Can you recall all the times over the years where people have been proclaiming the 30-second spot dead or dying?
Many articles have been written about it. The topic has been bandied about for almost 20 years now, but the fact is, the 30-second spot is not dead. It is being used in the incorrect way, and is due for an update.
The fact is clear, however: Nobody. Likes. Commercial. Interruptions. However, the 30-second spot that precedes content or is used sparingly during content might be OK.
Think about it. It’s the law of supply and demand. I watched a show on Paramount Plus last night, and in a 60-minute show there were 17 commercials. A regular show on network TV has 28 (yes, believe it) commercials included.
When I watched that show on Paramount Plus, I saw 17 ads for the same four to five advertisers. The frequency was high, all in the same episode.
That’s a wasted media buy. Why not simply reduce the number of commercials — maybe four as pre-roll, and four to six as spots scattered through two or three interruptions?
You could charge more for those spots, and you would create less annoyance for your customers. The advertisers get a more efficient media buy that doesn’t feel like too high a frequency.
The publisher gets the same, or even potentially more revenue for the ad spots because of the perceived value in scarcity. Consumers gets to watch their show more continuously. Feels like a win-win-win, if you ask me!
This issue of commercial interruption is more pronounced when you factor in that I’m paying the studio for access to their content, so they are making double the money. I get the model in cable where the ad placements are divvied up between local, network and operator.
That gets split among a lot of people. When I am subscribing direct, I feel like I should get fewer commercials. Interruptions suck, and we continue to perpetuate the model. It makes me truly contemplate whether I will watch shows that way or not.
The 30-second spot is an endemic piece of video advertising, but there are other models coming along. Native, product placement, overlays and more are starting to infringe on the traditional model of interruption, but the 30-second spot still has a future.
Put them at the beginning and end of a show. Limit their use and charge more. They do work when done well. Consumers are OK with that model. Make them unskippable. Consumers will live with that.
It’s the desire to keep being greedy and insert more commercial interruptions while charging for subscriptions that is going to be the death of the model. Listen to your consumers when they say, with their actions, that they don’t like the current model.
To avoid customer feedback is insanity, and it’s what started this whole problem in the first place. Cable could have sustained itself if not for the constant commercial interruptions on top of the fees it charged.
Learn from the past, look to the future, and find a better way.
This story was first published by MediaPost.com and is republished with the permission of the author.
Cory Treffiletti is chief marketing officer at generative AI-powered product placement platform, Rembrand. He was previously SVP at FIS. He has been a thought leader, executive and business driver in the digital media landscape since 1994. In addition to authoring a weekly column on digital media, advertising and marketing since 2000 for MediaPost‘s Online Spin, Treffiletti has been a successful executive, media expert and/or founding team member for a number of companies, and published a book, Internet Ad Pioneers, in 2012.
