If you think you know Edward Norton, think again. The Academy Award-nominated actor and filmmaker has a second act that’s captivating the business community – ad tech disrupter. In this episode, we sit down with the founder of EDO, as well as President & CEO Kevin Krim, to talk about how their company (which recently raised $80 million from Shamrock Capital) is changing the TV measurement game for brands with its powerful grasp of consumer search data and analytics.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Good Company is a production of I Heart Radio. We'll
throw down the glove and have an academic data science
debate with literally absolutely anybody who wants to try to
pigeonhole search into a niche. Hi, I'm Michael Casson. Welcome
(00:20):
to Good Company, where I'll explore how marketing, media, entertainment,
and tech are intersecting, transforming our lives and the way
we do business at a breakneck speed. I'll be joined
by some of the greatest business minds at strongest leaders
who will share how they build companies from the ground
up or transform them from the inside out. My bed
is you'll pick up a lesson or two along the way.
(00:41):
It's all good. I'm excited today to welcome to guests
to the Good Company Podcast. First of all, the E
d O Founder and as well the president and CEO
Number one, the E d O Founder is Edward Norton.
(01:03):
And Edward, you don't need much introduction. Certainly most of
us I know have enjoyed you know you as talent
both in front of the camera and behind the camera.
And I hearken back to the Oscars a k A.
Sunday Night at the Fights when one of the Academy
Award winners, talked about his daughter referring to him as
(01:24):
a nominee. Now he gets to say a winner. You've
won a couple of awards, You've had many nominations, but
you have certainly been awarded and honored in this industry.
And I will say I've had the pleasure of enjoying
you on the screen, but I've also had the pleasure
of listening to you speak to a group of advertisers
a couple of years ago, when I walked away saying
(01:45):
he's not just a pretty face. He knows a thing
or two about a thing or two. And so it's
a pleasure to welcome you, and as well, it's a
pleasure to welcome Kevin Krim, who's the president and CEO
of v DO. And we've had the pleasure of working
together Kevin in different and iterations and most recently with
the d O. So I want to welcome you both
the good company. I'm excited to be able to share
(02:07):
with our listeners some amazing insights and some understanding about
what motivated you both to really get into the trench
here on the not as a sexy side of the business,
but actually if one you know, looks at it through
the lens you do and I do maybe the sexiest
part of the industry, which is measurement. You know. So
(02:28):
I would ask you, both, Edward and Kevin, what was
it that motivated you to make a move and get
into the measurement business. It's fun to get into the
weeds with with someone who's not a CUB reporter and
asking us what measurement means. We were talking about. I
always wanted to be Jimmy Elson, but I'm happy not
(02:49):
to be. No. I it's for Kevin and I. It's
a it's a sweet relief to talk to a veteran
and to an audience group that's also probably you know,
pretty advanced in their level of convergency with all this stuff.
You know, It's funny I worked in I worked in
low income housing, tax credit syndication finance when I first
(03:11):
got out of school, if you can, you know, like
a lot of people, I think the actors traditional like
my job before I first got a gig was his
waiter and you know whatever I worked in kind of
this esoteric corner of I got. I had a lot
of friends who were in finance, and I got really
interested in financial technologies and investing in that kind of stuff,
and always kept that up, even as my my moonlighting
(03:34):
in the theater kind of took on a life of
its own and became a career. I would say it
became a career along the on the way I had
a I had. I had a friend named Daniel Nadler
who's the co founder of Video with Me. Daniel also
was a creative person, a published poet. He also, on
(03:55):
the side had a kind of an intellectual and finance career.
He he had a PhD from Harvard and quantitative data
science and had pioneered data science technologies at the FED
to help them analyze economic patterns. And I was really
lucky I talking to Daniel. He had this incredible idea
about applying putting edge machine learning and artificial intelligence to
(04:20):
financial market data. And he had a really articulate and
passionate kind of view of how he thought it could.
It could democratize the analytics that get siloed by hedge
funds and things like that, and and so he set
off on this kind of quixotic thing to build a
company called Ken Show. And I was lucky to be
(04:41):
one of his early investors and ultimately one of his
biggest investors, alongside others like Goldman Sachs and General Catalyst
and and ultimately all the six biggest banks and the
CIA in q Tel invested in the company too. And
what Daniel built with ken Show was was truly astonishing.
It the company was ultimately bought by S and P,
(05:02):
and he really showed he's one of I would say
he's a global innovator in looking at the way that
you know, massive parallel processing and machine learning and stuff
can be applied to open source data, not not just
proprietary data, but to open source data like search and
other things like that to build incredibly powerful predictive models
(05:24):
around financial market outcomes and things like that. I'll give
you an example because it relates to our world. He
they showed that, for instance, very granular at least specific
search query around Netflix subscription sign ups in European markets
could end up being more predictive of what Netflix's economic
performance was going to be over the next couple quarters.
(05:47):
Then most of the other analysis that was out there,
and this was all through the really pioneering way that
his company ingested and analyzed minute to minute search data
around specific topics. It ended up being a very hailed
company in the and intelligence community world. And I was
lucky enough to sort of be along for the ride
or be adjacent to Daniel's efforts on that. Along the way,
(06:11):
I said to him, you know, you say, what was
the song or what was the moment? You know I was.
I was in some good movies like Birdman and and
Grant Budapest Hotel and other things like that, where I
saw firsthand, you know, that the noble and in some
ways successful efforts of the studio to market these films,
(06:31):
oscar campaigns, all of that. Except I was also privy
to the fact that Wes Anderson and all the rest
of us, and all of us who are in Birdman,
we're inside compensation formulas that were basically going to be
very difficult for us to climb out from under the
marketing spend inefficiency. But because talent compensation these days is
more and more tied to net profit formulas as opposed
(06:55):
to gross which it used to be before DVDs got atomized,
and and so it sounds funny, but I was very
specifically aware of how compensation of creators, filmmakers, actors was
getting hammered by marketing and efficiency because the more the
more a studio spends, that that's an even bigger hole
(07:18):
that you have to recoup and climb out from under
before that that p and A ends up changing your
life for sure, exactly exactly, And and everybody thinks an
oscar campaign sounds great if a studio is spending on it,
But what you don't realize is they're literally spending your money.
They are, they are spending Every dollar they spend is
(07:39):
a dollar you have to climb out from under to
ever get into Wes Anderson seeing upside on on one
of his best and moment, I want to interrupt for
a second. I want to interrupt for one second, Edward,
because I want to tell you a story and it
involves Clean Eastwood, and it's a really interesting story because
your focus. You know that you're not the first. But
(08:00):
I will tell you why I mentioned Clint east Would
in this conversation. Back in the day when I ran
a large media agency, our largest client was the Walt
Disney Company, and we were exclusive to the Walt Disney
Company with one exception. We could buy for Clint Eastwood
for mal Paso Productions because the founder of the company
that I ended up running called Western International Media. Dennis Holt,
(08:22):
who was the founder, had been very good friends with
Clint back in the day. They were in r OTC together,
and you know they were they were contemporaries. And the
most efficient marketing campaigns of any movies that I ever
experienced were mal Paso productions, anything that Clint produced. And
why because Clint would actually show up at the planning
(08:43):
meetings with the media agency and he paid attention, and
because he showed up Back in the day, Bob Daly
and Terry Semmel would show up to those meetings because
they knew Clint was showing up. And the fact that
Clint East would paid enough attention to the detail of
the actual media plan change the efficacy back to your
word of the media then, because keep paid attention. It's
(09:05):
so funny that I'm hearing you say it but through
a different lens, But I actually saw it in practice
thirty years ago. It's really interesting. I just I had
to interrupt to say that, no, not at all. It's
it's it's always been sort of the I mean, look,
there's a reason that people wanted gross participation, right because
it's sort of atomized. You were getting it off the
(09:26):
top line on the marketing right, and and and in
and in our streaming world where the value of the
home video was taken from the main profit center in
the content media business model to being zero effectively, right,
and you you you know, gross went away for the
(09:47):
large majority of people in the industry, and and so
so inefficiency of marketing actually affects talent. But the other
thing is, and of course now I'm just talking about
the media. I'm talking about the content, you know, studio television, vertical.
But still, you know, a studio's appetite for the type
(10:10):
of material it makes is a function of its sense
of the risk, right of the cost, and and part
of the reason video producers and finance here's shy away
from the most challenging materials. They struggle to see how
they're going to get their return. And that's only rational, right, So,
so inefficiency of marketing spend, if if if two thirds
(10:33):
of your spend is is inefficient, it just means that
you it's harder for you to see a path to
how you're going to do well on something challenging, right,
And so so it's not just what do creators get paid.
It's what content even gets made suffers, suffers from a
sense of the top line cost versus the return, and
(10:55):
and so so the better better studios. Yeah, exactly. You know,
I was gonna say, think of genre, and think of Westerns,
and all of a sudden you have a Yellowstone, and
all of a sudden, Westerns are now chic again, and
everybody wants to be one of the Dutton's, you know
in yellow Stone. So but the bottom, the bottom line
(11:17):
is um for me. I mean, just to bring it
round to the to where we actually are. I said
to Daniel at one point, while Ken Show was rising
in the financial market worlds, is this kind of star
um in in bringing machine learning and AI to those markets,
not in a siloed way, for like through quant hedge
(11:38):
funds and stuff who keep their black box? Right he was,
he was democratizing it. I said to him, should we
start a media division of Ken Show? Because you're out
here crushing the baseline data science capabilities in very sophisticated
markets like the intelligence community and and finance. You're you're
demonstrating data science alpha even in those worlds. And I said,
(12:00):
without without throwing shade on people. This is an industry
that's still pricing it's all. It's advertising around a seventy
five year old data metric called a Nielsen rating that
is so obsolete and so absurdly blunt and uninsightful. You know,
it's like you're you're talking about something that was developed
(12:21):
when we had three major networks and every demographic of
audience was constrained into those three And so if you
said how many eyeballs did I get in X demographic?
