In this article…
As TV measurement continues to evolve and blend with digital, marketers need to stay on top of the newest trends to understand and capitalize on viewer behavior across all screen types. Several key developments for TV measurement in 2024 are helping shape the industry, including Nielsen’s global expansion and the increasing interest in alternative measurement providers.
Read on to learn more about how these changes can impact the future of TV measurement.
TV measurement background
In the ever-shifting terrain of television measurement, one name has long stood as the bedrock: Nielsen.
Nielsen
Nielsen is a leading provider of TV audience measurement and analytics. It is known for its TV rating system, which tracks viewership across various demographics and time slots. Nielsen’s data is used by media companies, advertisers, and broadcasters to understand audience preferences, develop, and plan advertising campaigns, and monitor program performance.
Nielsen’s recent global expansion
Nielsen has continued to expand its global coverage and now fully represents 100% of TV households in the continental U.S., delivering comprehensive and accurate audience measurement. Through this expansion, Nielsen has remained a go-to resource for domestic and international television analytics.
In 2021, Nielsen faced a significant setback when it was stripped of its MRC (Media Rating Council) accreditation, sending shockwaves through the industry. While the accreditation was eventually reinstated in 2023, the incident underscored the need for diversification and alternatives within TV measurement.
TV measurement competitor outlook
For decades, advertisers and agencies have relied on Nielsen’s metrics as the gold standard, a trusted source of data guiding ad spending and campaign strategies. However, recent developments have shaken this foundation, prompting a reevaluation of the TV measurement landscape.
One notable trend emerging in tv measurement in 2024 is the increasing interest in alternative measurement providers. As advertisers seek greater transparency, accuracy, and flexibility in measurement, many are exploring options beyond Nielsen. These providers offer distinct advantages and drawbacks, presenting advertisers and agencies with a wealth of options and considerations.
Here are the main competitors in the field.
Panel-based TV measurement providers
Panel-based TV measurement has long been a staple in the industry, relying on representative samples of viewers to extrapolate audience behavior. In 2024, several providers offer panel-based solutions, each with different strengths.
Comscore
Comscore is a key player in panel-based TV measurement, offering comprehensive audience measurement solutions for both linear and digital television. With its massive panel of opted-in households, Comscore provides advertisers with detailed demographic and behavioral insights, enabling targeted advertising strategies. Comscore recently earned MRC accreditation for total household and average audience measurement in national and local TV reports.
Kantar Media
Kantar Media offers a range of panel-based TV measurement services, including audience measurement, ad effectiveness measurement, and competitive intelligence. With its global footprint and deep expertise in media analytics, Kantar Media helps advertisers understand audience trends and optimize their media investments.
Kantar Media is currently working to create a cross-media measurement panel similar in size to what Nielsen offers. While Kantar Media does not presently operate in the U.S. TV measurement market, it would be a formidable competitor should it move into the arena.
ACR-based TV measurement providers
Automatic content recognition (ACR) technology has revolutionized TV measurement, allowing for real-time monitoring of content consumption across devices. In 2024, several providers use ACR technology to deliver innovative measurement solutions.
iSpot.TV
iSpot.TV has emerged as a leading provider of ACR-based TV measurement, using its advanced technology stack to capture and analyze TV ad exposures in real-time. Through its acquisition of 605, iSpot.TV strengthens its position in the market, offering advertisers enhanced audience targeting and attribution capabilities.
iSpot.tv’s ad catalog and ad occurrence data are fully accredited by the MRC, which is one of its strongest assets.
Samba TV
Samba TV offers a comprehensive ACR-based TV measurement platform, providing advertisers with insights into audience behavior across linear, streaming, and connected TV environments. With its robust data infrastructure and machine learning algorithms, Samba TV enables advertisers to optimize their TV advertising campaigns for maximum impact.
Samba has recently partnered with HyphaMetrics to create an alternative panel to compete with others in the market.
TVision
TVision is a smaller competitor in this group that blends ACR-based TV measurement solutions with a panel-based approach, offering advertisers and networks real-time visibility into viewer engagement and attention metrics. By tracking viewer attention and emotional response, TVision helps advertisers understand the effectiveness of their TV ad campaigns and make data-driven decisions.
