Learning To Measure Earned Media Value

The Frontline marketing approach to creating and sharing brand stories is usually defined by the cyclical Listen, Create and Share process. As part of this, listening-centric analytics are needed to fuel content creation, validate results, and provide benchmarks that help optimize and understand what type of engagement activity is resonating with consumers. However, earned media values (EMV) are remarkably difficult to measure.

That’s why, for the past several years, Ayzenberg’s paid media and social divisions have used earned media as a core metric to validate engagement for content, and the result was the Ayzenberg Earned Media Value Index (AEMVI). Vincent Juarez, principal at Ayzenberg & ION alongside the director of Analytics at Ayzenberg & [a]insights, Robin Boytos, explained how the AEMVI provided deeper insights into measuring earned media at the [a]list summit today.

To provide some context, the launch of the ION Influencer Division further increased reliance on earned media to justify the transition a traditional marketing approach to a more content-centric one. As the reliance on content and influencer marketing increased, so did the need for reliable metrics, and so the AEMVI was created to provide marketers with an evolving benchmark to evaluate campaign ROI.

Although many marketers know what earned media values are, few feel that they have a thorough understanding of what it is. Juarez explains that “earned media values are essentially the value of the extended paid media that happens as a result of those types of actions and the dollar value associated with it. More importantly, they validate the increasing use of high-engagement content marketing and influencer marketing tactics. You can look at this from the perspective of, ‘if all social media activity ceased to exist, what is the what is the media value that’s needed to drive that kind of result?'”

Although we all know that there’s an inherent value to a Facebook Like or Instagram comment, it’s difficult to show that to an upper-level executive. So, in the first step in figuring out how to measure EMV, they evaluated how much it would cost to create the same level of engagement using paid media. It’s important to note that neither Juarez or Boytos originally set out to create a metrics system from the ground up, but searching the internet yielded vague or outdated numbers. There was a clear need in the marketplace for updated values and an industry standard to measure influencer campaigns, which is why Boytos concluded that a new study had to be commissioned.

For sources, the team gathered as many comps as they could find and grouped them into four main categories:

• Auction based pricing. For this category, they went into social platforms like Facebook and Twitter and set up campaigns on five key verticals (gaming, automotive, beauty/fashion, entertainment and consumer electronics). Then they pulled real-world pricing data for any action that can be bought on a paid media basis.
• Years of paid media and social data from Ayzenberg. The study took all the resulting actions from these campaigns and derived a cost per every action.
• Organic social campaigns. Although some may question why organic campaigns were included when they were looking for costs of paid campaigns, Boytos explains that “even if paid media costs don’t apply, there are still managed service fees that go into creating them. Whether you or an agency or company, it costs money to produce this content, so there’s still value to those actions.”
• Third party publications. Anything that was published on the internet as a rate for each of these action, was included into the index. This creates a normalized view, since the study isn’t solely based on Ayzenberg’s data.

They then tied all the pieces together by evaluating every comp, throwing out any major outliers, and factored in whether these campaigns were engagement focused or funnel focused, then adjusted the comps accordingly.

Juarez presented the results for video view metrics, which were based on a foundation built using data from YouTube, since it has such a long history. Factoring in the premium nature of influencer and content marketing, the study settled on a $0.12  cost-per-view standard as a starting point. A conversion had to be applied when looking at Vine videos, given their short nature. So, it was determined that every five loops equated to one completed view, which makes each loop worth about two-cents.

Snapchat was trickier because there wasn’t a lot of history, and it doesn’t sell on a cost-per-view basis. Videos on the social channel turned out to be lower than YouTube, so the team took a step back and looked at the content being created. That’s when they realized that they had to adjust up, because Snapchat content has an “inherent sense of urgency,” said Juarez. Videos on Snapchat have in-the-moment engagement like a sporting events and livestreams. Audiences are engaged at a different level.

Facebook, Instagram and Twitter initially came out 3-6 times higher than YouTube, but they had to be adjusted down to $0.12 because the data is based on a three second dwell time, which isn’t the same as a completed view.

Boytos presented a look at the cost per action breakdown across social platforms. Actions include cost-per-click (CPC), cost-per-each-engagement (CPE), cost-per-comment (CPCO) and cost-per-page-like (CPPL). Boytos added that CPE data shouldn’t be relied on unless you don’t have visibility into Likes, shares and comments, since “not all engagements are created equal.” Some engagements take more effort than others, so they shouldn’t be all valued the same.

Facebook’s EMV highlights include a CPC value of $0.15 and a CPE of $1.97. The system breaks each engagement down into individual values, and Likes ended up being the least valuable ($0.39), because they’re so easy to do, while comments ($1.75) and shares ($1.93) require more effort. Shares are the most valuable, because shared content is cast to a wider audience, which is extremely valuable. Cost-per-page-likes can be purchased through auction bidding, and the team also factored in organic campaigns. Page likes are especially valuable to organic campaigns, because it’s proof that your campaign did so well that people want to subscribe to it, which can lead to other actions like comments and shares, so that’s why it’s valued at $1.72.

On Twitter, CPE came out to $1.73, replies are worth $1.58 and retweets are $1.67 and favorites are $1.49. Many of the values closely match Facebook, but Twitter’s most valuable action is gaining followers, which are valued at $2.39 each.

Juarez then discussed practical applications for the study. Several large clients across many different verticals were used to put the EMV metrics through a real-world stress test. The first involved a travel series that included five videos and over sixty-six content pieces across YouTube, Instagram and Twitter. Based on calculations, the campaign generated $143 thousand in earned media value.

The second campaign was from the consumer electronics space that revolved around creating slice-of-life brand stories through the lens of the consumer electronics products. There were eleven video pieces and dozens of Instagram and blog posts, which brought in about $248 thousand in earned media.

To conclude the presentation, the final sample included a mobile game based on a top comic book franchises. They worked with top-tier influencers across multiple platforms including YouTube, Instagram, Twitter and Facebook, which generated two-thousand earned media actions, which came out to more than $180 thousand in earned media value.