That was about the best proxy you could come up
with for did I reach my target audience? Right? But
we're in a world where of Facebook and digital advertising,
where the expectation of you know, how many people maybe
(12:45):
saw something? Yeah, and so what right? Right? And I mean,
we're we're in the point now where where you should
be able to know much, much, much more about the
value you got back from every dollar you applied. And
and yet, amazingly, in the television landscape, not just linear
but streaming, the convergent TV landscape, we were still even
(13:07):
seven years ago, we were still floating along with everybody,
you know, assuming that you know, it's it's still sort
of the best we've got, even though everyone on the
network side, like Kevin when he was at CNBC. We're
basically breaking faith with this idea that their their inventories
should be priced off of Nielsen ratings. Right, And and
(13:29):
so I said to Daniel, Listen, the big lie is
that everything is shifting to digital. It's not. There's still
probably six of all major our you know, sector verticals
advertised on television. The large preponderance of advertising dollars still
goes to television because they know it's a powerful medium.
(13:52):
But the data science has not matured on that side
of the line because it's hard, and because Nielsen Nielsen
does not only doesn't get to hire people like Daniel,
it doesn't even get to meet them, right like top
data science does not go to media historically. It doesn't
certainly doesn't go to legacy companies like Kantar and and Nielsen.
(14:13):
It goes to quant hedge funds, into the to the
intelligence community, into Google. Right absolutely. And look, so that's
why you didn't have You didn't have intellectual acted, you
didn't have technological improvement in the legacy media data companies.
But you didn't have to. We didn't have to because
the world accepted a currency. The bottom line is. I've
(14:33):
sort of said, Kevin and I have laughed. I said, like,
it's like if you needed brain surgery and the place
to see an era that was like a stone axe,
and you you would take it, you know. But but today,
if if if someone came at you with nineteen century tools,
you'd say, like, get me the fucking gamma knife. You
know what I mean? I want I want the best,
and and that that is that is the level of
(14:56):
technological data science and say that these legacy companies are
well and and Edward, I'm going to throw something out,
so you know, Traditionally we talked about the brand marketer
and the performance marketer, and those were separate and distinct
groups inside of an organization, inside of an agency. I
had my brand marketers and I had my performance marketers.
(15:17):
It really was brought to my attention by American Express
when we worked with them on reimagining their organization and
bringing the two together. And I give credit to Elizabeth Rutledge,
the chief marketing officer of American Express, for saying to me, Michael,
I need media links. Helped to bring these two disciplines
together before we go into the market and choose a
new agency and I had an epiphany. And I always
(15:40):
say the light bulb went off, and I get corrected.
Some people say, no, the light bulb goes on. For me,
the light bulb goes off because I think of it
as flashing. But when the light bulb went off, I said, well,
so what you're saying is brand marketing and performance marketing
are coming together. And I always like to find a
turn of a phrase, and I said, I'm going to
call it brandformance marketing. And it was the idea of
(16:00):
bringing the data and the discipline that WANT applied to
what was traditionally performance marketing together with that which was
the more esoter a kind of amorphous brand advertising. Because
brand advertising, as I e. The I want to build
the brand performance advertising or marketing is I want somebody
(16:21):
to take an action and think of it. With American
Express using them as the primary example. You know you
have the don't leave home without it. That was the
brand marketing membership has its rewards, but the performance marketing
was it's great that you have that American Express card
in your pocket, but are you using it? Because they
only make money when you use the card. So the
(16:43):
call to action, the data that you use to do
that is the data that you should be using to
do brand marketing. Ergo brandformance marketing. So that was my
little turn of a phrase. But it's a good segue. Um.
It's a good segue because as I was having this
conversation with Daniel back in the day, I said to
and listen, I'm looking at what you guys are doing
(17:05):
on on predictive analytics and r OI analytics for the
financial markets. And I said, you know, the ultimate, the
holy grail. I pointed out to him. Look, you have
legacy data companies like Nielsen, kantor com Score that maybe
at one point represented over billion of market cap, and
(17:25):
and they're just cratering right there there. They've they've gone
in half. So you have a big open space, and
you have you have a captive client base that really
wants a better option. They know they need a better option, right,
I said, So the opportunity is real. I got a
mutual ally of Daniels in mind. Jim Bryer, the legendary excel.
(17:47):
You see, Jim not only one of the one of
the great technology investors, but also on the board of
Fox and on Marvel and an early investor in Legendary
So of all the people. Daniel and I knew he
had become an invest during Ken Show as well. He
really straddled these worlds and and Jim and I convinced Daniel,
not only that the that the market opportunity was one
(18:09):
of those things that I al would say, like, you know,
something's some somethings go very slow and then very fast.
And it felt to me like the post Nielsen moment
was being talked about, but that at a certain point
it was going to go very fast and the people
with the new currency positioned with it, who have done
the hard work to get it ready, will will benefit
(18:30):
from that and will benefit the market. And we kind
of convinced Daniel that there was there was a there there,
and so we the reason we started the d O
was we believed in this concept of sort of that
there was a data science talent arbitrage available in this
but we know with all respect those people who have
(18:50):
those capabilities do not get hired into these markets. But
because Daniel it was a very celebrated entrepreneur and data
scientists with great success in building Ken Show in the
financial markets, he had the ability to go to Harvard
and M I T and Stanford and and really recruit
the creme de la creme of some of the top
(19:11):
you know, machine learning and engineering talent on the planet
and bring a cohort of them in. And we brought
it together. And the key piece, because I want to
have Kevin is we knew we could bring an unprecedented
cohort of data science caliber to this problem set. But
obviously you have to understand the way that this sits
(19:33):
within the industry. And Kevin, Kevin was at Universal, NBC
Universal UM and and we he he was. He identified
Ken Show as an incredible innovation and actually got it
programmed onto CNBC as the Ken Show stats Box, and
and helped push Steve Burke and Comcast to make a
(19:55):
co investment with Goldman Sachs and Ken Show. And so,
you know, Daniel said to me, there's this kayat CNBC
who really gets it um. And as we all got talking,
we realized that Kevin Kevin was you know, a key
a key advocate for CNBC dropping Nielsen Ratings as its
pricing metric. And when we all started to talk, Daniel
(20:18):
and I just instantly realized, like, you know, he was
running another company. I have a day job too, and
we had we had put together this really great team,
but we needed someone who was capable of straddling, you know,
understanding the Bicell ecosystem in a you know, C suite
kind of way, but also really conversing with technology on
(20:39):
a level that would do it. And so the best
thing that happened for us was Kevin agreed to leave
NBC you and come and run video and and and basically,
you know the last few years has been Kevin leading
the charge on getting our both our network you know,
advertising sellers and all of our brand clients to come
(20:59):
to understand why what we're doing is of higher value
than the nice to have signals that are out there,
let alone these kind of obsolete UM metrics of Nielsen
and and and and all the success we've had leading
up to this fantastic investment round. You know, Edward, I
want to say one thing before I turned it over
(21:21):
to Kevin. But you know, you talked about the actions.
I'm going to bring it back to kind of dime
store philosophy, which was something I learned from my grandmother.
Of all things, um she taught me when I was
a kid not to read people's lips, but watch their
feet and you know it's it's it's what you just said.
(21:42):
It's one thing to think of the signals, it's one
thing to think of the likes. It's one thing to think.
But what did they actually do is what really matters,
and if you're a marketer, knowing what actually happened. And look,
Kevin was famous to me before we got to work
together their e d O because he cut quite a
path at CNBC and and other parts of the digital
(22:07):
ecosystem that Kevin worked in. And I can't imagine a
better choice that you guys made for someone to be
in this leadership role with the d O because Kevin
understood it and reputationally the marketplace knew that as well.
It was so illuminating when at CNBC we would put
together we would put together these massive we'd call them
(22:30):
three sixty packages back then, right, it would be a
combination of traditional linear and all the digital kind of
assets that we had be because these huge thirty million
dollar sponsorship packages for all the endemic advertisers at CNBC, right,
Charles Swabs or the TD marriage rads, fidelities, and you
do a review with them and say, okay, all these
(22:52):
things that we did for you, you know, what would
you like us to do more of going forward? And
they'd say, you know, there was this moment where we
did the co branded segments where we're teaching we're teaching
your viewers how to do you know, more advanced trading
on online, and we'd see these massive spikes in activity
(23:12):
on our platforms and we'd say, well, that's great, let's
let's talk about that data. Let's get into it. Well,
we'll try to maximize that for you. And they say, well,
that's that's too precious for us. That's that's our data.
We can't have. Let you have it. But it got
got us thinking about the opportunity to truly level that
playing field and say, for both the buyce on this outside,
here's the data of what's working right in our Mantra
(23:35):
video is know what works? The ability to just see
it and and Michael, I love that, you know, watch
their feet not their lips kind of advice because we
see it in the data all the time when you
do correlations on share of search in a competitive category
and you name it works in insurance, automotive, restaurants, UH, pharma,
(23:59):
and certainly in entertainment like movies and streaming originals. If
you stack up shareff search, so of the competitive set,
who's getting the most shareff search it is not only
strongly correlated with their market share, but it's predictive of it.
