Retooling Newspapers for a New Generation (Part 1 of 4)
Written by Scott Loring and Andrew Davis
The newspaper industry is struggling to survive. The staggering loss of revenue has signaled that the time is coming for massive changes.
Media columnist Michael Wolff recently stated that “about 18 months from now, 80 percent of newspapers will be gone.” This tells us that the turning point for the newspaper industry is not only coming, it is already knocking at the door. The pile-on continues, with Ken Doctor discussing Google’s next step as a ‘digital paperboy,’ serving up relevant, timely digital content to the masses.
So, what is the story behind the story?
The Disruption of Modernization
There is something enjoyable about the tactile, time-slowing experience of opening a physical newspaper – be it on a plane, train, or a Sunday morning. But let’s just admit it – akin to talk radio in the car, newspapers will be forced to rely heavily on increasingly sparse captive settings for physical consumption. Not a bad thing, just a reality of the increasing speed of life. This lifespeed acceleration alone would be enough to kill the physical daily paper – nevermind the impending impact of the Kindle and other mobile consumption options.
A provocative presentation on TED by Jacek Utko suggests that improvements in newspaper design could buy some time, but this does not address the core issues at play.
This winter’s Nieman Reports outlined how the next generation of news consumers place high value on trusted news sources, talented journalists, and editorial direction. But as Mark Davis of the San Diego Union-Tribune mentions in a recent post, there are clearly navigational issues in today’s online news sites that continue to hinder young adult adoption.
On the monetization side, there is a growing consensus supporting a hybrid pricing model, where there is some ad-supported (free) content, some micropayment per article, and ultimately some subscriptions for full access (recently echoed by Eric Schmidt). This is an entirely reasonable approach, if for no other reason than to ensure that the newspapers are extracting the maximum amount of consumer surplus at every turn. But the path that takes a newspaper from their current predicament to this economic hybrid nirvana is unclear.
Why? Because we’re still dancing around the big elephant in the room.
Quality Content is Not Optional
You can design the hell out of your website, and deliver the slickest UI possible, but if the underlying content is poor, you will fail. You can also build a paywall around your content, but if the content is still poor, you will fail.
Here is some GOOD NEWS: 99% of the free content that newspapers are posting online today is priced properly: $0. It is not timely, it is not kicking off a conversation, it is not easily sharable, it is too unfocused, and it is almost entirely text-based. As a result, it simply does not deliver an engaging online experience – and therefore is not able to be monetized beyond poor CPM ad dollars.
As Jim VandeHei, executive editor of Politico, stated back in 2007 regarding the importance of the news organization brand vs. the journalists, “Reporters here will transcend the organization.” Branded journalists who deliver high-quality content and build direct relationships with their online readers deliver huge long-term value for the publication, the journalist, and ultimately for the online readers.
Time to Reinvent the News
A new medium requires new thinking and an appetite for experimentation. Case in point: some of the first failures in TV broadcast content were born from misguided attempts to film live theatrical plays for television consumption. Cramming old content into new mediums doesn’t work. The new online medium demands new content to fit the new context. The user experience can be so much more, and users are demanding more. To survive, newspapers must deliver more. The efficient market is YELLING this message to them … the newspaper industry may want to turn up their hearing aids.
Next Week
This is the first entry in a four-part series that address the rebirth of the newspaper industry. The second entry will focus on what newspapers are doing right and why hyper-local will be a lifeline for some, and ultimately highlight some success stories in elevating online content rather than simply shoveling offline content online. Highlights next week will include the NYTimes’ Article Skimmer prototype, the WSJ editorial page, the Domus Breaking News Project, and ExecTweets.
My Question to You (and a Poll Question)
Who do you think is evolving fast enough to weather the rebirth of the US newspaper industry?
