Why does the programmer cause controversy?

    In the era of the complete automation of all the spectra of human life, the possibility of facilitating one’s own life by means of new updates in global informational dependence and digitalized life is no longer becoming any news to anyone.

    However, even with the invention of computers for humans, a scandalous question became akin to the theory of UFOs and extraterrestrial origins of civilizations. The essence of this question, in short, was to determine whether computers and computer systems will and will ever have the ability not only to perform machine operations, but also the ability to think.

    This test was empirical and was named after the initiator of such a study, the magnificent and unrivaled Alan Turing.
    Like many scientists, fanatically embraced by the work of his whole life, he was little communicative and in tune with the general statistical society. However, the fruits of his work gave a tremendous leap and a fundamental foundation for further development and research on the basis of scientific and technological progress and further universal computerization, without which now none of the living people can imagine either their future or their present.

    The essence of these studies is to understand and find a path to understanding how computers can “instill” the ability not only to perform algorithms and calculations, but also to further predictions and the global ability of the human mind to think, as close as possible not only to processes conscious thinking, but also to the most unconscious.

    These studies combine a much larger number of affected areas than can be imagined at first glance. Allow yourself to ponder: the many years of work by scientists from various fields, such as neuropsychology, mathematical sciences, game theories, statistics and the works of physicists of many generations, as well as further research on this and not only the subject of science fiction writers, reduce everything to one global a question that later turned into an unresolved problem. Will the machine be able to inherit even a small fraction of the abilities of the human brain, and will it be possible later to somehow create on this basis a certain binary code containing the maximum data on the human genetic code?

    Unfortunately, this area of ​​scientific research is still at the stage of numerous trials and experiments. However, due to the peculiar “butterfly effect”, this question, generated by the brains of one single person, has generated in the minds of most generations so many processes that led us to the era of total mobile presence in a limitless Internet space.

    For marketers, a similar development trend made it possible to acquire the most powerful tools to influence their target consumers and sophisticated, but, of course, also practically brought to automatic, methods of influencing the minds of mankind spending their time online.

    So, the term “programmatic” is controversial and causes heated debate even among its loyal associates. Many people believe that the word “programmer” inadequately describes the range of advertising purchases, focusing on the fact that everything is done automatically. As if robots completely replace humans.

    However, the panelists at the Premium Programmatic 360 Summit in New York emphasized that the most effective software products are cybernetic in nature and imply human intervention along with the actions of robots.

    “The human factor will always be fundamental,” says Rick Greenberg, CEO of Kepler Group, a digital agency that has separated from MediaMath. “And robots provide an opportunity to scale RTB-activity. Machines can make instant decisions, but people still need to get the information that is needed to make decisions. ”

    Advertisers, agencies and advertising sellers seeking to push advertising towards programmatic are faced with the unenviable task of proving the benefits of these principles to people who are not interested in them.

    “The programmer is certainly perceived by many market players as a threat,” says Rob Burns, senior vice president of pricing and planning for media holding Gannett Company. “One of the obstacles is that sales managers see programmatic as a serious competitor. But this is fundamentally the wrong course. ”

    “I think that programmatic will soon turn from a sales channel into a sales tool,” explains Rob Burns. “This is a learning issue. Your sales team must understand that the programmer is not the enemy. Moreover, this is the best way to reach your audience. ”

    In particular, this can significantly increase the relevance of media purchases.

    Ray Reid, the North American head of programmatic at Neo @ Ogilvy, prefers not to think about the mechanisms of buying by programmer, but focuses solely on the benefits he brings.

    “We try not to talk about technology or the platform,” he says. “We are talking about the benefits that this extremely complex ecosystem provides. It is its complexity that stops customers who have neither the time nor the desire to understand the intricacies. We are talking about the capabilities of technologies that allow brand owners to fulfill their tasks. "

    This strategy should attract top marketers. But, praising technology and immediately starting with a description of the ecosystem, you can come across an impenetrable wall of misunderstanding or unwillingness to listen. It’s possible to hope that the employees responsible for advertising campaigns will start working with the RTB ecosystem only after senior marketers are interested in this system.

    These discussions are very relevant today, when software purchases have reached a certain level of maturity. In recent years, programmatic buying has gone beyond the stringent RTB framework that the market dictated earlier, and now has a direct bearing on premium inventory and even branding campaigns, which make up the bulk of the online advertising budget.

    “Interest comes when people see real progress,” says Rick Greenberg. “The usefulness and higher return will tip the scales in favor of the buy programmers. True, some brands, such as CPG, which sell directly to end consumers, will not be interested in programmatic purchases. But in an era of an integrated approach to customers, even these companies can take advantage of algorithmic procurement. ”

    “We see programmers as an effective means of finding new points of interaction with the consumer,” says Ray Reid. “How many times does an ad need to be shown to a user in order to convert it? It is programmatic that makes it possible to increase the frequency of impressions of the audience you need. For example, you cannot sell soap through an online store, but you need to show it to a specific audience, creating a positive image of the product for the consumer. This will be one touch point. A billboard will be another touch. The fact that today we can talk about a single metric indicates that in the near future, many brand managers will rely on programmed purchases. ” BYYD • Mobile Advertising Platform

    Also popular now: