The Advertising Revolution
Sponsored by: Market One Media Group
Many decades ago, the world was much simpler for advertisers.
Buying a ½ page newspaper ad or a 30-second television spot reached thousands of people, and consumers weren’t oversaturated with ads.
Today, we are bombarded with over 5,000 brand exposures each day. Of those, 362 are advertisements with only 12 of them “making an impression” on us.
Here’s a breakdown of average exposure per day:
- Average number of advertisement and brand exposures per day per person: 5,000+
- Average number of “ads only” exposures per day: 362
- Average number of “ads only” noted per day: 153
- Average number of “ads only” that we have some awareness of per day: 86
- Average number of “ads only” that made an impression (engagement): 12
With this oversaturation of the traditional ad market, the concept of “native ads” has emerged.
Native advertising is paid content that is created to fit the same format as a publisher’s organic content. In other words, it shows up to regular viewers as “sponsored” or “paid” posts in the same streams as regular content.
Native ad spending has exploded, and from 2013 to 2018, the industry is expected to quadruple in size.
There are compelling statistics for both the audience and advertisers on native ads:
- 70% of individuals want to learn about products or content through content rather than traditional advertising.
- 32% of consumers said, when given a choice, that they would rather share a native ad with friends and family vs 19% for banner ads.
- 57% of publishers have a dedicated editorial team to create content readers will care about, leaving publishers in full control, not brands, which ultimately benefits readers.
- People view native ads 53% more than banner ads.
- Native advertising generates up to an 82% increase in brand lift.
- Native ads that include rich media boost conversion rates by up to 60%.
- Purchase intent is 53% higher with native ads (vs. 34%)
- 49x higher clickthrough rate, 54% lower cost-per-click
Native ads are also being used by many of the “new media” and adtech companies that have had very successful fundraising rounds:
Latest raise: $250 million (2014)
Led by: A+E Networks
Valuation: $2.5 billion
Latest raise: $62.7 million (2015)
Valuation: $1.2 billion
Latest raise: $200 million (2015)
Led by: NBC Universal
Valuation: $850 million
Latest raise: $200 million (2015)
Led by: NBC Universal
Valuation: $1.5 billion
The Future of Native Advertising?
Right now 41% of brands use native advertising as part of their marketing mix, but the shift is only beginning. Here’s what experts think the future of native holds:
Tessa Gould, Director of Native Ads Products, The Huffington Post
“Next for native is being able to use other ad technologies to make native smarter. At the moment everyone is creating content and talking about social actions. But how do you go about retargeting the people who view the native ad elsewhere with banner ads and actually converting them into customers?”
Audra Martin, VP of Advertising, The Economist Group
“As publishers start to educate brands more and agencies more, the content will just get better. Then distribution, in terms of getting more sophisticated, not in terms of fooling readers but making it relevant to readers in the right place at the right time.”
Steve Edwards, Digital Sales Director, Hearst UK
“My main thing is about control. Native will continue to develop along the lines it has. Increasingly it’s about publishers taking control of the message and advertisers and brands coming along with us. Getting distribution right and getting measurement metrics right, how we actually measure success. How we can create work that is as good as the editorial that surrounds it. Take the logo off it, does it still work? That’s really interesting for us, and we’ve still got a way to get there.”
Sebastian Tomich, VP of Advertising, The New York Times
“Brands are jumping into native because they feel like they should be.”
How Global Health and Wealth Has Changed Over Two Centuries
This unique animated visualization uses health and wealth measurements to chart the evolution of countries over time.
How Global Health and Wealth Has Changed Over 221 Years
At the dawn of the 19th century, global life expectancy was only 28.5 years.
Outbreaks, war, and famine would still kill millions of people at regular intervals. These issues are still stubbornly present in 21st century society, but broadly speaking, the situation around the world has vastly improved. Today, most of humanity lives in countries where the life expectancy is above the typical retirement age of 65.
At the same time, while inequality remains a hot button topic within countries, income disparity between countries is slowing beginning to narrow.
This animated visualization, created by James Eagle, tracks the evolution of health and wealth factors in countries around the world. For further exploration, Gapminder also has a fantastic interactive chart that showcases the same dataset.
The Journey to the Upper-Right Quadrant
In general terms, history has seen health practices improve and countries become increasingly wealthy–trends that are reflected in this visualization. In fact, most countries drift towards the upper-right quadrant over the 221 years covered in the dataset.
However, that path to the top-right, which indicates high levels of both life expectancy and GDP per capita, is rarely a linear journey. Here are some of the noteworthy events and milestones to watch out for while viewing the animation.
1880s: Breaking the 50-Year Barrier
In the late 19th century, Nordic countries such as Sweden and Norway already found themselves past the 50-year life expectancy mark. This was a significant milestone considering the global life expectancy was a full 20 years shorter at the time. It wasn’t until the year 1960 that the global life expectancy would catch up.
1918: The Spanish Flu and WWI
At times, a confluence of factors can impact health and wealth in countries and regions. In this case, World War I coincided with one of the deadliest pandemics in history, leading to global implications. In the animation, this is abundantly clear as the entire cluster of circles takes a nose dive for a short period of time.
1933, 1960: Communist Famines
At various points in history, human decisions can have catastrophic consequences. This was the case in the Soviet Union (1933) and the People’s Republic of China (1960), where life expectancy plummeted during famines that killed millions of people. These extreme events are easy to spot in the animation due to the large populations of the countries in question.
1960s: Oil Economies Kick into High Gear
During this time, Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia all experience massive booms in wealth, and in the following decade, smaller countries such as the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait rocket to the right edge of the visualization.
In following decades, both Iran and Iraq can be seen experiencing wild fluctuations in both health and wealth as regime changes and conflict begin to destabilize the region.
1990s: AIDS in Africa
In the animation, a number of countries plummet in unison at the end of the 20th century. These are sub-Saharan African countries that were hit hard by the AIDS pandemic. At its peak in the early ’00s, the disease accounted for more than half of deaths in some countries.
1995: Breaking the 65-Year Barrier
Global life expectancy reaches retirement age. At this point in time, there is a clear divide in both health and wealth between African and South Asian countries and the rest of the world. Thankfully, that gap is would continue to narrow in coming years.
1990-2000s: China’s Economic Rise
With a population well over a billion people, it’s impossible to ignore China in any global overview. Starting from the early ’90s, China begins its march from the left to right side of the chart, highlighting the unprecedented economic growth it experienced during that time.
What the Future Holds
If current trends continue, global life expectancy is expected to surpass the 80-year mark by 2100. And, sub-Saharan Africa, which has the lowest life expectancy today, is expected to mostly close the gap, reaching 75 years of age.
Wealth is also expected to increase nearly across the board, with the biggest gains coming from places like Vietnam, Nigeria, and the Philippines. Some experts are projecting the world economy as a whole to double in size by 2050.
There are always bumps along the way, but it appears that the journey to the upper-right quadrant is still very much underway.
Slices of the Pie: Mapping Territorial Claims in Antarctica
Antarctica is the most inhospitable region on Earth, but that hasn’t stopped countries from making territorial claims. This maps shows them all.
Slices of the Pie: Mapping Territorial Claims in Antarctica
For the 55% of the world’s population who reside in cities, land is viewed as a precious commodity—every square foot has a value attached to it. As the global population continues to rise toward the eight billion mark, it can seem like humans have laid claim to every available corner of the earth.
While this is mostly true, there is one place on the planet that is vast, empty, and even partially unclaimed: Antarctica.
Today’s map, originally created by the CIA World Factbook, visualizes the active claims on Antarctic territory, as well as the location of many permanent research facilities.
The History of Antarctic Territorial Claims
In the first half of the 20th Century, a number of countries began to claim wedge-shaped portions of territory on the southernmost continent. Even Nazi Germany was in on the action, claiming a large swath of land which they dubbed New Swabia.
After WWII, the Antarctic Treaty system—which established the legal framework for the management of the continent—began to take shape. In the 1950s, seven countries including Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, Norway, and the United Kingdom claimed territorial sovereignty over portions of Antarctica. A number of other nations, including the U.S. and Japan, were engaged in exploration but hadn’t put forward claims in an official capacity.
|Territorial claims in Antarctica||Territory name||Area of claim|
|🇦🇺 Australia||Australian Antarctic Territory||3,663,915 mi² (5,896,500 km²)|
|🇳🇴 Norway||Queen Maud Land||1,677,702 mi² (2,700,000 km²)|
|🇬🇧 United Kingdom||British Antarctic Territory||1,062,171 mi² (1,709,400 km²)|
|🇦🇷 Argentina||Argentine Antarctica||908,194 mi² (1,461,597 km²)|
|🇨🇱 Chile||Chilean Antarctic Territory||776,874 mi² (1,250,258 km²)|
|🇳🇿 New Zealand||Ross Dependency||279,617 mi² (450,000 km²)|
|🇫🇷 France||Adélie Land||268,432 mi² (432,000 km²)|
Despite the remoteness and inhospitable climate of Antarctica, the idea of claiming such large areas of landmass has proven appealing to countries. Even the smallest claim on the continent is equivalent to the size of Iraq.
A few of the above claims overlap, as is the case on the Antarctic Peninsula, which juts out geographically from the rest of the continent. This area is less remote with a milder climate, and is subject to claims by Argentina, Chile, and the United Kingdom (which governs the nearby Falkland Islands).
Interestingly, there is still a large portion of Antarctica that remains unclaimed today. Just east of the Ross Ice Shelf lies Marie Byrd Land, a vast, remote territory that is by far the largest unclaimed land area on Earth.
While Antarctica has no official government, it is administered through yearly meetings known as the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meetings. These meetings involve a number of stakeholders, from member nations to observer organizations.
Frontage Theory: Another Way to Slice it
Of course, critics could argue that current claims are arbitrary, and that there is a more equitable way to partition land in Antarctica. That’s where Frontage Theory comes in.
Originally proposed by Brazilian geopolitical scholar Therezinha de Castro, the theory argues that sectors of the Antarctic continent should be distributed according to meridians (the imaginary lines running north–south around the earth). Wherever straight lines running north hit landfall, that country would have sovereignty over the corresponding “wedge” of Antarctic territory.
The map below shows roughly how territorial claims would look under that scenario.
While Brazil has obvious reasons for favoring this solution, it’s also a thought experiment that produces an interesting mix of territorial claims. Not only do nearby countries in Africa and South America get a piece of the pie, but places like Canada and Greenland would end up with territory adjacent to both of the planet’s poles.
Leaving the Pie Unsliced
Thanks to the Antarctic Treaty, there is no mining taking place in Antarctica, and thus far no country has set up a permanent settlement on the continent. Aside from scattered research stations and a few thousand researchers, claims in the region have a limited impact.
For the near future at least, the slicing of the Antarctic pie is only hypothetical.
Markets2 months ago
Prediction Consensus: What the Experts See Coming in 2021
Green1 month ago
Visualizing Countries by Share of Earth’s Surface
Green1 day ago
Mapped: The Greenest Countries in the World
Technology1 month ago
The 50 Most Visited Websites in the World
Money3 weeks ago
Mapped: The Wealthiest Billionaire in Each U.S. State in 2021
Technology4 weeks ago
Global Stars: The Most Innovative Countries, Ranked by Income Group
Sponsored4 days ago
The Carbon Footprint of Trucking: Driving Toward A Cleaner Future
Precious Metals2 months ago
How Every Asset Class, Currency, and S&P 500 Sector Performed in 2020