| Wed, May 13, 2009 |
|
Poll: Most Newspaper Execs Actually Still Believe They Will Get Back To Profitability
Newspaper execs usually don’t like announcing job cuts, so there are some obvious built in biases in the Associated Press Managing Editors’ survey, but there appears to be a widespread feeling that the staff reductions have made the job of news gathering much more difficult for newspapers. Roughly 71 percent of the 351 editors publishers participating in the survey said the ability to inform readers has diminished with their steadily shrinking staffs, the AP reported. Only 20 percent there had been little impact from layoffs. About 65 of the respondents said they laid off staff in the past year. The responses include several responses from one newspaper, but AP notes that this was one of the highest responses APME has received to its periodic questionnaires.
—Hope springs eternal: On the subject of the “death of newspapers,” just 17 percent said they believed the industry would go extinct. About 60 percent said their publications would find their way back to profitability. More after the jump
—Ad shrinkage: The AP said that about $11.6 billion—approximately one-fourth—of the industry’s annual advertising revenue since 2005 has been lost and staff reductions have been the main way newspapers have tried to cope. Secondly, the challenge of the blogs, which typically have much smaller staffs, have also called into the question the viability of maintaining large newsrooms. And despite the large responses to ASME’s survey, a number of media executives have been calling for newspapers to shrink their staffs if they want to survive. Last month, Thomson Reuters (NSDQ: TRIN) CEO Tom Glocer told an off-the-record gathering of new media execs that the NYT could get by with 60 reporters instead of 600-700 reporters. Of course, the news staff shortage has made services like Reuters and the AP a bit more crucial to newspapers, especially as they cut national and international coverage.
—The latest cut count: As for how things are looking this year, PaperCuts, the newspaper job loss counter, said there have been 9,162 jobs lost this year so far; in ‘08, the site said 15,970 posts were eliminated either through layoffs or buyouts.
-
paidContent.org
|
|
|
The Case For Narrowcasting
Chris Ahearn is president of Media at Thomson Reuters (NSDQ: TRIN). He joined Reuters in 2001 from J.P. Morgan, where he held positions in LabMorgan, the technology, media and telecommunications group, and the financial- institutions group. Prior to J.P. Morgan, he worked in the financial-institutions group at Credit Suisse First Boston.
Too often, media-industry players take the idea that “more is better” when talking about the size of their audience. Why? Because conventional wisdom is that bigger is better. The bigger your audience, the broader your reach, the more you can charge for space, time, frequency or general access. Conventional wisdom makes us feel good; but it is just that, conventional.
Our industry is drastically changing. If we are going to have a happy ending, we need to narrow the sweet spots to focus on unique needs. The spots that offer our customers valuable and unique services—and that they will pay for. The spots where advertisers can speak to quality audience. I think of these sweet spots as narrowcasting.
The questions to ask are: Where do we add real, differentiated value? Are we growing an audience that matters, or is it just numbers? Are we getting to know them better and giving them a unique service? These questions are the same whether it’s a B2C or B2B world.
In a fragmenting media world, make fragmentation your friend. Media owners have to take the same approach to advertising. Go deep, not broad. Whether endemic or not, would an advertiser rather target a new sustainable product to tens of millions general-news consumers or 5 million people who consume green news on a daily basis? It’s about the audience for sure, but it’s also having the opportunity to create messages that resonate with a specific group and entice them to do what you are asking.
It’s ironic that in an industry where people act like the cookie monster when times are good, bemoan how unfair things are when times are tougher. Sure technologies change the playing fields, but the focus really is pretty simple: love your customer by giving them something that they need and want.
-
paidContent.org
|
|
|
No Surprise: Newspaper Execs Say They Can’t Do More With Less
Newspaper execs usually don’t like announcing job cuts, so there are some obvious built in biases in the Associated Press Managing Editors’ survey, but there appears to be a widespread feeling that the staff reductions have made the job of news gathering much more difficult for newspapers. Roughly 71 percent of the 351 editors publishers participating in the survey said the ability to inform readers has diminished with their steadily shrinking staffs, the AP reported. Only 20 percent there had been little impact from layoffs. About 65 of the respondents said they laid off staff in the past year. The responses include several responses from one newspaper, but AP notes that this was one of the highest responses APME has received to its periodic questionnaires.
