|
I was chatting to a friend of mine who works in advertising about the web metrics piece I did yesterday. He suggested that I could also look at the amount of time spent with a website as a relative measure of their value to advertisers.
A Pew report last year suggests that US audiences spend 15 minutes on average reading a newspaper and six minutes reading news online. So you could take that to suggest that if the reach of online was 30% of the print product, the amount of exposure to an advert is 6/15 of that or 12%. That number reinforces what a Deutsche Bank researcher told Pew for State of the Media 2007: that each online reader is worth 10-15% of the print reader.
Maybe I was too generous yesterday.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
First published 6/20/2007 3:01 PM
I'm researching a piece for tomorrow's blog about the death of the internet (oh come on, can't you people take a joke!) and if you want to understand just how messed up and deceptive internet audience statistics are then I strongly recommend you try and do an exercise like this for your own newspaper.
I'll give you the conclusion at the beginning so you can decide whether to follow the tortuous mathematical route I had to take to get there.
Internet metrics substantially exaggerate the importance of the newspaper web audience. Would you be so keen to abandon print to its fate if you knew that despite 10 years of growth, your web site may only have 30% of the reach of your printed newspaper in the market where you can attract advertisers. And that at current rates of growth and decline it could be 2020 or 2030 before the two are even level with each other?
|
|
Read more...
|
The news on advertising revenue is very very grim. If you haven't already poured yourself a large one, please do so and have a look at the latest figures on US ad revenue in newspapers. We're looking at 15-20% annual declines in revenue in cars, homes, jobs and classified. Ad revenue for newspapers online up about $100m and slowing in growth. Ad revenue in print down about $1,000m and gathering pace.. Please don't tell me any more how online revenue is going to save the newspaper business ever. If you believe that you are about to kill your newspaper.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Being a big believer in the power of markets to expose the truths behind people's words, I thought I'd dig a little and work out how much it would cost me to buy a newspaper title from a group that really ought to sell it to me. That would be groups who believe that the future is digital in some way, who have no other synergistic newspapers in the same area and who could use the money. The New York Times and McClatchy have titles that fit into all those categories.
I also thought I'd pick two newspapers close to home, so I'd know whether there was a specific premium related to them being good newspapers. I chose the Bradenton Herald and the Sarasota Herald Tribune. Neither is particularly good, or outrageously troubled. The SH-T is dull and lifeless but that is hardly extraordinary. It is a lazy monopolist with few ideas and no feel for its community. Again, not outstanding in any way. If there was a prize for being mediocre and average, the SH-T would win so often that it would get to keep the trophy.
|
|
Read more...
|
I'm still doing the two-hour drive three days a week so I've been exploring a few other podcasts to check whether
the spoken written word is out there yet, and whether current media providers are typically seeing the podcast opportunity as a chance to take radio formats online.
It isn't. They are.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 1 of 4 |