It's an early leading indicator. So if you see someone
gaining shareff search a couple of quarters later, and it
(24:22):
depends on the category, you'll see them gain market share.
It is the KPI that every CMO should have at
the top of their dashboard every day, every week. And frankly,
it's the kind of KPI that will level the playing
field in the boardroom for them. Right the CMO is
sitting there at a just at a literal disadvantage when
(24:43):
you've got the head of sales, the head of distribution,
the CFO, the CEO talking about results, and then the
cmos are walking in with g RPS and some brand
attribute survey of favorability, and the board is saying, and then, what, okay,
you reach of your target audience. We got a couple
(25:05):
of upticks in our in our brand survey. Then what
and what we can help connect is that very moment
that you're talking about, that brand performance moment where it's
not an ore it's an end because rooted in what
we're doing is the understanding of the twenty one century consumer.
They aren't always connected, always on consumer, They are never
(25:27):
more than centimeters away from a connected device. And if
they see something in the programming, in the content, or
in the commercial breaks, they see something that moves them,
moves their hearts and minds, they their fingers do the
walking for them. And that is that is the thing
where you can't fake it. You can't lie with their fingertips.
(25:49):
You know, a lot of surveys all the time. I
tell you, Kevin that we did a conversation several years
ago during Advertising Week. Media Link always has a wonderful
spot to tell our stories, and we did something years
ago on the loss of serendipity and marketing. And you know,
we said, here, we all are searching for the right
(26:10):
device at the right time to the right person in
the right context. All of those things are valid and
important drivers, but we can't forget there is something in
marketing called, you know, surprise and delight and and so
if you think of autom manufacturers, and I've told this
story so many times, but it still resonates. You think
of auto manufacturers, they always wanted to reach Edward Norton
(26:34):
or or Kevin Krim When they're quote in market for
a car, what does that mean? It means your lease
is up, it means you just got moved to a
new center city, your kid just got their license, whatever
it may be, You're in market. So that's when you
want to get that person with a car. Ad right. Well,
the story I like to tell it was a milestone
(26:54):
birthday for me. Yes it was, no, I'm kidding, but
this was a couple of years ago and my wife said,
do you want to do you want to watch? Do
you want a party? I said, no, I don't want
to party, and I you know I've got enough watch it.
So I was affirmatively not in the market for a watch. Okay.
I picked up a catalog in in my house and
(27:17):
it opened to a picture of a watch, and I went, WHOA.
I ended up buying that watch. Okay. So the surprise
and delight of that ad, if you will, changed my
purchase intent. I went from affirmatively not wanting it, in
fact affirmatively saying no, to actually buying it. That was serendipity,
(27:39):
because if I didn't pick up that picture at that
moment and look at that magazine, that catalog. It was
actually a department store catalog. So I tell that story
all the time because we want to be precise. We
want to get all the science and all the data,
but we also have to blend it in the right
way with the artistic part of the business. And it's
kind of a merger of mad men and math men.
(28:03):
You know that that we're seeing, and yet you want
to have both. How do you how do you manage that?
The most frustrating thing that I come across is the
desire to pigeonhole what we do into that that's sort
of small box of oh, well, you're about data, you're
about performance, or you know, the various ways that people
(28:23):
want to put us, compartmentalize us away into something that
they don't need to pay attention to. And I and
I what I do is whenever I'm talking to a
head of marketing or a head of media or head
of investment in a big agency, I said, let's just
play a game. I'm gonna open our software up and
let's pick pick one of your favorite brands, and your
(28:44):
your brand if it's you, if it's a marketer, or
when your clients, and let's watch two ads. I'm not
gonna tell you anything about the data yet, we're gonna
watch two of these ads, and one, inevitably all have
chosen ahead of time, is going to be a brand
at right, the big high concept, not trying to sell
you anything right now, don't leave don't leave home without it,
right exactly. And then and then I'll and then I'll
(29:06):
show them a you know, a limited time offer spot
or a sales event spot or something that's down funnel
retail performance. Right. That's that's how inevitably their categories. And
nine and a half to ten times out of ten,
it's the good brand spot that outscores in terms of
driving people to take actions like going and searching for
(29:27):
the brand, going to the website, going to a shopping
site to look for that brand, all those actions. It's
the brand ad that drives more of that. It's significantly
more about. The single best ad in all of non
Luxuria Automotive last year was a spot from Toyota during
the Summer Olympics where they were showing a group of
young women teammates piling into a self driving car, a
(29:50):
car that is purely a concept. It won't be available
for probably the next decade, and the cars, playing songs
with them, singing with them, doing karaoke with them. It
was a fantastic ad. It has nothing to sell right
now for Toyota, nothing in the next decade. And it
was the highest performing single ad in all of non
Monchy automotive. And you know it's the it's a surprising delight,
(30:12):
My daughter said next. And he knows that we worked
closely with Toyota, so she pays attention and she's she says,
is that from Toyota? Is that really from Toyota? And
it had changed her mind about what Toyota could be
for her. She's thirteen, but she will be behind a
car in the next decade. Absolutely, No, you gotta plant
the seed early. I mean, you know, I learned this
(30:33):
back in the day working with Home Depot. The highest
selling Skew branded Skew at Toys r US back in
the nineties was the Home Depot tool Kit for kids.
So you know, kids grew up with play school or
whatever it might have been that, you know, the hardware
kids whatever, you know, the tool kids. That was the
(30:53):
word I was looking for. And Home Depot branded at
Home Depot and again it was the highest selling branded
Skew and so I Toys, r US and the old days.
And I said, well, of course, because you know, I
was taught a long time ago. You don't want to
start advertising a Mercedes to somebody when they can afford it.
You want to start advertising it to them when they
when they're aspirational, so that when they can't afford it,
(31:15):
that's the that's the standard, that's what they're looking for.
Home Depot took the same approach. So you're absolutely right.
You know your daughter is not ready to buy a
car yet or are you ready to buy her one,
but you will be shortly, trust me, you'll be buying it.
And you know as a result of that, you're right
because the nagging of kids, by the way, we did
a study years ago called the nag factor. You know,
(31:38):
not in a pejorative way, nagging, but you know, what's
the value of getting the kids to nag on the
parents to do something? And how do you do that? Yeah? Yeah.
One of the things I'm proudessed of, Michael is that
the we've been working with Disney both on the as
the studio, marketing, their originals, marketing, Disney Plus and Disney
(32:00):
all in the ads for across their family of networks.
The protesting I am is that that the creatives at
the studio at Disney Folks cutting the thirty second and
fifteen second spots for their films all the way up
to a who runs the whole marketing division, they can't
wait to see our data about their new spots. They
(32:20):
are clamoring for it first thing in the morning, before
the first cup of coffee. Because it's completely non judgmental.
It just tells them what's working right. It leaves their
judgment to figure out what should we do from here? Well,
I can tell you, Kevin, and I will tell our
audience how right you are. We we lead in the
(32:42):
global review for the Walt Disney Company to determine working
with the sod and the team, and you know, to
determine who was going to be the person placing billions
of dollars of media on behalf of the Walt Disney
Company globally. And I know how important this is because
the work we did around Disney Plus was really again
that illustration of the brand formants. Because traditionally the Walt
(33:07):
Disney Company, as all the studios were marketing to put
butts and seats on Friday, Saturday and Sunday when Edwards
opening a movie. And on the one hand, with Disney
Plus and the streamers, everybody had to reassess and it
gets to the brand formants. They had to reassess that
their marketing muscle needed to be put against subscriber acquisition
(33:28):
and avoiding churn. And that's a different marketing muscle as
we talked about earlier. So you're spot on relative to
how that impacts not only what a sod and and
the marketing site puts on the air, but it has
massive impact for what Rita Pharaoh and Lisa Valentino and
the people in their group are selling. So it's it's
(33:48):
both sides of that equation, not you know this chime
in that there's these other like there's multiple derivatives of
efficiency that flow out of a data insight capability that
lets you see in market in real time what's getting
(34:09):
a type of grab that you come to have confidence
really lines up with purchase intent, right and and one
of them you're kind of you're talking around it, but
it's worth saying because you you were kind of saying
this in our conversation earlier, Michael, think about the amount
of money that historically any kind of marketer has spent
(34:30):
in the lab trying to score the sentiment around something right,
not really knowing whether lab based analysis of sentiment lines
up with any of the things that actually matter in
terms of the actions of summer take right, But think
about the amount of money that's wasted. I would argue
(34:52):
trying to do lab assessment when a lot of our
clients are starting to realize they can literally cancel that
at lab analysis market testing budget because they can do
an A and a B creative take a package of
low cost cable inventory just to a B test in
(35:12):
the same target market type of thing. They can put
one up and put the other up, and they can
the same dollars they would have spent in the lab
not actually even putting it in the marketplace. They can
put it in the actual marketplace and watch in real
time what gets the purchase intent grab from the actual market.
(35:34):
So literally your whole lab testing budget goes direct into
into actually putting spend out into the world, and you
get a higher grade analysis of which of your creative
variations works in real time in the market. Are you
sure you're not a secret media buyer. Yeah, but literally
(35:56):
again again, I know, but again again. Think about it.
