Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United Kingdom Businesses Privacy

TV Ads To Target Households on Individual Streets in UK (msn.com) 38

An anonymous reader shares a report: Households on individual streets will be targeted with personalised adverts under plans being rolled out by Channel 4. The channel is to use new technology which will allow brands to tailor who sees their advert by enabling them to select a demographic within a specific location down to street level. For example, someone watching Made in Chelsea on Channel 4's streaming service could be served an ad for a fashion brand in a local outlet to them if a particular fashion trend is being discussed.

Advertisers can further optimise their campaign by selecting from 26 programme genres, as well as time of day and device the show is being watched on. It forms part of a wider update to Channel 4's streaming platform that the broadcaster hopes could boost revenues by as much as $13m. The company will launch a new private marketplace enabling brands to buy advertising space directly in real-time. This will allow advertisers to amend their campaigns to respond to events, whether that be real-world events such as local weather or developments in fictional storylines within TV shows. Channel 4's new ad targeting also includes more detailed data to track whether a viewer has made a purchase after seeing an ad, as well as new viewer profiles for brands to target.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

TV Ads To Target Households on Individual Streets in UK

Comments Filter:
  • by algaeman ( 600564 ) on Wednesday October 16, 2024 @03:03PM (#64870003)
    Is this controversial? Streaming services have been doing this from the very first day.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      My VPNs geolocation says I live in the town of AnonymousProxy.

      • by mjwx ( 966435 )

        My VPNs geolocation says I live in the town of AnonymousProxy.

        I doubt they're bothering with geolocation. My IP address will only tell you approximately what town I'm in and half the time it gives you the wrong town.

        I'd wager that when you sign up for Channel 4's streaming services you'll need to put in a UK street address or at least a post code (which in the UK will narrow it down to a very small area, some streets have multiple post codes).

    • Why don't the TV companies and streaming services just do what they want to actually do and have the channels just show ads all the time, who needs programmes etc when they can show ads 24hrs a day on every channel, this was they can make a fast buck and squeeze what they can from the advertisers whilst their TV channels and streaming services slow dwindle to the poor suckers who can't be bothered to cancel their subs.

      It's nearly like this now UK TV with 7 to 8 minutes of ads every 5 mins of actual programm

    • by mjwx ( 966435 )

      Is this controversial? Streaming services have been doing this from the very first day.

      Never seen any ads on streaming services. /pats uBlock Origin on the head "who's a good ad blocker, yes you are, yes you are".

      This is just another foot in the grave for traditional TV. Getting even more desperate to sell ads to an ever diminishing audience.

  • ..are still stupid, incredibly stupid.
    I would love accurately targeted ads.
    If I was in the market for a product or service, I would invite all providers of the thing I was looking for to send me their pitch.
    It would be limited to exactly what I was looking for, without spam.
    After I decide to buy, or nor, ALL pitches would stop.

    Today's sad excuse for targeting uses broad categories like men over 50. They might as well be random.
    Even worse, when I buy a product, I get an avalanche of ads for the thing I just

  • by Cpt_Kirks ( 37296 ) on Wednesday October 16, 2024 @03:25PM (#64870049)

    Do they still get to pay for the "privilege" of seeing these targeted ads?

    • by hwstar ( 35834 )

      Muddied statement.

      The TV license costs cover the BBC's operating costs. BBC channels are commercial-free. The independent channels are ad-supported.

      You can't really get away with saying you only watch the independents when they knock on your door and ask to see your TV license though.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        The BBC has loads of ads, but only for its own shows.

        I don't bother with a TV licence now. Since they made Newsnight into a shadow of its former self there just isn't anything on linear TV or the BBC that I want to watch.

      • Muddied statement.

        The TV license costs cover the BBC's operating costs. BBC channels are commercial-free. The independent channels are ad-supported.

        You can't really get away with saying you only watch the independents when they knock on your door and ask to see your TV license though.

        Whether you only watch the independents is irrelevant. "You need a TV Licence if you watch or record live TV on any channel or service." [www.gov.uk]

        • What the hell? Why would anyone apply for that TV license thing???