—Hope springs eternal: On the subject of the “death of newspapers,” just 17 percent said they believed the industry would go extinct. About 60 percent said their publications would find their way back to profitability. More after the jump
—Ad shrinkage: The AP said that about $11.6 billion—approximately one-fourth—of the industry’s annual advertising revenue since 2005 has been lost and staff reductions have been the main way newspapers have tried to cope. Secondly, the challenge of the blogs, which typically have much smaller staffs, have also called into the question the viability of maintaining large newsrooms. And despite the large responses to ASME’s survey, a number of media executives have been calling for newspapers to shrink their staffs if they want to survive. Last month, Thomson Reuters (NSDQ: TRIN) CEO Tom Glocer told an off-the-record gathering of new media execs that the NYT could get by with 60 reporters instead of 600-700 reporters. Of course, the news staff shortage has made services like Reuters and the AP a bit more crucial to newspapers, especially as they cut national and international coverage.
—The latest cut count: As for how things are looking this year, PaperCuts, the newspaper job loss counter, said there have been 9,162 jobs lost this year so far; in ‘08, the site said 15,970 posts were eliminated either through layoffs or buyouts.
-
paidContent.org
|
|
|
The Case For Narrowcasting
Chris Ahearn is president of Media at Thomson Reuters (NSDQ: TRIN). He joined Reuters in 2001 from J.P. Morgan, where he held positions in LabMorgan, the technology, media and telecommunications group, and the financial- institutions group. Prior to J.P. Morgan, he worked in the financial-institutions group at Credit Suisse First Boston.
Too often, media-industry players take the idea that “more is better” when talking about the size of their audience. Why? Because conventional wisdom is that bigger is better. The bigger your audience, the broader your reach, the more you can charge for space, time, frequency or general access. Conventional wisdom makes us feel good; but it is just that, conventional.
Our industry is drastically changing. If we are going to have a happy ending, we need to narrow the sweet spots to focus on unique needs. The spots that offer our customers valuable and unique services—and that they will pay for. The spots where advertisers can speak to quality audience. I think of these sweet spots as narrowcasting.
The questions to ask are: Where do we add real, differentiated value? Are we growing an audience that matters, or is it just numbers? Are we getting to know them better and giving them a unique service? These questions are the same whether it’s a B2C or B2B world.
In a fragmenting media world, make fragmentation your friend. Media owners have to take the same approach to advertising. Go deep, not broad. Whether endemic or not, would an advertiser rather target a new sustainable product to tens of millions general-news consumers or 5 million people who consume green news on a daily basis? It’s about the audience for sure, but it’s also having the opportunity to create messages that resonate with a specific group and entice them to do what you are asking.
It’s ironic that in an industry where people act like the cookie monster when times are good, bemoan how unfair things are when times are tougher. Sure technologies change the playing fields, but the focus really is pretty simple – love your customer by giving them something that they need and want.
-
paidContent.org
|
|
|
The Case For Narrowcasting
Chris Ahearn is president of Media at Thomson Reuters (NSDQ: TRIN). He joined Reuters in 2001 from J.P. Morgan, where he held positions in LabMorgan, the technology, media and telecommunications group, and the financial- institutions group. Prior to J.P. Morgan, he worked in the financial-institutions group at Credit Suisse First Boston.
Too often, media-industry players take the idea that “more is better” when talking about the size of their audience. Why? Because conventional wisdom is that bigger is better. The bigger your audience, the broader your reach, the more you can charge for space, time, frequency or general access. Conventional wisdom makes us feel good; but it is just that, conventional.
Our industry is drastically changing. If we are going to have a happy ending, we need to narrow the sweet spots to focus on unique needs. The spots that offer our customers valuable and unique services—and that they will pay for. The spots where advertisers can speak to quality audience. I think of these sweet spots as narrowcasting.
The questions to ask are: Where do we add real, differentiated value? Are we growing an audience that matters, or is it just numbers? Are we getting to know them better and giving them a unique service? These questions are the same whether it’s a B2C or B2B world.
In a fragmenting media world, make fragmentation your friend. Media owners have to take the same approach to advertising. Go deep, not broad. Whether endemic or not, would an advertiser rather target a new sustainable product to tens of millions general-news consumers or 5 million people who consume green news on a daily basis? It’s about the audience for sure, but it’s also having the opportunity to create messages that resonate with a specific group and entice them to do what you are asking.
It’s ironic that in an industry where people act like the cookie monster when times are good, bemoan how unfair things are when times are tougher. Sure technologies change the playing fields, but the focus really is pretty simple – love your customer by giving them something that they need and want.
-
paidContent.org
|
|
More Featured Content
|
Newsletter
