Ramp.com

It’s that season again, when the weather cools dramatically and along with the heavier coats we suddenly need to bring out the tissue boxes and up our daily does of vitamin C to try to escape catching a cold.

But where some home made chicken soup and a trip to the family doctor were once the obvious answers once the germs finally caught up to you, the Web now plays an increasing role in people’s health management. A recent article on sfgate.com emphasizes how many health-focused websites have begun modeling themselves after YouTube and social-networking sites such as MySpace. This appears to be part of a larger effort to connect patients with each other and help them navigate the overwhelming amounts of medical information available online. From WebMD to various niche support group sites, Internet users have a wealth of medical information available to them and a growing number of people are integrating Web search and health communities into their online experience.

New Web 2.0 Elements

Larger players such as Yahoo host online patient communities, as do health-information sites like WebMD. But the Web 2.0 generation of social networking and specialized health search engines offers patients new tools. From user-generated video, to blogs and health podcasts, to wikis and social networking sites, the ways we can use the Web for health related research and support are expanding rapidly.

Social networking health sites

These sites are among a new wave of social networking services available for patients to share experiences and learn more about their health conditions:

NursesRateDoctors.com: With the motto, “Spread the word; improve the care,” this site recruits nurses to give their candid assessment of doctors so that patients can have better information and make choices to get quality care.

DailyStrength.org: Gives patients and caregivers a place to join a support community, write a journal, share videos, and send virtual support with “hugs” and “flowers.”

ReliefInSite.com: Helps patients record and track their pain and medications and share it with their doctors, nurses, pain specialists, therapists, friends and family members.

OrganizedWisdom.com: The goal of this site is “to provide the best search service in the world for health by hand-crafting search results that physicians and consumers will recommend to their family and friends.” OrganizedWisdom aligns doctor-reviewed and user-generated health content to help people make decisions regarding treatment and care.

PatientsLikeMe.com: A platform for collecting and sharing real world, outcome-based patient data. The creators are working to establish data-sharing partnerships with doctors, pharmaceutical and medical device companies, research organizations, and non-profits. This site offers people battling devastating diseases the ability to discuss and track in great detail the treatment options other patients in their disease group are trying.

ICYou.com: Defines itself as a site dedicated to making it simple for anyone to find, upload, watch and share healthcare videos worldwide. Dubbed the YouTube of health care, ICYou.com allows patients to share their stories through online video clips. The site, which is expected to formally launch late this year or early next, already has about 1,500 posted videos.

Online Video Advertising Opportunity

While using the Web for health research is hardly a new phenomenon, health-related content is becoming increasingly vast and varied as a growing number of people decide to share their own experiences online through health communities, blogs and online video. A Google search for health videos evidences this trend toward online video libraries and user—or patient—testimonials. And advertisers want to be where the video is on the Web.

How to Advertise with Integrity

There is an opportunity here, albeit one rife with challenges. Advertising from the pharmaceutical industry, medical-device manufacturer and health insurers seems a natural revenue stream for these online health communities, but anyone who has ever been subjected to the big pharmaceutical TV ads might realize the potential tension in such a partnership. To successfully take advantage of this market, medical industry advertisers need to get their messages and targeting spot on. As founders of the health-focused Web communities have noted, medical ads often cause patients to question the validity of a site’s information. Health sites and their potential advertisers have an incredible chance to build revenue as more consumers look the Web for health information and support. The question is whether sites will be able to maintain their credibility with the users—who value the conversational, Web 2.0 experience—while letting in the ads that bring health industry dollars.

There is plenty of excitement right now with people talking, blogging, estimating and projecting about the power of online video. Everyone from the kid next door with the video camera uploading content to YouTube, to Presidential candidates, to big shot marketers seems to want in on the Web video action. In a recent report Tubemogul highlighted the impact potential of video asking:

“…when was the last time that a paid search listing or banner ad raised your blood pressure or induced you to forward something to a friend?”

They definitely have a point.

Yet online video raises as many hurdles as it does cheers of elation. Marketers are in search of plausible ways to produce the myriad iterations necessary for the geographic, demographic, and use-based targeting that Web video makes ultimately inevitable and increasingly challenging. Will all the excitement and hype translate into increased budgeting for online video and other social media?

