Experian Marketing Services’ 2014 Digital Marketer: Benchmark and Trend Report, social media Websites are playing an increasingly important role in driving traffic to other Websites, including retail sites and even other social networking sites, at the expense of search engines and portal pages. For instance, as of March 2014, social media sites account for 7.72 percent of all traffic to retail Websites, up from 6.59 percent in March 2013. Further, Pinterest, more than Facebook or YouTube, is supplying the greatest percentage of downstream traffic to retail sites. According to the Digital Marketer Report, more retailers are directing their customers to social media within their email campaigns. In fact, 96 percent of marketers now promote social media in their emails, and it shows. In 2013, for instance, email Websites generated 18 percent more clicks to social networking pages than the year prior. Social drives more traffic to other social Websites Social media Websites are driving more and more traffic to other social sites. In 2013, 15.1 percent of clicks to social networking and forum sites came from other social networking sites, up from a 12.5 percent click share reported in 2012. Despite driving the greatest share of traffic to social networking sites with 39.1 percent of clicks, search engines’ share of upstream traffic to social declined a relative 13 percent year-over-year. Among the other top referring industries to social, only the portal front pages industry — which includes sites like Yahoo!, MSN and AOL and is closely affiliated with search engines — showed a drop in upstream click share providing further evidence that increasingly all (or most) roads lead to social. To learn more about key trends in social media traffic, including downstream traffic from social sites and the share of consumers accessing social media across multiple channels, download the free 2014 Digital Marketer: Benchmark and Trend Report.