From my into view, every dollar spent testing thirty second
ad spots for a given movie is just lost leader
for all of us who are trying to make money
on the back end. Right, If you put a thirty
second ad number one joker and thirty second add number
two and you put them up against each other, then
at least it was ads and Warner gets to see
(36:19):
in real time, Wow, that one really takes. It has
a little more humor in it. It. Who knows why,
but it takes. Now we can just lean into that
one and get more value out of the thing. But
we didn't waste some money on some supposition all you know,
God forbid. Like my the test audience and the commentary
of the focus group literally should end in the world.
(36:41):
I mean, it's it's it's the single worst experience for
a director, for a commercial director, for an ad marketer.
No one should ever talk to a focus group ever again,
because they lie, their egos come into it. It's the
worst way to assess anything that there is. And and
you know, we we we have a funny thing with
the universal guys when they were doing fifty shades of
(37:05):
gray right, Like the market was telling them that they
were going to do like sixty five and our guys
were saying, no, you're gonna do like a hundred and
ten in the opening weekend. And this is a direct
function of what we're talking about. If you survey people
and RG style and say hey, are you going to
see fifty shades of gray eight subtext are you up
for a little light bondage this weekend? A lot of
(37:27):
people in a survey are going to say no. But
their search what they're searching at home, the very gods Yeah,
sitting in their underwear saying, you know, Dakota Johnson imagery
combined with fifty shades of gray showtimes near Me tonight
tell the tell a much more accurate story about their
appetite for B DSM than if you survey them, right,
(37:50):
And that's that's that's a really obvious one. But I think, um,
I mean, you know, it's funny you say that about
the predictive so years and years ago, and and this
is really a story worth telling. We we came up
with a strategy when I was running a media agency
which was looking at the theatrical release and the home
(38:10):
video and the windowing and what I what I posited
and we proved it was that on Friday morning of
a week opening weekend, by whatever time in the morning,
you should be able to predict the entire life cycle
value of that product. You should know what home video
is going to do within a plus or minus ten percent,
(38:32):
because you know what the box office did. There are
examples of exceptions, but by whatever moment you know that
opening weekend gross, you should be able to calculate the
entire value of that product through its windows. And as
a result, you should be able to set your marketing budget.
Because this was around setting the marketing budget. And it
was a guy named Warren Lieber far pretty famous in
(38:53):
the day at Warner for creating the DVD literally and
you know, he said, I should be able to know
the marketing budget of that movie for home video the
moment it opens in theatrical and he was right, because
you should be able to predict based on what the
theatrical opening that opening Friday is going to be is
going to tell you what the home video volume is
going to be. And it's that data that kind of
(39:17):
should be informing everything we're doing. The focus group could
never tell you that the box office on Friday, And
to take another category of it now we're talking about
for the marketing side. But one of the reasons that
some of the top top network ad sellers have really
you know, and I don't know Kevin mentioned to earlier,
it just it happened to line up with this big
(39:39):
investment round we just took in. But you know, Discovery
Networks announced that video is their preferred core measurement analysis metric,
which is thrilling for us, but in some ways unsurprising
because we've played a central role in affirming to Discovery
that they've got a huge percentage of this shows that
(40:00):
deliver the bank for the buck in the whole industry.
And if you're a seller, think about the fact of
the persuasion that you've had to do around the notional
reach of what your show provides. Right, it's it's such
a soft science. Well, these number of people watch our
show and this' it's kind of what Kevin said, Yeah,
(40:20):
you you you've got to x number of people notionally
and then what right, if suddenly you're able to see
a massive regression analysis of the way that you've driven
purchase intent inflection on a specific show. Everything you're getting
out of the weeds of generalities and you're able to say, hey,
look like Kevin said this, this may this may seem
(40:41):
like an noun sexy show, this home improvement show, but
look what it moves relative to other things for certain
types of people. What does that open up? And and
a particular head of all ad fills at one of
the major networks said to us, my god, like, you know,
we've stood here and watched financial market operators build struct
heard products around bond yield or credit default swaps or whatever,
(41:03):
and sat here just thinking, why can't we sell optimized
pods of structured product on our advertising because we don't
have sophisticated analytics that give us a data driven, finance
grade analysis. We're trying to open up for the sell
side the capacity to build unprecedented sophistication into the way
(41:26):
they package their inventory and structured products for specific clients. Right,
And if you think about what's going to bring the
yield back to television, you know that's the kind of
thing that that will transform it. Because you know, and
this may be a controversial thing to say, but I
would argue that after all the romance with the idea
that digital was more you know, effective, I think it's
(41:48):
kind of gone the other way. In digital. There's been
a realization that a lot of what Facebook and other
people assert is kind of being blown apart by really
smart firms that are showing, well, you know, it didn't
get off mute, or it never really got watched in
anything other than picture and picture. And the truth is
a lot of what goes out in digital blows by
(42:09):
and is being shown to be less effective than people thought,
Whereas what we're doing is showing people that television is
as or more effective than they even thought. And it's
just in some sense, I think the television advertisers have
had one hand tied behind their back because they the
(42:32):
meaning the networks. They haven't been able to show what
they believe to be true and that it is in
fact true, which is that they deliver the effect, meaning
that they move people to the action that does actually
tend to line up with conversion. You know what I mean? Yeah, No, absolutely,
And look here's what I would say, Edward and Kevin,
(42:53):
this is a conversation that you probably can tell that
I would love to have for hours. This is bread
and butter to me. And you know, as I said
to you and were in the sort of green room
before we were recording, I'm a believer that our industry
is pivoting on a couple of words, and those words
(43:14):
are all with the tea. As I said, you know, trust, transparency, technology, transformation,
and talent. And I think I actually said it on
the broadcast as well. You guys are speaking truth to power,
if you will, relative to trust and transparency, so that
people can make those decisions more real time. And look,
(43:35):
one of the dynamics in the industry that makes E
d oh so much more important than it would be
anyway is the importance of procurement. And you know, inside
the organizations that we're talking about wanting to prove the
efficacy of the spend because at the end of the day,
you need to do that because when you have the
(43:55):
bean counters looking at it more critically and under standing
that you want to make sure. You know, the basic
premise of the advertising industry is to be able to
if you're an agency or somebody placing media on somebody's behalf,
you're really not unlike a mutual fund anyway, what you're
hoping to render as a return on investment. What I
(44:16):
think E. D O is able to demonstrate is you
don't have to waste any of it anymore. The other
thing I would say is it's almost like within the
marketplace of the new there's there's a lot of noise,
there's a lot of assertion going on right I think
one of the things we've we've been increasing willing to
say is like we'll we'll throw down the glove and
have an academic data science debate with literally absolutely anybody
(44:38):
who wants to try to pigeonhole search into a niche
like we think everything else is nice to have, and
and we'll throw down and say that not one thing
anybody's pitching you, um that that is not within that.
In terms of mid funnel efficacy outcome measurement, we don't
(45:01):
think there's anything that can stack up as as a
as an authentic investment grade metric of what your financial
outcomes are going to look like an efficacy like we've
you know, top of the funnel stuff, bottom stuff maybe,
but if you want to know literally whether you're getting
what you paid for in real time, we will say
I'm on the stage and and have the academic debate
(45:23):
about why the components of our signal are are higher
grade and actually line up with a much higher correlation
to purchase intent and ultimate financial outcomes. And part of
the reason, you know, sometimes what people says, well, if
that's true, then you know why is more people doing it?
And here's the answer is it's fucking hard, like really
(45:45):
really hard to think about what it means to say
you can sort and scrub from all of search that's
happening all the time, the granular specific around each and
associated with in a time stamped way, with each and
repiece of advertising. It really is like that scene in
the Matrix of saying, I can see what's going on
as the numbers fall past me and the bottom line
(46:08):
is A woman who built the Google Trends product at
Google who ended up working at Ken Show literally said
to our team one time, I'm not even sure there's
I think there's people at Google who don't even know
that this is possible at the scale that you're doing it.
We've done it in a white paper sense, like in
short form, highly specific sort of minute by minute resolution demonstrations,
(46:29):
but on an industrial scale, we don't think there's anybody
who's even close to being able to pull off technologically
what Daniel and and our amazing team have kind of
pulled off on a technological sense. And that's that's one
of the reasons I think people have a hard time
wrapping their head around can this actually be true? Because
(46:50):
it is. It is literally like matrix like vision of
what's taking place in real time, and it's it's it's
pretty phenomenal. Um, you know, and I think here's what
I'd say, Um, there are times and and and it's
a great fine point to kind of close on. There
are times where something feels like it's too good to
be true, but actually it is true. And what it
(47:12):
sounds to me like and and this is a great compliment.
Please take it as such. You've identified with the d
O something that might sound like it's too good to
be true, but it's actually true. Any time I can
end up a podcast by quoting Oscar Wilde, I will,
because I think you're taking not cynical, but you know
(47:33):
the great definition Oscar Wilde ascribed to a cynic with
somebody who knows the price of everything and the value
of nothing. And you know what, what you've just articulated
is there is a relationship between the price and the value?
Edward and Kevin, I I can't thank you enough for
one of the most robust conversations that I've had on
(47:55):
Good Company. And I've been doing this for you know.
