Advertising dollars fund editorial staffing and production costs for print media properties.
Advertising rates are based on circulation and readership.
Media circulation and readership has declined because media properties have made news and information available for free.
Advertisers are retreating from traditional print because of circulation decline.
Media properties now have to rely on their digital properties to replace lost ad revenue.
Advertisers are not simply reallocating print advertising budgets into the digital advertising space with those same media properties.
Reduced ad revenue forces media companies to cut staff which makes journalistic integrity vulnerable.
That impacts all of us as consumers of information.
The Wall Street Journal has had paid-for online subscription for years, with the New York Times working on a paid digital model to be revealed in the near future. One would assume others will follow.
So this brings us to a crossroads of sorts with both trade and consumer media. A few basic questions to consider are:
- Will it be possible for media outlets to “turn back the clock” and charge for online content successfully?
- For the advertiser, what is the value of an online subscriber versus the traditional print subscriber?
- Does the flexibility and customization of digital content allow media companies even more advertising revenue potential than they have had in the past?
- Are YOU willing to pay for news content online?
If your answer to the last question is “no,” you may want to think about the repercussions. Without money to pay people for objective news and information, we are putting critical, relevant platforms for our marketing communications at risk. One could go so far as to suggest the First Amendment (freedom of the press) would be taken to a new level with the public relying on unsubstantiated “experts” providing biased information. Personally, I hope traditional media gets this figured out in a hurry so we aren’t relying on “hobby journalists” for our information.
I’ve always believed that you get what you pay for, so I’m willing to pay a few bucks a month to maintain a certain level of intelligence and sanity.
Tags: public relations, trade media
I agree fully—though I wonder given that, why companies and ad agencies continue to advertise in editorially weak publications/websites etc.? I know the answeris “they’re cheap,” but they’re cheap because they are not investing in staff written editorial or circulation (or both).
In a cluttered media environment, people are shying away from any channel that is editorially “light,” so if people don’t open the magazine or go to the web site, because the content isn’t any good, what value is there for the advertiser?
With all the stress on time, people are turning off to media that doesn’t deliver good, timely, insightful information.
We always say good editorial is the best value-added thing we can provide, and you blog entry seems to reinforce that.
thanks for the message Mike. These are intersting times and hopefully the market allows for quality editorial to remain as a top priority.