There is no dispute that the wheels of change in media are turning ever more quickly. Consider the announcement of the video iPod® in October 2005; in a few short weeks, this event precipitated an outpouring of program download offerings from broadcast and cable networks not only for the video iPod, but also for PC viewing through Internet sites, or television viewing through cable and satellite television operators.

Even the largest companies are rushing to leverage the latest technologies as a means to target their messages while a common metric of effectiveness is not in place. At the same time, consumers seem to be busier than ever – meaning that their attention to any one medium or activity is rarely undivided. In this fragmented environment, advertisers and media companies are challenged as never before to quantify the value of traditional and non traditional advertising.

Media researchers, as well, must figure the metrics that matter today. Engagement has become a buzz word, and rightly so, signifying the need to define not just exposure, but the potential for effectiveness. Measuring actual effectiveness, of course, requires that we tie media measurement to purchase; but efforts at grand measurement schemes are frequently tripped up by seemingly small factors – such as uniform encoding of broadcasts so that they can be registered by portable meters.

We encourage advertisers to be adventurous in their pursuit of consumers; the means to target are in place, and efficiency is increasing. We also believe that the most important starting place for any media measurement is the goals set by advertisers. As campaigns become more targeted and eclectic, measuring ad efficacy demands not so much massive infrastructure as flexibility and ingenuity. If we can be relentlessly innovative in how we approach measurement and our understanding of effectiveness, we can measure not just media, or advertising, but consumer response.