Push.

With all of the hype and anticipation surrounding the launch of iPad's first paid news brand built specifically for the platform, I wanted to take a look at how it compares to other more established news apps.

Since consuming news in app is relatively new, what do readers want? What works? What doesn't? Who is doing the best job utilizing the technology? It may be too soon to answer all of these questions, but I put The Daily side-by-side with my two of previous favorite news apps for the iPad to see how some of the key features compare. Time will tell what consumers want, but here is what I want:

With the convergence of the digital world and the cable delivery system, advertisers will rely less on ratings and look more toward delivery.

Content will be less relevant as audience delivery becomes the key driver in television and cable buying. The technology currently exists through cable providers to give household and even demographic information about subscribers. This information coupled with the technology to deliver ad messaging at a household or even unit level will trump content ratings and put audience delivery at the forefront. Think about it, we will no longer "guess" at audiences but will be able to deliver individuals regardless of content. We will no longer be talking about what audience Grey's Anatomy received last night, but how many messages we delivered to Women 18-34, regardless of what they are watching. And the kicker is ... as advertisers, we will pay more for it, because we have less waste!

The second component to this model is that content will be offered both at a price or free with ad support. We will soon allow the end consumer to decide how they would like to receive content. They will be able to choose between $2.99 for the latest episode of Rules of Engagement or watch it for free with a few "un-skippable" ad units. This will further re-inforce the advertisers message as the end user will actually be requesting our messaging and will see the value of it ... therefore they will be more engaged.

Broadcast has their CPP (cost-per-point), newspaper their PCI (per column inch), out-of-home their DEC (Daily Effective Circulation), but will online's CPM (cost-per-thousand) be around forever? Probably not.

Unlike online's traditional media counterparts, the currency for evaluating, negotiating and buying media online is becoming obsolete. I've always thought that online biggest downfall is it's accountability, and now that's changing how we buy it. TV, radio, print and out-of-home are all bought on audience estimates and in most cases the analysis stops there. Sure, there's some post evaluation of the media mix and the campaign's overall effectiveness, but rarely is one medium isolated for performance within an integrated campaign. Except for online.

The impressions purchased online (which by the way are actuals vs. estimates) are just the beginning of buying process. Total clicks, click through percentages, time spent in-banner, video plays, etc.... are all carefully reviewed under a microscope with a fine-toothed comb and used to weight the performance of an online ad. So where is the over-analysis of digital media leading us? From realtime and post performance monitoring to prebuy currency.

More and more we will be purchasing our online inventory based on results rather than piles of impressions. It accidentally started years ago with SEM by engines fronting the impressions and advertisers only paying anytime a user clicked on their ad, and now that model has made it's way to digital display. Cost-per-acquisitions, cost-per-leads, and cost-per-clicks are slowly becoming the norm for purchasing online display. Unlike traditional media where inventory is defined and limited, digital inventory expands daily the placement is becoming irrelevant. All advertisers are interested in are the results and with almost infinite inventory available online, results are becoming the new currency and you're never going to see an advertiser complain about that.