Media Coverage

MOUNTAIN VIEW — Peter Daboll believes video is the future of online advertising. He just wants to make those ads better.

Daboll is CEO of Ace Metrix, a Mountain View firm that uses online software and banks of human evaluators to measure the quality of TV and Internet video commercials by scoring them against standard criteria for a variety of clients. Facebook recently announced that Ace Metrix is helping the social network screen its advertisers’ 15-second videos before they appear on users’ smartphones.

As more video ads appear online, they’re becoming an important source of revenue for Internet companies like Facebook, Google, Twitter and even Amazon. In this interview, edited for length and clarity, Daboll talked about this trend and the work his company does.

Q: Tell me about your process for evaluating video ads.

A: We have some 40,000 ads, already tested, in a database. We start by grabbing a TV ad as it airs or getting a digital ad or a test ad directly from an agency. They’re put in the cloud; we go out and get 500 viewer responses from around country. Those come back into our system and our clients essentially get an alert on their phone that a new ad broke in their category, so they can see how it scored.

We can also score ads using some machine data (from algorithms that can, for example, recognize elements of a 15-second ad that’s edited down from a longer ad that was already scored). These are very predictive in terms of how goods the ads are, and we can calibrate that with our human sample. The key difference for us is we’re not just testing your ad; we’re testing every ad.

Q: Who are your customers?

A: We started with brands (corporate advertisers). They’re interested in not just their own ads but how they compare to other ads, what messages are resonating with consumers. But we also work with agencies (that create ads).

By providing all these diagnostics and analytics, people can test multiple versions now. We can be involved early in the creative process. They can give us nine versions of an ad; we’ll test those and deliver results back to them in 24 hours and they’ll tweak them again.

Q: Why did Facebook ask you to help with its introduction of video ads?

A: Facebook recognized that having a standard for creative quality was essential to make its video ads work. They came out and said bad (ads) cost us money: It’s bad for the user experience. If you see a bad ad on Facebook, especially in your News Feed, you’re not just mad at the advertiser, you’re going to be mad at Facebook.

Now we’re seeing this with other online publishers. They’re saying: “If I have a great, expensive, beautiful (site), but I’m running terrible ads, what are people going to do? They’re going to leave the site.”

Q: Can a video ad be powerful in just 15 seconds?

A: We see some that are extremely effective, and some are terrible. One of the things we do for digital ads is look at the first three to five seconds, because that’s going to determine (whether someone watches to the end). If you’re on YouTube or some other platforms where you can shut off the ad, you want to make sure those three to five seconds are creating enough tension or likeability to carry the whole ad.

Q: What was your reaction a few years ago when YouTube started letting users skip ads they weren’t interested in, and only charging advertisers when someone watches?

A: You know, people can skip ads, if they’re not interested, on TV, too. You can change the channel. There’s a part of the population that avoids ads at all costs. But generally people are pretty accustomed to ads. What it comes down to is, if that ad resonates with you, you may want to watch it. That’s what Facebook is saying: They want to get ads as close to content that you would choose to watch as possible.

Q: Should digital video ads be different from ads made for broadcast or cable TV?

A: If you see a video ad on a computer, or on your TV, you really don’t process it any differently. But the phone is different, because 30 seconds on a phone just feels so much longer than it does when you’re passively watching TV or casually surfing the Web (on a PC).

Q: Is the industry trying new approaches for digital video ads?

A: Certainly Facebook is, with its “autoplay” ads. They start without sound, and they require some user interaction to restart them with sound. Right now it’s mostly, “I’m going to take the ad I already have (for TV) and run it over here, too.” But we think there’s going to be a lot more experimentation.

But as much as targeting (individual consumers’ interests) has been touted, you’re not going to have a million different versions of a video ad. You’re going to have five, or three, and you need to make sure those are the best possible ads.

Targeting can get people to take action (such as clicking or buying), but there’s a lot of value as well in “high-reach” ads (that create general awareness and even emotional attachment).

Q: How are advertisers viewing digital video? Do they see this as a good place to put their money?

A: I think it’s going to grow. What we’re going to see is better and better (ads) starting to migrate to the Web, and some people going to the Web first, without having to start on TV.

Follow this reporter at Twitter.com/BrandonBailey or google.com/+BrandonBaileyOnline or on Facebook at http://on.fb.me/ULIOfb