Although speculative answers abound, the most successful form and ultimate direction online video will take remains an unknown. Coremetrics’ second annual Face of the New Marketer survey illustrates that social media marketing tools—including user generated videos and product reviews—are becoming integral to online marketing. A disconnect remains however between the desirability of social marketing and the budget allocated to it; 78% of respondents see social media marketing as a way to gain competitive edge, but only 7.75% of total online marketing spend is devoted to it. John Squire, SVP product strategy, GM marketing services at Coremetrics explains:

“marketers are aware of the impact that social media marketing can have on their overall program, but view it as uncharted territory, not worthy of their budget.”

One of the biggest challenges facing marketers wanting to adopt online video is lack of tools and expertise. Video production costs are hard to stomach—it is a new medium that has some marketers questioning whether returns will justify the cost. One possible answer lies in an increased blurring of the lines between user generated content, commissioned ads and user reviews. Online Video Insider entry Video Ads For People Without TV points to consumer generated content campaigns run through managed brand communities as at least a partial solution to the problems of cost and video proficiency.

When it comes to distribution and targeting, companies must often choose between reach and quality of content. The Online Video Insider post: The Next Video Ad Innovation: Automation of Ad Assembly contends:

“The need to innovate automation tools in the video ad editing space is driven by demand for video ads from every property on the Internet, yet few have discovered how to tackle the problem of mass adoption.”

Some companies are already onto this. If companies opt to automate production of online videos to save on cost and time, will their content still effectively engage consumers? At the moment this looks to be a trade off of artistry and quality for targeting and relevance. If, however, creators accept that they must build their “video templates” around editing techniques that the technology handles well, perhaps such automation could solve for cost and scalability without losing all creativity and viewer engagement.

In their report, “Web Video Marketing – Best Practices”, Tubemogul states that the strength of online video as a marketing medium stems from its engagement potential, SEO value, and measurement opportunities. In its report Tubemogul argues that 50% of creating a great viral video—which is really the ultimate success story for online video—is about content and production. The goal, as they put it, “is to create something remarkable, literally, something that causes people to remark – and in doing so to effectively convey your message.”

In order to grow online video needs conquer issues of cost and scalability while somehow remaining remarkable. How can Web video maintain creativity, specificity and influence while scaling to impact a greater swath of people? Since hoping your videos will “go viral” is not a complete distribution strategy—particularly if companies opt for template videos—video SEO must begin to play a much larger role. As videos flood the Web, getting people to find and watch your videos will only become more challenging though increasingly significant for raising brand awareness and content monetization.

Now that we are almost into November of 2007, the Presidential primaries are just around the corner. A few of the candidates started off big on the “new media” angle, with profiles on social networks, personal and political blogs and online videos. Notably, Obama, Clinton and Giuliani fans and detractors stirred up a great deal of press around viral videos about their candidacies.

The press attention to these new media strategies has died down somewhat. In the NY Times article, “Their Look for Fall 2008,” Stephanie Rosenbloom looks at the candidates efforts to sell their images and messages on t-shirts, tank tops and pins. She notes that:

The race to offer the most extensive, fashion-conscious and youthful gear is being won by Mr. Obama and Rudolph W. Giuliani.

While it is certainly interesting to note that candidates are expanding their branded offerings, this is still simply the diversification of an existing campaign strategy—sell stuff with your name on it to finance and promote your presidential bid. What happened to the new media angle? I wanted to take a look at where these campaigns are now—are they keeping current with their media strategies, or has the new media kick stagnated along with the buzz around it?

I looked around online to see what some of the most talked about candidates were up to and to try to get a sense of their different strategies—or lack thereof—when it comes to new media. What I found was not what I had expected.

Barack Obama is on Twitter—now all those copycat Obama girls can find out what he is up to at any given moment! I was disappointed by the videos on the Barack Obama Impact Channel page however. They were not as current as I would have expected for a candidate with such a strong younger following. Facebook was another story. With well over 500 groups related to Obama and his candidacy, the buzz around this social network is certainly Obama-heavy.

Hillary Clinton also commands quite the presence on Facebook, with myriad positive and negative groups devoted to—or intended to detract from—Clinton’s candidacy. There was a rosier tint to her MySpace page where I found a slew of birthday well wishes from “friends”. If you get tired of reading those you can also catch up on her life story there, each section of which offers a video to complement the text. Most of the other videos I found for Clinton were standard TV ads that had been uploaded to the Web.