Advantages of alternative measurement providers
As the TV measurement landscape continues to evolve in 2024, alternative measurement providers present compelling advantages over traditional approaches. Let’s explore three key benefits of embracing alternative measurement providers.
Diverse data sources
Alternative providers use a wide array of data sources, including set-top boxes, smart TVs, streaming platforms, and digital devices, offering a more comprehensive view of audience behavior.
Granular insights
Many alternative providers offer granular insights into viewer demographics, preferences, and engagement metrics, allowing for more targeted and effective advertising strategies.
Real-time analytics
Some providers offer real-time analytics capabilities, enabling advertisers to optimize campaigns on the fly and capitalize on emerging trends and opportunities.
Challenges with alternative measurement providers
Alternative providers face several key challenges that need to be addressed before they are widely adopted. Let’s dive into each challenge in more detail.
Fragmentation
With multiple providers using different methodologies and metrics, achieving standardization and comparability across campaigns can be a daunting task.
With the proliferation of over-the-top (OTT) services, the TV measurement landscape has become increasingly complex, with new platforms emerging regularly. While ACR technology has enhanced data collection directly from televisions, the market remains highly fragmented, with many manufacturers (like Vizio, LG, and Samsung) building their own ACR solutions.
Data privacy concerns
As TV measurement becomes increasingly data-driven, concerns around consumer privacy and data ethics loom large, necessitating robust privacy protocols and compliance measures. We’ve already seen lawsuits around the ACR approach to TV measurement.
Education and adoption
Shifting away from the familiar territory of Nielsen requires education and buy-in from stakeholders, including advertisers, agencies, and media buyers, which can be a gradual and iterative process.
Importance of an identity graph in TV measurement
As the TV measurement landscape trends toward a blend of options instead of singular approaches, the ability to identify and target audiences across platforms is crucial. An identity graph serves as a foundational tool that can enable brands and advertisers to resolve disparate data sources into a unified view of the consumer.
Embedded within our suite of products, our Graph offers a distinct advantage for accurate attribution and reporting. As the industry shifts toward cross-channel campaigns, our in-house nationally representative device graph becomes increasingly invaluable.
Unlike many providers, we seamlessly merge offline and digital data, enabling superior ID resolution and matching capabilities. This allows us to consolidate media logs from diverse sources, providing our clients with comprehensive reports for precise cross-channel comparisons.
As advertisers navigate the complexities of the TV measurement landscape in 2024, using the capabilities of identity graphs like Experian’s will be essential for driving effective cross-channel advertising strategies and maximizing ROI.
How Experian supports TV measurement
Experian has been in the TV measurement space for decades and offers flexible attribution reports that can attribute media spend on TV to real actions or outcomes, such as website visits, physical location visits, and online and offline sales. We also have unique data through our automotive and financial databases that can be used for attribution.
Through our Consumer Sync solutions, you can elevate your attribution quality to understand the true path to conversion by linking all digital touchpoints to a single person.
Navigating the next frontier of TV measurement
TV measurement in 2024 presents both challenges and opportunities for understanding audience behaviors and preferences. We anticipate a continued migration toward alternative providers as advertisers seek greater flexibility and accuracy in measurement. We expect a fragmented future for TV measurement, where data sources extend beyond traditional giants like Nielsen to include numerous smaller players. Despite the entrenched role of linear TV measurement, advertisers must adapt to a blend of data from diverse sources to navigate the evolving landscape.
At Experian, we have the solutions to help you tackle 2024 marketing trends and make the most of your consumer marketing data. Our Graph enables seamless tracking across devices and channels, allowing us to implement first-touch, last-touch, and multi-touch attribution models with unparalleled accuracy. By harnessing the capabilities of our Graph, our attribution solutions can assign value to every crucial touchpoint in the customer journey, giving you a more holistic and comprehensive view of your campaign performance.
Connect with an Experian expert to learn more about how we can help you succeed in your marketing efforts.
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.