We also believe that newspapers, especially local papers, need to rethink the kind of content they create and disseminate. Here’s our first poll question…
Retooling Newspapers for a New Generation – Part 2
About the author
Andrew Davis -
In 2002, Andrew founded Tippingpoint Labs with journalist James Cosco. Since then, he's spent countless hours exploring the online universe and building a methodological approach to developing digital strategies that drive revenue or reduce costs.
Andrew's always asking big questions and analyzing data to understand markets, online forces and even business models. Andrew's research has resulted in the creation of innovative online metrics including Online Brand Value and Category Brand Value, eye-opening graphical representations of website evolution through the New Media Life Cycle and even using online data to predict offline revenue.
When he's not surfing the web, Andrew's traveling the globe speaking to a wide-variety of audiences about everything from social media to the future of print. Andrew is a frequent contributor to the Tippingpoint Labs website and has been creating valuable content since the early 1990s for The Jim Henson Company, CNN, The Today Show and MTV.
He's contributed to a book of short stories, called The Way Things Were and produced and co-wrote Roadside Ambition a documentary film about one small town with two huge balls.
"In a world where content is consumed as rapidly as it's created, companies need to develop a sound strategy to creating valuable online experiences that can, and should, be leveraged enterprise-wide. There is a content solution to every business challenge."Popular Posts
-
Seth Godin and the Flower Clock
August 24, 2010 -
The Online Brand Value Chain Explained
October 6, 2009 -
Give Most of it Away. The Rest Will Pay.
December 1, 2009
Related Posts
-
Your Workforce is Your Social Media Policy
July 1, 2010
-
14 Things Everyone Should Know about Writing for eCommerce Sites
June 28, 2010
-
Purchase, Persuasion, or Participation
June 9, 2010
Quality content is king. Local media outlets are going to have to learn to have more distributed content collection from the community to get the rich, quality content needed. They also need this to get the scale of information required to make it a viable part of the community it serves–and to get the advertising bucks necessary to keep the online doors open.
Christian,
Thanks for participating (and starting) the conversation. I agree, local media outlets are going to have to have more community interaction on a local and regional scale to stay relevant online. I’m not sure that the advertising model can sustain their entire business, unless they start getting creative with the term ‘advertising.’
What do you think?
Creativity in advertising is key…the local ad/sponsorship market is not as efficient yet as the google ads search…if you build the content people care about in the community, the community will care about sponsoring/advertising with the paper.
I agree that content is a major thing that should be addressed. Newspapers will have to move more online than they are currently, it just makes sense. I know I read my daily news online but at the weekend I do love a proper newspaper with my coffee and breakfast. My guess is that the papers will have to move online for the daily (weekday) news, but a lot of people like me love weekend papers.
Amelia,
You’re so right about the weekend paper. I hadn’t thought of this angle. Perhaps daily newspapers should really focus on that weekend edition with high-value engaging deep content? Great point! I’ve actually seen the quality of the Sunday Globe decline (in my opinion) over the past couple of years… anyone else?
Thanks for engaging! Really appreciate it!
It’s easy to point to the lack of meaningful content as a cause for the decline in readership and revenues. To some extent, this is certainly the case. However I would question whether it is the cause of the disease or just a symptom of a larger problem, namely lack of evolution in revenue and distribution methods.
Could it be that we’ve entered an era where the current revenue model does not provide a proper feedback loop for how well readers appreciate the content? As such, newspapers get further and further out of touch, losing readers and advertisers alike. If we look at the current revenue model, circulation numbers and advertising expenditures are certainly way down. It is my position that the money making side of the business of news needs to get creative and begin realigning their processes with the realities of our digital world.
Once this is done it will be more clear what stories are requested by readers, at which point journalists, editors, and bloggers should be better able to understand the desires of their readers.
I offer one solution for being creative in finding a sustainable revenue model for content that is mostly free. I call this system In-a-Moon, http://www.slideshare.net/mankins/inamoon-overview
Thanks for the thinking, Matt. There definitely is a causality question concerning whether the quality of content is driving down revenues, or vice-versa. I like the feedback loop comment as well – I do believe that the entrenched advertising dollars insulated the newspapers from having to address their falling readership sooner than they did. With that, as you said, they became more and more out of touch with their reader’s needs. Well said – and thanks for the In-a-Moon concept – I like the creative approach. Mass market might struggle with it, but still a mental stepping stone if nothing else.