Mitt Romney also has a number of relatively recent TV ads online accessible on his site and his social network profiles. His own site has a “Mitt TV” section where viewers can watch news clips, promotional videos and reality TV-esque clips from a series the site calls “24 Hours on the Trail”.

Rudy Giuliani also uses this video tactic but takes it even further. A message on his MySpace page reads:

Hey there! I’m Dan Meyers and welcome to Rudy’s MySpace page. I am the host of “Running with Rudy” and I’m here to give you an insider’s perspective of life on the campaign.

Giuliani (or rather Dan and the team) employ interesting widgets and videos giving the page an up to date and digitally focused feel. Giuliani has fewer overall Facebook groups devoted to his candidacy, but also a higher ratio of supporting groups. Overall Giuliani got top marks for his new media efforts. Having weekly video updates and blog posts along with a young personality managing his online identity makes Giuliani’s presence on MySpace seem natural and current.

Interestingly enough, the fastest growing Facebook group at the moment is devoted to Stephen Colbert’s political aspirations. Within just one week Colbert’s group surpassed its 1 million member goal. This demonstrates the potential power of social networking available to candidates. If done right, such online networking can be an incredible political tool; gathering that number of supporters for so little time and money is truly impressive when compared to traditional campaigning methods.

Just as advertisers and old media must adapt to the new media paradigm, the Presidential candidates have found themselves in largely uncharted territory this election season. Everything about social networks, user-generated content and increasingly user-programmed content is opposed to control; outside of their own sites and Web pages, viral videos, blogs and Facebook groups define candidates in ways beyond their power. In light of this, candidates will increasingly need to shift their politicking to integrate their messages into this radically new environment. This may be the only way to reach a younger audience and maybe, just maybe, get them riled up enough to get out and vote when the time comes.

Just a few days after Current board chairman Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Price, the youth-oriented news and information cable network launched its new Web site Current.com. Unlike the old site, Current.com goes beyond a TV station feeder system in its offerings. With an increased degree of user involvement and social networking, Current now looks to be a full fledged multinetwork media solution.

The concept of Current.com, explains Chief Executive Joel Hyatt, came out of surveys showing that 70% of Current TV viewers had a laptop open as they watched. Hyatt describes Current as:

“…a new form of social media where viewers can create, engage, and influence news and information”

Current’s goal is to give viewers a greater voice in media while also giving them context for videos on the site. The network, which already allowed professional videographers to submit video news segments, moves several steps further with the new site by soliciting user feedback over the Web and converting submissions into online news and pieces for broadcast. What is striking about Current’s latest developments is how they address issues of brand control, dual-screen viewing, and interactive media consumption patterns.

Brand control and messaging

Advertisers are intrigued by the potential impact of online video when it comes to messaging and brand awareness, but they are also nervous about control. Video spreads rapidly across the Web, particularly when it is creative and quirky. How do companies get in on the online video trend without breaking the bank, spreading the wrong message through repurposed TV content that falls flat, or having their brand name show up next to objectionable or irrelevant content?

Current offers one possible solution. Gore asserts that Current’s platform gives advertisers the best of both worlds: brand control and zero production costs. Video ads created by consumers must adhere to certain guidelines and advertisers screen the clips to decide whether they should be distributed beyond the Current network. Additionally, Current.com acts as a hub where people can watch ads for the sake of watching ads—viewers are drawn to the clips in part because other users generate one third of the advertising content. When your brand has an ad on a site like Current.com, users may find it more entertaining—Current viewers prefer Vcams (viewer created videos) to traditionally produced spots by a 9-1 margin. Because of the eclectic, interactive nature of the Current network, advertisers may fret less over whether or not an ad will show up next to poorly targeted or objectionable content—at least while the ad is within the Current network. The question of control rears its head once more when the advertiser opts to move an ad into the wider Web.

Integrated two-screen experience

Just as the explosion of web video has advertisers excited yet hesitant, the TV industry is looking for how best to handle the competition and opportunity Web video presents. Current, thus far, is a success story of dual screen and dual industry integration. Realizing that the vast majority of their viewers watch Current programming while using the Internet, Current now actively acknowledges this dual screen viewing. By making the two screens complementary to one another Current provides viewers with an experience that mutually reinforces both TV and Internet platforms. Current does not stream online, so to enhance the web experience users tune in to their TV; those watching on their television set find out they can engage online, so they open their laptops and participate. There is no live feed of the Current TV broadcast on the Web—the cable and satellite companies were not fans of the idea—meaning Web users must turn on their TV to watch; the full Current experience is truly multiplatform.

The way we twenty-somethings want our media

Gore maintains that the best way to reach the younger web-savvy audience is to let us help create the content. Right now Current presumes an incredibly active consumer—the draws of the network and the site are interactivity, topic breadth and, I would argue, brevity of individual clips. There is also the chance that your content could make it onto the TV channel, allowing for the type of exposure my generation seems so taken with from our live journals to Facebook profiles to the videos we upload of ourselves doing just about anything onto YouTube. As Rafe Needleman contends:

“Current milks our fascination with being broadcast for all it’s worth.”

Still, in its present iteration Current—as a dual screen, interactive, multinetwork media product—reaches only a narrow population segment. “This is about being more actively involved in the news,” said Gartner analyst Mike McGuire, continuing, “It presumes a pretty active consumer as opposed to a passive one.” The challenge for Current will be to expand their audience while maintaining the vivacity of their content and the conversational nature of their programming.

Google announced late Monday that it is integrating the AdSense network with YouTube, offering a bold new alternative to current models of supporting online video through advertising. Will this latest move by Google totally disrupt the existing online video advertising paradigm? Will video units become the answer to the YouTube revenue conundrum?

This is huge news for the world of online video and advertising. Google believes these video units will allow more publishers to have video content on their sites while simultaneously offering them the potential for extra revenue. It is also the logical next step, following Google’s release of text-based ad overlays on select YouTube videos. Video unit ads dedicate a small companion banner at the top of the screen to run graphical banner ads. This takes up around 20 percent of the player screen. A text ad also appears on the bottom portion of the video once a user clicks the play button and the video begins showing.

The Google AdSense blog explains:

“You can choose categories of video to target to your site, select content from individual YouTube partners, or have video automatically targeted to your site content.”

Around 100 YouTube video content partners are currently taking part. Google would not release a full list of participants, even so, notably missing from those mentioned were any major media companies. They did mention some of the current content partners including Expert Village, a producer of how-to videos; Ford Models, a modeling agency; and Extreme Elements, which creates videos about extreme sports.

From a video producer angle this looks pretty good—at least initially; imagine your videos syndicated to thousands of websites while you get a cut from each ad. So why are the big media companies holding back? It looks like concerns have already surfaced over who controls the content placement and how well it can be targeted.

Website publishers may abstain from jumping on the video unit bandwagon because of similar concerns. With the video distribution completely out of their hands, both content producers and web publishers will have to rely on Google’s targeting to ensure the relevance and appropriateness of the streamed videos.

For consumers, there is certainly an appeal to the non-invasive, non-interruptive nature of Google’s video unit ads. But will they want to watch these videos outside of the familiar YouTube environment? Google’s text ads have succeeded in spite of irrelevant links showing up where the targeting is clearly not at 100%. Will consumers find it more irksome when the inevitable irrelevant video clips pop up? Online video has proven itself a powerful medium thus far, so odds are where the videos go—so long as they are adequately targeted—eyes will follow.

This is exactly where the fears of publishers and content providers come in. The power of web video, its popularity and viral nature, also make it uniquely challenging to control, target and navigate online. This has meant that in spite of the explosion of online video, publishers have remained somewhat wary of the medium. Google has undoubtedly shaken the world of online video, but the hesitance of publishers will continue to hold web video back as long as concerns over inadequate control linger.

Advertising.com’s Bi-Annual Online Video Study indicates that the majority of consumers, at 62 percent of respondents, are viewing video online. The study also concludes that the majority of these viewers are aged 35 or older and their preference tends towards news clips as opposed to user generated content.

The report notes that while consumers continue to incorporate streaming video into the online experience, a difference remains based on Internet users age group.

As previous studies have shown, older consumers use streaming video to gain information, which can be seen by their preference for online news clips, while younger consumers are streaming content for entertainment purposes, such as viewing movies, TV shows and user-generated videos online.

My question is: which came first, the viewer preferences or the digital content models and media sites?

As a twenty-something who likes to spend my time online getting information as well as entertainment, I wonder if the differences in viewer preference tell us something deeper than, old people like news, young people watch YouTube.

The MediaPost article, “Times Touts ‘All the News that’s Fit to Click’” highlights the shift in the marketing of New York Times online media offerings. After the fall of TimesSelect, NYTimes.com has launched a multi-channel branding initiative to show non-readers (or should we call them non-clickers?) what they are missing.

While NYTimes.com continues to add blogs to its mix, much of the multimedia content the new initiative underscores isn’t even new. Murray Gaylord, vice president of marketing for NYTimes.com explains,

“Internal research showed us that people think the Web site has what’s in the paper, and that’s it…We needed a campaign to show them what’s online–like video, slide shows, interactive blogs, and reader comments. There’s all this content they don’t know about.”

The two year TimesSelect project was by no means a flop—paid subscriptions generated around $10 million a year in revenue. Still, “projections for growth on that paid subscriber base were low, compared to the growth of online advertising,” Vivian L. Schiller, senior vice president and general manager of NYTimes.com, said upon the announcement earlier this month. Interestingly, while many of my friends enjoy the columnists and other features that were off-limits to non-subscribers, only those in that over 35 bracket seemed willing to pay for TimesSelect. We twenty-somethings came of age with Napster, watch Daily Show clips online when we want, and can now buy the new Radiohead album digitally for whatever price we choose—it is hard to get us to pay for information when we don’t even pay for our digital entertainment.

And what if the majority of online news sites just aren’t hip enough to draw in younger, more digitally aware Internet users? I can barely keep up with all the innovation on sites like Facebook but that is, to a certain extent, what keeps it interesting and engaging. Maybe the Times will get it right for the under 35 set with their destruction of the TimesSelect pay wall and their emphasis on a multimedia, interactive digital news experience.

Online video makes up an increasing component of Internet user activity. According to a comScore Video Metrix report, Americans viewed more than 9 billion videos online during July 2007.

The report also notes:

• Online viewers watched an average of more than three hours of online video during the month (181 minutes).
• The average online video duration was 2.7 minutes.
• Nearly three out of four (74.2 percent) U.S. Internet users viewed video online.
• More than one out of three (36.7 percent) U.S. Internet users viewed video on YouTube.com.
• The average online video viewer consumed 68 videos, or more than two per day.

The report highlights that nearly 75 percent of U.S. Internet users watched an average of three hours of online video during July and 134 million Americans —or approximately three in four U.S. Internet users—viewed online video. Google Sites ranked as the top U.S. video property with nearly 2.5 billion videos viewed (27.0 percent share of videos), 2.4 billion of which occurred at YouTube.com. Yahoo! Sites ranked second with 390 million (4.3 percent), followed by Fox Interactive Media with 298 million (3.3 percent) and Viacom Digital with 281 million (3.1 percent).

While some have challenged the report’s data and language, we can take a few away from it. For one, the comScore findings are further evidence of the growing online video trend; Americans are spending a large portion of their time online watching video clips. Second, the report demonstrates that Google and MySpace are continuing their successful audience aggregation in the video segment, which has implications for big media companies. Some of these media companies, such as ABC and NBC, seem to be catching on and looking for ways to ensure that their content is accessible and appealing to Internet users. The question remains however, can Google replicate its own financial success, leveraging audience aggregation in the video category as it has done so profitably with search?

A new report from the Radio Advertising Bureau highlights the continued growth of non-spot revenue in the industry. Non-spot activity—largely in the form of innovative brand extensions to the Internet and enhanced event sponsorship packages—remains a focal point for Radio. This strength, evidenced by 16% gains in the second quarter of 2007 for non-spot, helped to offset the slight dips in local, national and network revenues.

According to Jeff Haley, CEO of the Radio Advertising Bureau:

The average monthly non-spot revenue growth rate for the last two years has been 10%. At this rate non-spot revenue will be over $1.5B for 2008 and approach $2B by the end of 2009.

Haley acknowledges that radio stations’ online efforts are bringing in the majority of this revenue, and many in the industry expect such efforts to accelerate in the coming years. The question will be, how quickly and gracefully can the radio industry step up online offerings?

Noted for localism and targetability, radio is poised to capitalize on a major share of advertising spending. To draw listeners and therefore advertising dollars online, radio will need to successfully leverage offline multimedia content. Radio offers great brands, great content, and a massive industry, however as it stands today the brands and content are not yet being leveraged to capacity. Radio’s vast and varied content must be made available, accessible and navigable online for the industry to capitalize on their valuable brands, radio names and programs. The success story for radio will be both a reaction to and a continuation of the growth of non-spot revenue and the expansion of stations online.

Advertisers are clearly taking note of the power and popularity user-generated content enjoys online today. Tremor Media has recently partnered with ExpoTV in order to embed user-generated product testimonials into ads, while Italian-American start-up Zooppa—which launched its new site last month—synthesizes two Web phenomena, user-generated video and online social advertising. Tremor and Zooppa are two intriguing examples of how experimental the frontier of online video remains—particularly when it comes to creating successful advertisements and brand awareness.

The partnership between Tremor Media and ExpoTV allows Tremor ads to exhibit unique ExpoTV Videopinions reviews, which ExpoTV describes as “short, unbiased, consumer-generated videos of products and services.” The companies see such reviews as a new advertising vehicle that will, ideally, leverage the influence of brand ambassadors to get the word out about products. The appeal of user-generated reviews is that they should resonate with Internet users, as the production by another consumer lends a greater air of authenticity than a typical, company produced ad. Videopinions reviews also get advertisers off the hook when they lack creative assets suited for the online environment; the reviews provide ready-to-use video with full usage rights. Tremor Media CEO Jason Glickman calls this:

…a new twist on blending advertising with user-generated content that leverages the power of social media that is safe for brands.

Glickman is not the only one looking for creative, safe ways to leverage social media for branding purposes online. Zooppa describes its site as “an innovative platform for advertising made by users and sponsored by companies.” The start-up aspires to conduct business in a creative and rewarding viral context. By providing designers and video makers the opportunity to bid on contests from big brands to create commercials, Zooppa simultaneously fosters competition and creative collaboration. The production of ads in such an open, social environment lets companies get a glimpse of how people see a brand. The subsequent viral spread of the most popular, creative videos also works wonders for brand building.

Both the Tremor/ExpoTV partnership and the Zooppa business model demonstrate an interesting, viral yet controlled direction for online video advertising. Could blurring the lines between consumers and content creation be the next big thing in online branding?

Advertising.com recently issued a report with some intriguing findings from the company’s bi-annual video study. The study consisted of a survey which assessed consumer perceptions and usage of streaming content. Gathering data from a sample of 500 consumers over the age of 18, the survey used a series of questions related to when, what and why consumers view video online.

The study indicates that the majority of consumers are viewing video online; 62 percent of respondents claim to watch videos on the Internet. Another interesting finding shows that, contrary to popular opinion, these viewers are not simply young adults viewing user-generated videos. The majority of viewers—69 percent—falls into the 35 and older group. And that 69 percent prefers viewing news clips over YouTube videos. Lynda Clarizio, president of Advertising.com believes this preference highlights that:

The internet is still seen first and foremost as an information resource. With news clips remaining the most popular type of streamed content, video viewing habits reflect that status.

Where is the online video trend headed, and what can consumer behavior tell us about shifting preferences?

Clarizio adds that:

…it will be interesting to see how viewership evolves with the rise of social networks, more diverse video content, increased interactive gaming, and other such advances in online entertainment. I think we may see a shift in usage toward recreation; these latest figures certainly hint at that trend.

Will there be an evolution in usage as Clarizio predicts, with the focus on web video as entertainment taking a firmer hold?

Whatever the outcome, advertisers will need to pay close attention to the way consumer preferences for online video consumption develop and shift. Advertising.com’s report shows that consumers accept video advertising as part of the video experience and even prefer ads to subscription fees. The shorter the ads, the better they performed for advertisers in terms of percentage of ad played. Shorter ads also make the experience more pleasurable for consumers engaging with the video content.

Online video advertising has yet to find its equivalent to TV’s 30 second ad spot however. Video advertising online may be a more complex beast, but much of that complexity could work to the advertiser’s advantage. While online video provides a rich context for analyzing consumer behavior and closely targeting ads to viewer preferences, marketers and content providers have not fully tapped this resource. Video search will begin to play a major role, as more advanced video search engines provide transcripts of video files which enhance search results, heighten user experience and allow deeper analysis of consumer behavior and preferences online.