You were nice to say, I'm not a reporter. I've
been doing this for a minute or two, and this
is one of the most enjoyable and illustrative conversations of
an opportunity and a challenge on a marketplace issue. So
Edward Norton and Kevin Krim, thank you so much for
(48:16):
for for sharing your thoughts. Absolutely, I'm Michael Casson, thanks
for listening to Good Company. Good Company is a production
of I Heart Radio. A special thanks to Lena Peterson,
chief brand Officer and Managing Director of media Link for
(48:37):
her vision I'm Good Company, and to Jen Seely, Vice
President Marketing Communications of media Link for programming amazing talent
and content
Good Company is a production of I Heart Radio. We'll
throw down the glove and have an academic data science
debate with literally absolutely anybody who wants to try to
pigeonhole search into a niche. Hi, I'm Michael Casson. Welcome
(00:20):
to Good Company, where I'll explore how marketing, media, entertainment,
and tech are intersecting, transforming our lives and the way
we do business at a breakneck speed. I'll be joined
by some of the greatest business minds at strongest leaders
who will share how they build companies from the ground
up or transform them from the inside out. My bed
is you'll pick up a lesson or two along the way.
(00:41):
It's all good. I'm excited today to welcome to guests
to the Good Company Podcast. First of all, the E
d O Founder and as well the president and CEO
Number one, the E d O Founder is Edward Norton.
(01:03):
And Edward, you don't need much introduction. Certainly most of
us I know have enjoyed you know you as talent
both in front of the camera and behind the camera.
And I hearken back to the Oscars a k A.
Sunday Night at the Fights when one of the Academy
Award winners, talked about his daughter referring to him as
(01:24):
a nominee. Now he gets to say a winner. You've
won a couple of awards, You've had many nominations, but
you have certainly been awarded and honored in this industry.
And I will say I've had the pleasure of enjoying
you on the screen, but I've also had the pleasure
of listening to you speak to a group of advertisers
a couple of years ago, when I walked away saying
(01:45):
he's not just a pretty face. He knows a thing
or two about a thing or two. And so it's
a pleasure to welcome you, and as well, it's a
pleasure to welcome Kevin Krim, who's the president and CEO
of v DO. And we've had the pleasure of working
together Kevin in different and iterations and most recently with
the d O. So I want to welcome you both
the good company. I'm excited to be able to share
(02:07):
with our listeners some amazing insights and some understanding about
what motivated you both to really get into the trench
here on the not as a sexy side of the business,
but actually if one you know, looks at it through
the lens you do and I do maybe the sexiest
part of the industry, which is measurement. You know. So
(02:28):
I would ask you, both, Edward and Kevin, what was
it that motivated you to make a move and get
into the measurement business. It's fun to get into the
weeds with with someone who's not a CUB reporter and
asking us what measurement means. We were talking about. I
always wanted to be Jimmy Elson, but I'm happy not
(02:49):
to be. No. I it's for Kevin and I. It's
a it's a sweet relief to talk to a veteran
and to an audience group that's also probably you know,
pretty advanced in their level of convergency with all this stuff.
You know, It's funny I worked in I worked in
low income housing, tax credit syndication finance when I first
(03:11):
got out of school, if you can, you know, like
a lot of people, I think the actors traditional like
my job before I first got a gig was his
waiter and you know whatever I worked in kind of
this esoteric corner of I got. I had a lot
of friends who were in finance, and I got really
interested in financial technologies and investing in that kind of stuff,
and always kept that up, even as my my moonlighting
(03:34):
in the theater kind of took on a life of
its own and became a career. I would say it
became a career along the on the way I had
a I had. I had a friend named Daniel Nadler
who's the co founder of Video with Me. Daniel also
was a creative person, a published poet. He also, on
(03:55):
the side had a kind of an intellectual and finance career.
He he had a PhD from Harvard and quantitative data
science and had pioneered data science technologies at the FED
to help them analyze economic patterns. And I was really
lucky I talking to Daniel. He had this incredible idea
about applying putting edge machine learning and artificial intelligence to
(04:20):
financial market data. And he had a really articulate and
passionate kind of view of how he thought it could.
It could democratize the analytics that get siloed by hedge
funds and things like that, and and so he set
off on this kind of quixotic thing to build a
company called Ken Show. And I was lucky to be
(04:41):
one of his early investors and ultimately one of his
biggest investors, alongside others like Goldman Sachs and General Catalyst
and and ultimately all the six biggest banks and the
CIA in q Tel invested in the company too. And
what Daniel built with ken Show was was truly astonishing.
It the company was ultimately bought by S and P,
(05:02):
and he really showed he's one of I would say
he's a global innovator in looking at the way that
you know, massive parallel processing and machine learning and stuff
can be applied to open source data, not not just
proprietary data, but to open source data like search and
other things like that to build incredibly powerful predictive models
(05:24):
around financial market outcomes and things like that. I'll give
you an example because it relates to our world. He
they showed that, for instance, very granular at least specific
search query around Netflix subscription sign ups in European markets
could end up being more predictive of what Netflix's economic
performance was going to be over the next couple quarters.
(05:47):
Then most of the other analysis that was out there,
and this was all through the really pioneering way that
his company ingested and analyzed minute to minute search data
around specific topics. It ended up being a very hailed
company in the and intelligence community world. And I was
lucky enough to sort of be along for the ride
or be adjacent to Daniel's efforts on that. Along the way,
(06:11):
I said to him, you know, you say, what was
the song or what was the moment? You know I was.
I was in some good movies like Birdman and and
Grant Budapest Hotel and other things like that, where I
saw firsthand, you know, that the noble and in some
ways successful efforts of the studio to market these films,
(06:31):
oscar campaigns, all of that. Except I was also privy
to the fact that Wes Anderson and all the rest
of us, and all of us who are in Birdman,
we're inside compensation formulas that were basically going to be
very difficult for us to climb out from under the
marketing spend inefficiency. But because talent compensation these days is
more and more tied to net profit formulas as opposed
(06:55):
to gross which it used to be before DVDs got atomized,
and and so it sounds funny, but I was very
specifically aware of how compensation of creators, filmmakers, actors was
getting hammered by marketing and efficiency because the more the
more a studio spends, that that's an even bigger hole
(07:18):
that you have to recoup and climb out from under
before that that p and A ends up changing your
life for sure, exactly exactly, And and everybody thinks an
oscar campaign sounds great if a studio is spending on it,
But what you don't realize is they're literally spending your money.
They are, they are spending Every dollar they spend is
(07:39):
a dollar you have to climb out from under to
ever get into Wes Anderson seeing upside on on one
of his best and moment, I want to interrupt for
a second. I want to interrupt for one second, Edward,
because I want to tell you a story and it
involves Clean Eastwood, and it's a really interesting story because
your focus. You know that you're not the first. But
(08:00):
I will tell you why I mentioned Clint east Would
in this conversation. Back in the day when I ran
a large media agency, our largest client was the Walt
Disney Company, and we were exclusive to the Walt Disney
Company with one exception. We could buy for Clint Eastwood
for mal Paso Productions because the founder of the company
that I ended up running called Western International Media. Dennis Holt,
(08:22):
who was the founder, had been very good friends with
Clint back in the day. They were in r OTC together,
and you know they were they were contemporaries. And the
most efficient marketing campaigns of any movies that I ever
experienced were mal Paso productions, anything that Clint produced. And
why because Clint would actually show up at the planning
(08:43):
meetings with the media agency and he paid attention, and
because he showed up Back in the day, Bob Daly
and Terry Semmel would show up to those meetings because
they knew Clint was showing up. And the fact that
Clint East would paid enough attention to the detail of
the actual media plan change the efficacy back to your
word of the media then, because keep paid attention. It's
(09:05):
so funny that I'm hearing you say it but through
a different lens, But I actually saw it in practice
thirty years ago. It's really interesting. I just I had
to interrupt to say that, no, not at all. It's
it's it's always been sort of the I mean, look,
there's a reason that people wanted gross participation, right because
it's sort of atomized. You were getting it off the
(09:26):
top line on the marketing right, and and and in
and in our streaming world where the value of the
home video was taken from the main profit center in
the content media business model to being zero effectively, right,
and you you you know, gross went away for the
(09:47):
large majority of people in the industry, and and so
so inefficiency of marketing actually affects talent. But the other
thing is, and of course now I'm just talking about
the media. I'm talking about the content, you know, studio television, vertical.
But still, you know, a studio's appetite for the type
(10:10):
of material it makes is a function of its sense
of the risk, right of the cost, and and part
of the reason video producers and finance here's shy away
from the most challenging materials. They struggle to see how
they're going to get their return. And that's only rational, right, So,
so inefficiency of marketing spend, if if if two thirds
(10:33):
of your spend is is inefficient, it just means that
you it's harder for you to see a path to
how you're going to do well on something challenging, right,
And so so it's not just what do creators get paid.
It's what content even gets made suffers, suffers from a
sense of the top line cost versus the return, and
(10:55):
and so so the better better studios. Yeah, exactly. You know,
I was gonna say, think of genre, and think of Westerns,
and all of a sudden you have a Yellowstone, and
all of a sudden, Westerns are now chic again, and
everybody wants to be one of the Dutton's, you know
in yellow Stone. So but the bottom, the bottom line
(11:17):
is um for me. I mean, just to bring it
round to the to where we actually are. I said
to Daniel at one point, while Ken Show was rising
in the financial market worlds, is this kind of star
um in in bringing machine learning and AI to those markets,
not in a siloed way, for like through quant hedge
(11:38):
funds and stuff who keep their black box? Right he was,
he was democratizing it. I said to him, should we
start a media division of Ken Show? Because you're out
here crushing the baseline data science capabilities in very sophisticated
markets like the intelligence community and and finance. You're you're
demonstrating data science alpha even in those worlds. And I said,
(12:00):
without without throwing shade on people. This is an industry
that's still pricing it's all. It's advertising around a seventy
five year old data metric called a Nielsen rating that
is so obsolete and so absurdly blunt and uninsightful. You know,
it's like you're you're talking about something that was developed
(12:21):
when we had three major networks and every demographic of
audience was constrained into those three And so if you
said how many eyeballs did I get in X demographic?
