Is your attention worth more than mine?

Today, most advertisers pay the same amount to serve 1,000 ads to a hyper-connected super-influencer as they do to my granny (granny only rarely uses the Web and has relatively few followers on Twitter). The CPM, or ‘cost per mille’, is undifferentiated from user to user – despite the fact that some users are very much more influential than others: the value is crudely determined by the advertiser, the site and the quality of your sales team.

It’s true that there are snazzy behavioural targeting technologies that allow site owners to gain a higher degree of individual insight – for example, by tracking which sites and what type of content they have been visiting and consuming before arriving at yours – but the basic, flat-rate same-CPM-for-everyone is still the prevailing model for monetising online visits in the UK and US.

One of the most interesting ideas discussed at last week’s SxSW was the idea of ‘Personal CPM’. The idea was mooted in Charlene Li’s talk on The Future of Social Networks as a natural consequence of:

“Social networks becoming like air – not as in ‘sites’ like MySpace and Facebook, but in terms of relationships and connections being available anywhere and everywhere”.

The trend towards greater interoperability and technologies that allow us to port and share our online identities and social graph in more sophisticated ways across any and all of the digital services we use mean that it is only a matter of time before a site we visit knows how influential we are as individuals.

How? By understanding a very great deal more about us as individuals from our social behaviours: namely, our social identities, contacts/network and activities. From this, as Charlene says below in an earlier video interview about the social algorithm, machines will be able to understand who’s important to us, what’s important, when and where and serve up more relevant and interesting recommendations.

Of course, this will rely upon us opting in to share a whole lot more of our data, but there are huge incentives to do this. In a few years social technologies will be baked into everything around us and a social algorithm for sharing our data with this dynamic, smart-cloud will be like an invisible passport to access content and services wherever we are. Can you imagine stopping to log in to each individual service when *everything* is connected? And how many of us are already treading a dangerous and slightly chaotic line between public and private on Facebook, Twitter and other services? We certainly need help managing all this stuff, and it seems likely that we’d swap a key to our personal social algorithm for convenience and access. Of course, we’re not about to hand the keys to anyone, we’ll need trusted brokers. Charlene thinks Google is uniquely trustworthy and well-placed to be one of these brokers.

Screenshot of a slide from Charlene Li’s Future of Social Networks presentation at SxSW09 on Slideshare

One of the most interesting possibilities of a ‘personal social algorithm’ like this would be the ability of participating sites to analyse the value of your personal network on the fly. Advertisers would get charged more if you were particularly influential and less if you weren’t. Sites would also be able to serve more tailored and personalised ads, and also to show you what people in your network think of the content, services and products you’re looking at. As TV, Web and mobile converge this kind of personal CPM would become quite powerful, with the most connected and influential people generating significantly greater value than others. In this scenario, wouldn’t it be fair for the most connected and influential people to receive a share of the revenue?

5 comments

Author: Joe Joe

Something tells me that the influencers you’re talking about are just that because the do the web properly – they have real conversations with real people within their networks, they understand that ‘doing’ is about collaborating, creating and spreading, not shouting and interrupting. I guess what I’m trying to say is the more influential someone is the less predisposed they will be to paying attention to advertising – no matter how targeted or personalized it is.

Author: tim tim

But Joe – what about if you could make advertising that was actually genuinely useful?

Author: Joe Joe

Hmmm, useful would be great, but don’t you think stuff inside boxes (banners) is only useful when you get it out and play with it. If the person can talk to it, remix it, use it and spread it again then that’s cool, but doesn’t it then cease to be advertising, oh and don’t these guys know what they like through their own connections and investigation?

Author: tim tim

I was hoping we were talking ‘beyond the banner’: branded utility, advertising as a service

Author: Kang Kang

Tell me about it. CPM only really works if your site is one of the components which drive/direct internet traffic, otherwise for the most of us, traffic comes in spikes…… and then dies away.

I suppose the reason internet adspace isnt as hot as it should be, is because banners and side widgets, realistically dont work.

Seriously, how many people even click on the Google text ads anymore these days. The problem is people are concious of the fact that it IS an advert and we’re all secretly expecting the internet to not get saturated like the way mainstream media is.

What Joe says about being about to play with the stuff inside the adbox is quite useful actually, everybody knows its a pr stunt – but if it’s cool maybe it’ll stick? I don’t know, I’m far from the marketing guru.

As a niche blogger, the CPM rate is just not worth it (I dont have a massive adwords budget behind me to drive traffic) , if there is a better way to improve my cpm rate by showing off my targeted demographics (like say quantcast for example) – will that lead to a better CPM for my subject area?

Hmm.