Deloitte responds to Bizcommunity readers

I'd like to highlight the role Deloitte plays in the industry - not of a watchdog, but an independent party enabling service providers in delivering the best service to their clients and ensuring clients receive the value that they pay for... nothing more, nothing less.

As an independent audit firm, our goal is to assist our clients in achieving 0% advertising errors. If you agree with this, then our intentions are aligned, and media owners and agencies would support achieving these goals.

To clarify in response:

• “water marking of flighting material leaves much to be desired”: We have used two technologies (water marking and wave pattern recognition) and would be happy to explain how they produce broadcast monitoring results. We have rigorously tested both systems through a due diligence process and using actual material of campaigns due for broadcast. We are comfortable with the level of accuracy we obtain and we check every instance reported to our clients anyway.

• “Radio may not be 100%, but it's nowhere near as inaccurate as this ‘release' alleges”: Our business has been built on sound principles based on specific broadcast results identifying the need for such validation support. The cumulative error rate that we report to date is a result of a significant volume of broadcast certified in a 12-month time period across all media owners and stations in South Africa and for major advertisers throughout this period. And hence the extrapolation of 9% as an industry average is considered sound.

• "‘Monitoring companies/WATCHDOGS' are often the last to know of such (material) changes” : Broadcast error can occur through change or material being submitted late by agencies. However, this is marginally responsible for the overall broadcast error we detect and we are informed of revisions to bookings as we work closely with our clients' agencies. Any discrepancies are openly discussed with all parties involved, so that the ultimate result is that advertisers receive that value that they pay for.

• The balance of broadcast error is a result of media owner delivery: non-broadcast, broadcast in incorrect time channel or of incorrect material.

• “Damaged relations?” We've built sound relationships with both media owners and our clients' agencies, both seeking support in serving their clients

• The objective of our clients receiving clean reports is exactly what we aim to achieve through such a validation function.

• “Either back up the claims with proper figures that can be openly challenged, or retract this emotive tosh”: Our findings listed at a high level serve to illustrate examples of the opportunity cost borne by advertisers. They are substantiated through actual broadcast results. We are confident that our reports are accurate and have time stamped audio to substantiate this. “Name and shame?” These results are confidential to our clients.

• “Alarmist rubbish designed to frighten clients into subscribing; scare mongering” : Our goal is to ultimately provide a platform for service providers to prove the value add they bring to their clients where fees can be charged based on independently proven service delivery.

• Our intention as an audit firm is not to create alarm but rather to inform the industry of our proven findings. The nature of the service corresponds closely with our compliance risk management offering, which reports to clients on the extent that their service providers are fulfilling their contractual obligations. And we are simply extending our audit methodology process that in the past was unauditable. Such media reports as published in Bizcommunity.com serve to inform and motivate the industry to act upon the level of broadcast error being detected and aim to better serve the advertisers.