The multiscreen viewer truly does exist. Crossover between television viewing and online video watching is growing as TV viewers increasingly rely on digital outlets for engagement around TV-related content, according to new research from Google.

One of the hottest topics in media today is cross-screen advertising. While the technical capabilities are somewhat nascent, the concept is receiving tremendous attention from marketers, who are challenging agencies to take advantage of the immediate opportunity. But what about the publisher perspective? For publishers, cross-screen means considering things like monetization, content distribution, measurement, and form factor, and then determining how each is affected by screen proliferation. I've attempted to outline a few considerations for publishers, so that they can enter carefully but confidently into the other side of the cross-screen equation.

Can Taco Bell dethrone McDonald's in the world of fast food breakfasts? It's too early to tell if the Tex-Mex brand can snatch market share from its much larger rival, but Taco Bell is making a powerful case for its marketing prowess with its latest efforts.

As long as brand advertisers and their agencies define ROI as "more ad impressions for lower cost" they will continue to buy cheaper and cheaper ad inventory. That inevitably means there will be "dirty" or fraudulent inventory.

If a brand isn't offering product videos on its website, it's missing a potential marketing and engagement opportunity. About 90% of consumers watch online videos, and online shoppers are nearly twice as likely to make a purchase than consumers who do not view video, according to new research from video marketing firm Invodo.

In location-based video advertising, context is more important than content. There, I said it. I get flack every time I say that. There's this perception that if we can make a really, really good video ad, it will "go viral," and then people are going to share it all over the place after they initially see it while they're out and about, and our work is done. Location-based video advertisers needs to take a cue from online advertising and understand that great content doesn't do much if it's not seen by the right people at the right time.

Every year, we see new creative trends emerge. In 2014, viewers have made it clear that they want as many tear-jerking videos as brands can produce. While any brand can create this type of video, the demand for emotional storytelling -- be in heartwarming or heartbreaking -- is especially opportune for nonprofits.

The Media Research Council (MRC) and the IAB this week issued viewable impressions guidelines for both static display and video ads: for the former, 50% of pixels in view for at least one continuous second; for the latter, 50% of pixels in view for two seconds. In a world where advertisers and audiences are considering "TV" (Television) more and more as the broader descriptor of "T/V" (Television/Video), this new standard for minimum video viewability brings the largest single pool of ad buying dollars under the microscope. Traditional, linear television has never had a viewability standard.

For decades, the gross rating point (GRP) metric has been used in television advertising to calculate campaign exposure with respect to reach and frequency against a target demographic audience. GRPs are now available for digital video advertising through Nielsen online campaign ratings (OCR). The ad industry had been pushing for the ability to compare TV buys to digital video -- and it's finally arrived, opening the door to a new kind of conversation between TV and digital buyers.

Consumers have high expectations for video quality, and they don't differentiate or make exceptions for the delivery mechanism, according to a slate of new research. What's more, viewers are increasingly less tolerant of any video problems they encounter.