>>A lot of users who come to a story from an outside source bounce after going to a next page, and therefore the Time Spent metric is basically useless for most articles.

That known fact, are more likely to provide an unfair advantage to Galleries, and even with that handicapped start, Articles win three times over (in the above example).

>>I’ve noticed that slideshows for our publication tend to outperform articles in terms of time spent (keeping in mind what I just said in the above paragraph)

Very interesting (I am seeing the opposite). I would love to see some of your data on that.

cheers
d. :-)

I’m curious how you calculated Time Spent considering that it typically requires two time stamps (the entry page and a next page). A lot of users who come to a story from an outside source bounce after going to a next page, and therefore the Time Spent metric is basically useless for most articles.

I’ve noticed that slideshows for our publication tend to outperform articles in terms of time spent (keeping in mind what I just said in the above paragraph), and are great performers across all segments (new, loyal, etc). Bounce rates are also way lower for slideshows than articles. We will continue to use them as a way to boost impression counts for advertisers that are ordering via CPM (as you mentioned above, this makes a lot of sense from a business perspective).

Cheers
Jon

Well, if nothing else – YOU and I agree! :-)

>>However, looking at it in time spent in aggregate is really the ah ha moment

I’ve been doing presentations for News Media companies on this and given the right talk, proper data and the right visualization – most insiders certainly tend to get the point, but as long as advertisers are OK with the CPM not changing from Article to Galleries, they’ll continue. And from a business point of view, I actually don’t blame them.

Have a wonderful weekend
d.

Just discovered your blog and look forward to following.

Carson

Thanks for commenting. AND some very valid questions (observations). I honestly believe that news media in particular have been starved in regards to ACTUAL insights, so I certainly have more comments to make on the subject matter..

One note (even though that’s probably not what you are implying). A Time Spent increase because of true interest (such as your scenario above) would in most cases, equal a fair VALUE increase, no matter the CTR rate. I do agree that for some ad systems or some ad sales teams, CTR might represent the advertising product value directly (or indirectly as a proxy for CPM value), but I think we’ll see that change.

have a great weekend
d. :-)

I’m glad to see you addressing this question. I agree with a lot of what’s been said here, but I also believe what nic said above:

“On the other hand, some pictures have an enourmous effect on click-rates by touching people emotionally. Would be interesting to see, if your Time Spent metric correlates with ad-clicks (although I doubt that, but I like to be surprised).”

My experience is that when we have a particularly touching or emotionally compelling set of images that our time spent tends to go up.

Keep up the good work – this is my first time here, I will be back.

Gary

Thanks for the thumbs up mate. AND I agree that Video is not to be aligned with Galleries – at all – actually.

d. :-)

I’m an analyst for a major media company in Canada, and would agree with a lot that has been said. Video definately brings much more engagement, and with pre-roll video ads available, advertisers get great exposure and pay more for their value.

Kris

Thanks for commenting. AND it’s nice to hear that we have SMARTER advertisers out there. – Not a bad question at all, in regards to correlation in between ad-CTR and Galleries, so I am taking notes for future posts.

n.b. I would love to hear any indication of the Gallery “Discount” ??

Have a great weekend
d. :-)