You are trying to answer the million(s) dollar question…. the transition from print to digital; when, how, how much….
There is a lot of grey in the word “local”. Define local ?.. Local – town level ? Local – region level ? Local – state level ? The wider you get, the tougher the story in the print world. It is the principle reason that most every major metropolitan daily in the country is in financial trouble. You can get International, Domestic, State wide news anywhere and everywhere at the click of a button or the click of a keyboard. In addition, people are tired of hearing about the Economy, the War, Politics, the Misery of front page stories and leading nightly news stories.
People still need and want LOCAL….
Conversely, the narrower you get, if you have the resources to be “hyperlocal” (ie one town at a time), it is still a viable business to be in print. CONTENT is king. You have to have what people will come back for each week – Local stories, Town coverage, Youth Sports, Local Gov’t, Obituaries, Police Logs etc…. The one thing people do make time for is WHERE THEY LIVE, WHERE THEIR KIDS GO TO SCHOOL, WHAT ACTIVITIES THEY ARE INVOLVED IN etc…. Is it a long term viable business ? Define “long term”…. 1 yr, 5 years, 10 years, 15 years ? Clearly, even the current viable local town weekly print product needs to have a digital face. Audiences are adapting to new ways of accessing their local content. If you are a company like GateHouse Media (GHM) that has both (print and digital), in many, many towns, it is a balance of how to sustain both environments with enough content (interactive, stimulating, breaking, local) to satisfy print readers, on line readers, and those that do both. Our generation and older are still print people who have adapted to on line. The next generation is the challenge as they have grown up digital. How to satisfy their collective “lack of attention” with content that keeps them in one place long enough (like a newspaper would) to monetize their visit ? WOW… the million dollar question.
In the media business today, it is a race for the audiences’ attention. Capture it, stimulate it, force it to want to come back on a consistent basis. If you have a good meal at a restaurant, you are more likely to go back the next time you eat out. Not likely if the meal was terrible. CONTENT = MEAL in the media business today.
The economics of print/online: Online environments offer content flexibility that print doesn’t; video, audio, longer stories, unlimited photo capbility – visual and audio stimulation etc…. Print offers more available ad units and healthier price points. Online is cheaper to produce and deliver but has less revenue capacity… it is a tricky economic at play.
For companies like GHM, it is a bonus to have both because they can leverage the strengths of each…. The challenge in this economy is convincing enough advertisers to invest in advertising period, regardless of medium. Because budgets are so tight, advertisers are looking for immediate ROI’s on their investments. It has changed the idea of image advertising, branding, top of mind awareness…. to what did your ad do for me lately… They want to have surgery and feel fine the next day. Their money is limited and what they choose to do has to work.
Anyways, off the beat and track a little bit, but LOCAL is where the future is in the media business. Currently, few do it, and even less do it well.. Who will be left standing in the ring to fight the next fight is the question.
Mike – great contribution, thanks!
The only definition for ‘local’ that seems appropriate is “the stuff people care about in relation to their home”, which includes some or all that you referenced. But two things that it clearly does not include are national and international news. The online addition breaks the local news in digital, multimedia splendor, while the paper provides deeper local insight. The audience that wants deeper local insight in paper form is shrinking – but if the insight is rich, the audience will continue to eat the meal. However, as you said, if the meal is terrible …
GHM’s strength of dual mediums is also its weakness. They need to fully embrace the cannibalization of their cash cow by their fledgling online business. Never easy – but if they don’t, their competitors will.
In part 2 of this series (coming out tomorrow), we address how newspapers need to take back the power of breaking news, as well as the power of branded journalists. By part 4, I hope to have better answered your million dollar question.
Thanks again Mike!
Scott