That was about the best proxy you could come up
with for did I reach my target audience? Right? But
we're in a world where of Facebook and digital advertising,
where the expectation of you know, how many people maybe
(12:45):
saw something? Yeah, and so what right? Right? And I mean,
we're we're in the point now where where you should
be able to know much, much, much more about the
value you got back from every dollar you applied. And
and yet, amazingly, in the television landscape, not just linear
but streaming, the convergent TV landscape, we were still even
(13:07):
seven years ago, we were still floating along with everybody,
you know, assuming that you know, it's it's still sort
of the best we've got, even though everyone on the
network side, like Kevin when he was at CNBC. We're
basically breaking faith with this idea that their their inventories
should be priced off of Nielsen ratings. Right, And and
(13:29):
so I said to Daniel, Listen, the big lie is
that everything is shifting to digital. It's not. There's still
probably six of all major our you know, sector verticals
advertised on television. The large preponderance of advertising dollars still
goes to television because they know it's a powerful medium.
(13:52):
But the data science has not matured on that side
of the line because it's hard, and because Nielsen Nielsen
does not only doesn't get to hire people like Daniel,
it doesn't even get to meet them, right like top
data science does not go to media historically. It doesn't
certainly doesn't go to legacy companies like Kantar and and Nielsen.
(14:13):
It goes to quant hedge funds, into the to the
intelligence community, into Google. Right absolutely. And look, so that's
why you didn't have You didn't have intellectual acted, you
didn't have technological improvement in the legacy media data companies.
But you didn't have to. We didn't have to because
the world accepted a currency. The bottom line is. I've
(14:33):
sort of said, Kevin and I have laughed. I said, like,
it's like if you needed brain surgery and the place
to see an era that was like a stone axe,
and you you would take it, you know. But but today,
if if if someone came at you with nineteen century tools,
you'd say, like, get me the fucking gamma knife. You
know what I mean? I want I want the best,
and and that that is that is the level of
(14:56):
technological data science and say that these legacy companies are
well and and Edward, I'm going to throw something out,
so you know, Traditionally we talked about the brand marketer
and the performance marketer, and those were separate and distinct
groups inside of an organization, inside of an agency. I
had my brand marketers and I had my performance marketers.
(15:17):
It really was brought to my attention by American Express
when we worked with them on reimagining their organization and
bringing the two together. And I give credit to Elizabeth Rutledge,
the chief marketing officer of American Express, for saying to me, Michael,
I need media links. Helped to bring these two disciplines
together before we go into the market and choose a
new agency and I had an epiphany. And I always
(15:40):
say the light bulb went off, and I get corrected.
Some people say, no, the light bulb goes on. For me,
the light bulb goes off because I think of it
as flashing. But when the light bulb went off, I said, well,
so what you're saying is brand marketing and performance marketing
are coming together. And I always like to find a
turn of a phrase, and I said, I'm going to
call it brandformance marketing. And it was the idea of
(16:00):
bringing the data and the discipline that WANT applied to
what was traditionally performance marketing together with that which was
the more esoter a kind of amorphous brand advertising. Because
brand advertising, as I e. The I want to build
the brand performance advertising or marketing is I want somebody
(16:21):
to take an action and think of it. With American
Express using them as the primary example. You know you
have the don't leave home without it. That was the
brand marketing membership has its rewards, but the performance marketing
was it's great that you have that American Express card
in your pocket, but are you using it? Because they
only make money when you use the card. So the
(16:43):
call to action, the data that you use to do
that is the data that you should be using to
do brand marketing. Ergo brandformance marketing. So that was my
little turn of a phrase. But it's a good segue. Um.
It's a good segue because as I was having this
conversation with Daniel back in the day, I said to
and listen, I'm looking at what you guys are doing
(17:05):
on on predictive analytics and r OI analytics for the
financial markets. And I said, you know, the ultimate, the
holy grail. I pointed out to him. Look, you have
legacy data companies like Nielsen, kantor com Score that maybe
at one point represented over billion of market cap, and
(17:25):
and they're just cratering right there there. They've they've gone
in half. So you have a big open space, and
you have you have a captive client base that really
wants a better option. They know they need a better option, right,
I said, So the opportunity is real. I got a
mutual ally of Daniels in mind. Jim Bryer, the legendary excel.
(17:47):
You see, Jim not only one of the one of
the great technology investors, but also on the board of
Fox and on Marvel and an early investor in Legendary
So of all the people. Daniel and I knew he
had become an invest during Ken Show as well. He
really straddled these worlds and and Jim and I convinced Daniel,
not only that the that the market opportunity was one
(18:09):
of those things that I al would say, like, you know,
something's some somethings go very slow and then very fast.
And it felt to me like the post Nielsen moment
was being talked about, but that at a certain point
it was going to go very fast and the people
with the new currency positioned with it, who have done
the hard work to get it ready, will will benefit
(18:30):
from that and will benefit the market. And we kind
of convinced Daniel that there was there was a there there,
and so we the reason we started the d O
was we believed in this concept of sort of that
there was a data science talent arbitrage available in this
but we know with all respect those people who have
(18:50):
those capabilities do not get hired into these markets. But
because Daniel it was a very celebrated entrepreneur and data
scientists with great success in building Ken Show in the
financial markets, he had the ability to go to Harvard
and M I T and Stanford and and really recruit
the creme de la creme of some of the top
(19:11):
you know, machine learning and engineering talent on the planet
and bring a cohort of them in. And we brought
it together. And the key piece, because I want to
have Kevin is we knew we could bring an unprecedented
cohort of data science caliber to this problem set. But
obviously you have to understand the way that this sits
(19:33):
within the industry. And Kevin, Kevin was at Universal, NBC
Universal UM and and we he he was. He identified
Ken Show as an incredible innovation and actually got it
programmed onto CNBC as the Ken Show stats Box, and
and helped push Steve Burke and Comcast to make a
(19:55):
co investment with Goldman Sachs and Ken Show. And so,
you know, Daniel said to me, there's this kayat CNBC
who really gets it um. And as we all got talking,
we realized that Kevin Kevin was you know, a key
a key advocate for CNBC dropping Nielsen Ratings as its
pricing metric. And when we all started to talk, Daniel
(20:18):
and I just instantly realized, like, you know, he was
running another company. I have a day job too, and
we had we had put together this really great team,
but we needed someone who was capable of straddling, you know,
understanding the Bicell ecosystem in a you know, C suite
kind of way, but also really conversing with technology on
(20:39):
a level that would do it. And so the best
thing that happened for us was Kevin agreed to leave
NBC you and come and run video and and and basically,
you know the last few years has been Kevin leading
the charge on getting our both our network you know,
advertising sellers and all of our brand clients to come
(20:59):
to understand why what we're doing is of higher value
than the nice to have signals that are out there,
let alone these kind of obsolete UM metrics of Nielsen
and and and and all the success we've had leading
up to this fantastic investment round. You know, Edward, I
want to say one thing before I turned it over
(21:21):
to Kevin. But you know, you talked about the actions.
I'm going to bring it back to kind of dime
store philosophy, which was something I learned from my grandmother.
Of all things, um she taught me when I was
a kid not to read people's lips, but watch their
feet and you know it's it's it's what you just said.
(21:42):
It's one thing to think of the signals, it's one
thing to think of the likes. It's one thing to think.
But what did they actually do is what really matters,
and if you're a marketer, knowing what actually happened. And look,
Kevin was famous to me before we got to work
together their e d O because he cut quite a
path at CNBC and and other parts of the digital
(22:07):
ecosystem that Kevin worked in. And I can't imagine a
better choice that you guys made for someone to be
in this leadership role with the d O because Kevin
understood it and reputationally the marketplace knew that as well.
It was so illuminating when at CNBC we would put
together we would put together these massive we'd call them
(22:30):
three sixty packages back then, right, it would be a
combination of traditional linear and all the digital kind of
assets that we had be because these huge thirty million
dollar sponsorship packages for all the endemic advertisers at CNBC, right,
Charles Swabs or the TD marriage rads, fidelities, and you
do a review with them and say, okay, all these
(22:52):
things that we did for you, you know, what would
you like us to do more of going forward? And
they'd say, you know, there was this moment where we
did the co branded segments where we're teaching we're teaching
your viewers how to do you know, more advanced trading
on online, and we'd see these massive spikes in activity
(23:12):
on our platforms and we'd say, well, that's great, let's
let's talk about that data. Let's get into it. Well,
we'll try to maximize that for you. And they say, well,
that's that's too precious for us. That's that's our data.
We can't have. Let you have it. But it got
got us thinking about the opportunity to truly level that
playing field and say, for both the buyce on this outside,
here's the data of what's working right in our Mantra
(23:35):
video is know what works? The ability to just see
it and and Michael, I love that, you know, watch
their feet not their lips kind of advice because we
see it in the data all the time when you
do correlations on share of search in a competitive category
and you name it works in insurance, automotive, restaurants, UH, pharma,
(23:59):
and certainly in entertainment like movies and streaming originals. If
you stack up shareff search, so of the competitive set,
who's getting the most shareff search it is not only
strongly correlated with their market share, but it's predictive of it.
