Suggestions
Travis Scoles
SVP, Product Management, Advanced Advertising - Vantage at ViacomCBS
Travis Scoles is currently the Executive Vice President of Advanced Advertising at Paramount.24 He oversees Vantage, Paramount's advanced advertising platform, as well as other data optimization and analysis products.2 Scoles is responsible for managing key efforts in currency and measurement innovation for the company.3
Scoles joined ViacomCBS (now Paramount) in February 2020 as SVP of Product Management for Advanced Advertising.4 He has since been promoted to his current role, where he manages Paramount's Advanced Advertising business, including sales, operations, data science, engineering, and product for several key advertising platforms.4
Prior to joining Paramount, Scoles worked in consulting, focusing on quantitative research, media analytics, and media optimization.3 He has been recognized in Ad Age's 40 under 40 and Broadcasting + Cable's 40 under 40 lists for his contributions to the advertising industry.3 Scoles also serves as the Chairman of the U.S. Joint Industry Committee's Board of Directors.3
Scoles holds a BA in Economics from Amherst College, where he graduated Cum Laude.1 He currently resides in Darien, CT with his wife and two children.3
Highlights
Have you seen the new Paramount-Pepsi commercial? Between the talent, the Gladiator IP, and overall production, how can you not call that premium?
"Premium" is probably the most debated term in the industry.
Publishers make the argument that premium is driven by the content. Long form, professionally produced video that is designed to engage an audience and elicit emotional connection.
Platforms make the argument that premium is driven by the user. UGC? Cat video? It's all premium to the person that searches for that topic.
This post isn't here to continue to litigate that topic. Instead, I'd like to unpack premium as it pertains to things that aren't content. It's no secret that the creative itself is the cornerstone of a campaign's performance, so what makes a creative premium?
I'd argue this Pepsi commercial is an amazing example of how to do it right. You want attention? Launch an ad with 4 of the biggest talents in the NFL, right at the start of the season. What about non-sports fans? Let's add one of the top musical talents in the nation, and frame it within one of the most anticipated theatrical releases of the year. How can anyone argue that the branding effect of this ad will be matched by display, generic copy, etc.?
Here's where these topics converge. This type of premium ad only makes sense in matching content, which is overwhelmingly found on linear and streaming TV. An ad with Derek Henry matches much better in the Ravens game than unrelated how-to videos. The production value of the Gladiator theme feels odd if juxtaposed against most UGC.
The concept of premium needs to expand beyond the content when viewed through an advertising lens. Creative, activation method, available measurement, and yes - user intent, all drive the impact of advertising, and should be thought about in the same vein. When "premiumness" is matched across the board (obviously including content), that's when you unlock amazing branding moments, as Pepsi just did.
Today is my birthday. As this day does for many of us, it causes some reflection on the past years and a recognition of the pace of change in our lives.
Media has undergone more change than most things, and is a huge part of my life, so I've been thinking about some of the major shifts over the past 5 years.
One thing that is easy to look towards is the move from "spots and dots" to data driven advertising in TV. In the last decade, this has gone from essentially non-existent in the traditional linear space, to a huge part of the linear ecosystem, to the core of streaming advertising. We often point towards consumer behavior or technological evolution as the driver of this, but I'm not sure that's right (it's at least not the entire story). I think it's more a result of the blurring of lines between advertising channels.
The emergence of digital platforms in the video space, and the impact on advertiser expectations, is hard to overstate. Digital advertising forged the data oriented space, mostly in display. As large players like Google spilled into the video space, first in short form and now long form, many of the mechanisms they relied on (especially in the data realm) went from unavailable in video to table stakes.
The odd thing is, in many ways, that evolutionary flow has been one way. Brand safety is a good example - social platform content risks are still given many free passes TV is not. I think this is temporary - as the capabilities of TV (platform or publisher) converge with traditional digital/user generated content, so too will eventually the same concerns around brand impact.
As publishers increase transparency in digital data as a competitive edge against platforms, so too will platforms have to lower their walls (eventually) as a result.
These aren't separate channels anymore. Convergence across platforms means much more than simply measurement. It also means converging expectations around advertising capability and impact.
There has been a ton of change, and it will continue. But I'm not sure the future is so uncertain, based on the past. We're less evolving as an industry, and more merging up like some giant adtech/measurement/activation/data/strategy Megazord. If you want to know what advertising will look like in the future, just look at the best parts of the various channels today.
Looking forward to seeing if this holds up in 5 years.