          • In principle, if you're found to be breaking the rules you can be fined. There are enforcement officers (who work for private companies contracted by the BBC) who make visits to homes without TV licenses to inspect. There's also the civic duty aspect - it funds the BBC, which many consider to be a public good.

            In practice, many people choose not to. The TV license inspectors are a nuisance but they can't enter your home without your permission. Unless your living situation means that someone standing on

    • by mjwx ( 966435 )

      Do they still get to pay for the "privilege" of seeing these targeted ads?

      The TV license never paid for commercial stations. It was to cover the operating budget of the BBC which has always been and remains, 100% advertisement free.

      The TV license was to remove the possibility of political interference in the BBC by removing it's funding out of the hands of parliament, so it could not be used as a "political football" as Americans put it.

  • Not only are they now having targeted ads shoved down their throats, they still pay a yearly licensing fee equivalent to 220 US dollars for the 'privilege' of having their eyes and ears violated.

    • $220 per year is nothing. Basic cable in the U.S. is close to $100 per month. Once you start adding in the "special" channels which come as a package (all sport, all entertainment, etc) you can easily reach $200 per month.

      And you still get ads.

      • by PPH ( 736903 )

        Basic cable in the U.S. is close to $100 per month.

        But rabbit ears are free.

        • Basic cable in the U.S. is close to $100 per month.

          But rabbit ears are free.

          If you only want 5 or 6 channels, and you are happy with what is on those channels, then, yes.

          • by PPH ( 736903 )

            If you only want 5 or 6 channels

            90 channels here.

            you are happy with what is on those channels

            All the streaming stuff, delayed by a year or two. Fine. I don't need to watch the new releases _Right_Now_ just to keep up with the cool kids.

      • You still on cable? Cut the cord and save some bucks!

    • The TV licence is for the BBC-produced channels and content only. It has absolutely nothing to do with the commercial, independent, ad-supported and free-to-air ITV, C4, C5 or the ever-growing plethora of digital TV and streaming-based services available in the UK.

      The clues really are in the names for much of it - BBC first (British Broadcasting Corporation), ITV - Independent TeleVision ("channel 3", in the old analogue days, back when there really were just 3 channels to choose from - the launch of C4

  • Looks like an act of desperation on Channel 4's part.

    Unless you're a sports fan, why would you bother with linear TV?

    (In fact, why would you bother with anything on Linear TV. It's mostly garbage IMHO.

    OTA TV Broadcasting and Cable TV is a dying business.

    Sports programming still is viable, but commands a pretty penny from the sports leagues which an advertising-only model is growing increasingly incapable of supporting.

    • I have BBC NEWS (Virgin Media 601) on the telly. That’s linear. Not sport or C4.
    • It's nothing to do with linear TV. It is of course impossible to target multiple different broadcasts to the level of individual streets via the over-air transmission tower network. The coverage is vastly too broad and the technology to send different signals out even to individual towers doesn't really exist, mostly because it'd just be wildly expensive to establish truly independent links to each tower.

      As the summary says, this article is talking about the streaming service which used to be called "4OD

    • This is for Channel 4s streaming, non-linear service ... Not broadcast TV ...

  • For example, someone watching Made in Chelsea on Channel 4's streaming service could be served an ad for a fashion brand in a local outlet to them if a particular fashion trend is being discussed.

    Discussed...by whom? Is the TV listening to your discussions?

  • They'll spend $20,000 out of the accounting budget each year to see if there's even a possibility to save 1% on something from another department that costs in total under $2500 a year. They'll spend millions on a free wifi scheme at their stores that will track phones and present targeted ads at the point of purchase knowing full well that even if 100% of every purchase recommended by this idiotic scheme went through it would never make back a fraction of its cost. They'll have marketing departments stuffe

  • they have few viewers than GB news and they only have the presenter and his mum.
  • ...No longer has adverts in English then?

  • "It's not your imagination, Mr. Smith ... your neighbors really can smell your BO! Consider our deodorant today!"

I'd rather just believe that it's done by little elves running around.

Working...