It's an early leading indicator. So if you see someone
gaining shareff search a couple of quarters later, and it
(24:22):
depends on the category, you'll see them gain market share.
It is the KPI that every CMO should have at
the top of their dashboard every day, every week. And frankly,
it's the kind of KPI that will level the playing
field in the boardroom for them. Right the CMO is
sitting there at a just at a literal disadvantage when
(24:43):
you've got the head of sales, the head of distribution,
the CFO, the CEO talking about results, and then the
cmos are walking in with g RPS and some brand
attribute survey of favorability, and the board is saying, and then, what, okay,
you reach of your target audience. We got a couple
(25:05):
of upticks in our in our brand survey. Then what
and what we can help connect is that very moment
that you're talking about, that brand performance moment where it's
not an ore it's an end because rooted in what
we're doing is the understanding of the twenty one century consumer.
They aren't always connected, always on consumer, They are never
(25:27):
more than centimeters away from a connected device. And if
they see something in the programming, in the content, or
in the commercial breaks, they see something that moves them,
moves their hearts and minds, they their fingers do the
walking for them. And that is that is the thing
where you can't fake it. You can't lie with their fingertips.
(25:49):
You know, a lot of surveys all the time. I
tell you, Kevin that we did a conversation several years
ago during Advertising Week. Media Link always has a wonderful
spot to tell our stories, and we did something years
ago on the loss of serendipity and marketing. And you know,
we said, here, we all are searching for the right
(26:10):
device at the right time to the right person in
the right context. All of those things are valid and
important drivers, but we can't forget there is something in
marketing called, you know, surprise and delight and and so
if you think of autom manufacturers, and I've told this
story so many times, but it still resonates. You think
of auto manufacturers, they always wanted to reach Edward Norton
(26:34):
or or Kevin Krim When they're quote in market for
a car, what does that mean? It means your lease
is up, it means you just got moved to a
new center city, your kid just got their license, whatever
it may be, You're in market. So that's when you
want to get that person with a car. Ad right. Well,
the story I like to tell it was a milestone
(26:54):
birthday for me. Yes it was, no, I'm kidding, but
this was a couple of years ago and my wife said,
do you want to do you want to watch? Do
you want a party? I said, no, I don't want
to party, and I you know I've got enough watch it.
So I was affirmatively not in the market for a watch. Okay.
I picked up a catalog in in my house and
(27:17):
it opened to a picture of a watch, and I went, WHOA.
I ended up buying that watch. Okay. So the surprise
and delight of that ad, if you will, changed my
purchase intent. I went from affirmatively not wanting it, in
fact affirmatively saying no, to actually buying it. That was serendipity,
(27:39):
because if I didn't pick up that picture at that
moment and look at that magazine, that catalog. It was
actually a department store catalog. So I tell that story
all the time because we want to be precise. We
want to get all the science and all the data,
but we also have to blend it in the right
way with the artistic part of the business. And it's
kind of a merger of mad men and math men.
(28:03):
You know that that we're seeing, and yet you want
to have both. How do you how do you manage that?
The most frustrating thing that I come across is the
desire to pigeonhole what we do into that that's sort
of small box of oh, well, you're about data, you're
about performance, or you know, the various ways that people
(28:23):
want to put us, compartmentalize us away into something that
they don't need to pay attention to. And I and
I what I do is whenever I'm talking to a
head of marketing or a head of media or head
of investment in a big agency, I said, let's just
play a game. I'm gonna open our software up and
let's pick pick one of your favorite brands, and your
(28:44):
your brand if it's you, if it's a marketer, or
when your clients, and let's watch two ads. I'm not
gonna tell you anything about the data yet, we're gonna
watch two of these ads, and one, inevitably all have
chosen ahead of time, is going to be a brand
at right, the big high concept, not trying to sell
you anything right now, don't leave don't leave home without it,
right exactly. And then and then I'll and then I'll
(29:06):
show them a you know, a limited time offer spot
or a sales event spot or something that's down funnel
retail performance. Right. That's that's how inevitably their categories. And
nine and a half to ten times out of ten,
it's the good brand spot that outscores in terms of
driving people to take actions like going and searching for
(29:27):
the brand, going to the website, going to a shopping
site to look for that brand, all those actions. It's
the brand ad that drives more of that. It's significantly
more about. The single best ad in all of non
Luxuria Automotive last year was a spot from Toyota during
the Summer Olympics where they were showing a group of
young women teammates piling into a self driving car, a
(29:50):
car that is purely a concept. It won't be available
for probably the next decade, and the cars, playing songs
with them, singing with them, doing karaoke with them. It
was a fantastic ad. It has nothing to sell right
now for Toyota, nothing in the next decade. And it
was the highest performing single ad in all of non
Monchy automotive. And you know it's the it's a surprising delight,
(30:12):
My daughter said next. And he knows that we worked
closely with Toyota, so she pays attention and she's she says,
is that from Toyota? Is that really from Toyota? And
it had changed her mind about what Toyota could be
for her. She's thirteen, but she will be behind a
car in the next decade. Absolutely, No, you gotta plant
the seed early. I mean, you know, I learned this
(30:33):
back in the day working with Home Depot. The highest
selling Skew branded Skew at Toys r US back in
the nineties was the Home Depot tool Kit for kids.
So you know, kids grew up with play school or
whatever it might have been that, you know, the hardware
kids whatever, you know, the tool kids. That was the
(30:53):
word I was looking for. And Home Depot branded at
Home Depot and again it was the highest selling branded
Skew and so I Toys, r US and the old days.
And I said, well, of course, because you know, I
was taught a long time ago. You don't want to
start advertising a Mercedes to somebody when they can afford it.
You want to start advertising it to them when they
when they're aspirational, so that when they can't afford it,
(31:15):
that's the that's the standard, that's what they're looking for.
Home Depot took the same approach. So you're absolutely right.
You know your daughter is not ready to buy a
car yet or are you ready to buy her one,
but you will be shortly, trust me, you'll be buying it.
And you know as a result of that, you're right
because the nagging of kids, by the way, we did
a study years ago called the nag factor. You know,
(31:38):
not in a pejorative way, nagging, but you know, what's
the value of getting the kids to nag on the
parents to do something? And how do you do that? Yeah? Yeah.
One of the things I'm proudessed of, Michael is that
the we've been working with Disney both on the as
the studio, marketing, their originals, marketing, Disney Plus and Disney
(32:00):
all in the ads for across their family of networks.
The protesting I am is that that the creatives at
the studio at Disney Folks cutting the thirty second and
fifteen second spots for their films all the way up
to a who runs the whole marketing division, they can't
wait to see our data about their new spots. They
(32:20):
are clamoring for it first thing in the morning, before
the first cup of coffee. Because it's completely non judgmental.
It just tells them what's working right. It leaves their
judgment to figure out what should we do from here? Well,
I can tell you, Kevin, and I will tell our
audience how right you are. We we lead in the
(32:42):
global review for the Walt Disney Company to determine working
with the sod and the team, and you know, to
determine who was going to be the person placing billions
of dollars of media on behalf of the Walt Disney
Company globally. And I know how important this is because
the work we did around Disney Plus was really again
that illustration of the brand formants. Because traditionally the Walt
(33:07):
Disney Company, as all the studios were marketing to put
butts and seats on Friday, Saturday and Sunday when Edwards
opening a movie. And on the one hand, with Disney
Plus and the streamers, everybody had to reassess and it
gets to the brand formants. They had to reassess that
their marketing muscle needed to be put against subscriber acquisition
(33:28):
and avoiding churn. And that's a different marketing muscle as
we talked about earlier. So you're spot on relative to
how that impacts not only what a sod and and
the marketing site puts on the air, but it has
massive impact for what Rita Pharaoh and Lisa Valentino and
the people in their group are selling. So it's it's
(33:48):
both sides of that equation, not you know this chime
in that there's these other like there's multiple derivatives of
efficiency that flow out of a data insight capability that
lets you see in market in real time what's getting
(34:09):
a type of grab that you come to have confidence
really lines up with purchase intent, right and and one
of them you're kind of you're talking around it, but
it's worth saying because you you were kind of saying
this in our conversation earlier, Michael, think about the amount
of money that historically any kind of marketer has spent
(34:30):
in the lab trying to score the sentiment around something right,
not really knowing whether lab based analysis of sentiment lines
up with any of the things that actually matter in
terms of the actions of summer take right, But think
about the amount of money that's wasted. I would argue
(34:52):
trying to do lab assessment when a lot of our
clients are starting to realize they can literally cancel that
at lab analysis market testing budget because they can do
an A and a B creative take a package of
low cost cable inventory just to a B test in
(35:12):
the same target market type of thing. They can put
one up and put the other up, and they can
the same dollars they would have spent in the lab
not actually even putting it in the marketplace. They can
put it in the actual marketplace and watch in real
time what gets the purchase intent grab from the actual market.
(35:34):
So literally your whole lab testing budget goes direct into
into actually putting spend out into the world, and you
get a higher grade analysis of which of your creative
variations works in real time in the market. Are you
sure you're not a secret media buyer. Yeah, but literally
(35:56):
again again, I know, but again again. Think about it.
From my into view, every dollar spent testing thirty second
ad spots for a given movie is just lost leader
for all of us who are trying to make money
on the back end. Right, If you put a thirty
second ad number one joker and thirty second add number
two and you put them up against each other, then
at least it was ads and Warner gets to see
(36:19):
in real time, Wow, that one really takes. It has
a little more humor in it. It. Who knows why,
but it takes. Now we can just lean into that
one and get more value out of the thing. But
we didn't waste some money on some supposition all you know,
God forbid. Like my the test audience and the commentary
of the focus group literally should end in the world.
(36:41):
I mean, it's it's it's the single worst experience for
a director, for a commercial director, for an ad marketer.
No one should ever talk to a focus group ever again,
because they lie, their egos come into it. It's the
worst way to assess anything that there is. And and
you know, we we we have a funny thing with
the universal guys when they were doing fifty shades of
(37:05):
gray right, Like the market was telling them that they
were going to do like sixty five and our guys
were saying, no, you're gonna do like a hundred and
ten in the opening weekend. And this is a direct
function of what we're talking about. If you survey people
and RG style and say hey, are you going to
see fifty shades of gray eight subtext are you up
for a little light bondage this weekend? A lot of
(37:27):
people in a survey are going to say no. But
their search what they're searching at home, the very gods Yeah,
sitting in their underwear saying, you know, Dakota Johnson imagery
combined with fifty shades of gray showtimes near Me tonight
tell the tell a much more accurate story about their
appetite for B DSM than if you survey them, right,
(37:50):
And that's that's that's a really obvious one. But I think, um,
I mean, you know, it's funny you say that about
the predictive so years and years ago, and and this
is really a story worth telling. We we came up
with a strategy when I was running a media agency
which was looking at the theatrical release and the home
(38:10):
video and the windowing and what I what I posited
and we proved it was that on Friday morning of
a week opening weekend, by whatever time in the morning,
you should be able to predict the entire life cycle
value of that product. You should know what home video
is going to do within a plus or minus ten percent,
(38:32):
because you know what the box office did. There are
examples of exceptions, but by whatever moment you know that
opening weekend gross, you should be able to calculate the
entire value of that product through its windows. And as
a result, you should be able to set your marketing budget.
Because this was around setting the marketing budget. And it
was a guy named Warren Lieber far pretty famous in
(38:53):
the day at Warner for creating the DVD literally and
you know, he said, I should be able to know
the marketing budget of that movie for home video the
moment it opens in theatrical and he was right, because
you should be able to predict based on what the
theatrical opening that opening Friday is going to be is
going to tell you what the home video volume is
going to be. And it's that data that kind of
(39:17):
should be informing everything we're doing. The focus group could
never tell you that the box office on Friday, And
to take another category of it now we're talking about
for the marketing side. But one of the reasons that
some of the top top network ad sellers have really
you know, and I don't know Kevin mentioned to earlier,
it just it happened to line up with this big
(39:39):
investment round we just took in. But you know, Discovery
Networks announced that video is their preferred core measurement analysis metric,
which is thrilling for us, but in some ways unsurprising
because we've played a central role in affirming to Discovery
that they've got a huge percentage of this shows that
(40:00):
deliver the bank for the buck in the whole industry.
And if you're a seller, think about the fact of
the persuasion that you've had to do around the notional
reach of what your show provides. Right, it's it's such
a soft science. Well, these number of people watch our
show and this' it's kind of what Kevin said, Yeah,
(40:20):
you you you've got to x number of people notionally
and then what right, if suddenly you're able to see
a massive regression analysis of the way that you've driven
purchase intent inflection on a specific show. Everything you're getting
out of the weeds of generalities and you're able to say, hey,
look like Kevin said this, this may this may seem
(40:41):
like an noun sexy show, this home improvement show, but
look what it moves relative to other things for certain
types of people. What does that open up? And and
a particular head of all ad fills at one of
the major networks said to us, my god, like, you know,
we've stood here and watched financial market operators build struct
heard products around bond yield or credit default swaps or whatever,
(41:03):
and sat here just thinking, why can't we sell optimized
pods of structured product on our advertising because we don't
have sophisticated analytics that give us a data driven, finance
grade analysis. We're trying to open up for the sell
side the capacity to build unprecedented sophistication into the way
(41:26):
they package their inventory and structured products for specific clients. Right,
And if you think about what's going to bring the
yield back to television, you know that's the kind of
thing that that will transform it. Because you know, and
this may be a controversial thing to say, but I
would argue that after all the romance with the idea
that digital was more you know, effective, I think it's
(41:48):
kind of gone the other way. In digital. There's been
a realization that a lot of what Facebook and other
people assert is kind of being blown apart by really
smart firms that are showing, well, you know, it didn't
get off mute, or it never really got watched in
anything other than picture and picture. And the truth is
a lot of what goes out in digital blows by
(42:09):
and is being shown to be less effective than people thought,
Whereas what we're doing is showing people that television is
as or more effective than they even thought. And it's
just in some sense, I think the television advertisers have
had one hand tied behind their back because they the
(42:32):
meaning the networks. They haven't been able to show what
they believe to be true and that it is in
fact true, which is that they deliver the effect, meaning
that they move people to the action that does actually
tend to line up with conversion. You know what I mean? Yeah, No, absolutely,
And look here's what I would say, Edward and Kevin,
(42:53):
this is a conversation that you probably can tell that
I would love to have for hours. This is bread
and butter to me. And you know, as I said
to you and were in the sort of green room
before we were recording, I'm a believer that our industry
is pivoting on a couple of words, and those words
(43:14):
are all with the tea. As I said, you know, trust, transparency, technology, transformation,
and talent. And I think I actually said it on
the broadcast as well. You guys are speaking truth to power,
if you will, relative to trust and transparency, so that
people can make those decisions more real time. And look,
(43:35):
one of the dynamics in the industry that makes E
d oh so much more important than it would be
anyway is the importance of procurement. And you know, inside
the organizations that we're talking about wanting to prove the
efficacy of the spend because at the end of the day,
you need to do that because when you have the
(43:55):
bean counters looking at it more critically and under standing
that you want to make sure. You know, the basic
premise of the advertising industry is to be able to
if you're an agency or somebody placing media on somebody's behalf,
you're really not unlike a mutual fund anyway, what you're
hoping to render as a return on investment. What I
(44:16):
think E. D O is able to demonstrate is you
don't have to waste any of it anymore. The other
thing I would say is it's almost like within the
marketplace of the new there's there's a lot of noise,
there's a lot of assertion going on right I think
one of the things we've we've been increasing willing to
say is like we'll we'll throw down the glove and
have an academic data science debate with literally absolutely anybody
(44:38):
who wants to try to pigeonhole search into a niche
like we think everything else is nice to have, and
and we'll throw down and say that not one thing
anybody's pitching you, um that that is not within that.
In terms of mid funnel efficacy outcome measurement, we don't
(45:01):
think there's anything that can stack up as as a
as an authentic investment grade metric of what your financial
outcomes are going to look like an efficacy like we've
you know, top of the funnel stuff, bottom stuff maybe,
but if you want to know literally whether you're getting
what you paid for in real time, we will say
I'm on the stage and and have the academic debate
(45:23):
about why the components of our signal are are higher
grade and actually line up with a much higher correlation
to purchase intent and ultimate financial outcomes. And part of
the reason, you know, sometimes what people says, well, if
that's true, then you know why is more people doing it?
And here's the answer is it's fucking hard, like really
(45:45):
really hard to think about what it means to say
you can sort and scrub from all of search that's
happening all the time, the granular specific around each and
associated with in a time stamped way, with each and
repiece of advertising. It really is like that scene in
the Matrix of saying, I can see what's going on
as the numbers fall past me and the bottom line
(46:08):
is A woman who built the Google Trends product at
Google who ended up working at Ken Show literally said
to our team one time, I'm not even sure there's
I think there's people at Google who don't even know
that this is possible at the scale that you're doing it.
We've done it in a white paper sense, like in
short form, highly specific sort of minute by minute resolution demonstrations,
(46:29):
but on an industrial scale, we don't think there's anybody
who's even close to being able to pull off technologically
what Daniel and and our amazing team have kind of
pulled off on a technological sense. And that's that's one
of the reasons I think people have a hard time
wrapping their head around can this actually be true? Because
(46:50):
it is. It is literally like matrix like vision of
what's taking place in real time, and it's it's it's
pretty phenomenal. Um, you know, and I think here's what
I'd say, Um, there are times and and and it's
a great fine point to kind of close on. There
are times where something feels like it's too good to
be true, but actually it is true. And what it
(47:12):
sounds to me like and and this is a great compliment.
Please take it as such. You've identified with the d
O something that might sound like it's too good to
be true, but it's actually true. Any time I can
end up a podcast by quoting Oscar Wilde, I will,
because I think you're taking not cynical, but you know
(47:33):
the great definition Oscar Wilde ascribed to a cynic with
somebody who knows the price of everything and the value
of nothing. And you know what, what you've just articulated
is there is a relationship between the price and the value?
Edward and Kevin, I I can't thank you enough for
one of the most robust conversations that I've had on
(47:55):
Good Company. And I've been doing this for you know.
You were nice to say, I'm not a reporter. I've
been doing this for a minute or two, and this
is one of the most enjoyable and illustrative conversations of
an opportunity and a challenge on a marketplace issue. So
Edward Norton and Kevin Krim, thank you so much for
(48:16):
for for sharing your thoughts. Absolutely, I'm Michael Casson, thanks
for listening to Good Company. Good Company is a production
of I Heart Radio. A special thanks to Lena Peterson,
chief brand Officer and Managing Director of media Link for
(48:37):
her vision I'm Good Company, and to Jen Seely, Vice
President Marketing Communications of media Link for programming amazing talent
and content
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com