Folio just reported on a recent Magazine Day where there was much conversation about the future of magazines (Magazines 3.0) and print in general. The drum beat of bad news for the traditional print business has been steady as consumer eyeballs and marketing dollars migrate to events (live and interactive) and online (e.g., Web sites, video, social networking, etc.)
I was really struck by the juxtaposition of quotes coming from the conference. John Griffin, Chairman of the Magazine Publishers of America (and group President of National Geographic) is trying to put a positive spin on it, but he seems to be fighting a losing battle. He is hoping to be able to deliver faster “audience metrics” to compete with online and TV. Huh? How is getting MRI and ad readership scores quicker going to help compete against the web? There will never be a real and tangible way to tie a print ad in a publication like National Geo (with close and materials deadlines a month ahead of publication) to any measurable return – that fact is driving the migration of advertisers away from print media.
However, that is only one issue responsible for the decline of print media. The other is also mentioned in the Folio article. There are still existing hard walls between edit and sales in American print media. Check these quotes out:
“Advertisers want to borrow—or steal—the credibility and authority we have with our readers,” Griffin said. “And we want to give it to them” without threatening the credibility and authority, he said. “[At National Geographic] we’re always asking ‘How far can we go with this?’ It’s a contestant internal struggle.”
“It’s the single biggest point of contention within our company,” said Deidre Depke, Newsweek.com’s assistant managing editor. “The only editorial asset our magazine has is its content—for us to abandon that, and let advertisers do what they want with it, would be a big mistake.”
In sum: there is a holier than thou streak that runs though these companies and publications that goes beyond what is really necessary and required by consumers. But read this quote – it is excellent, and I think sums up how many marketers/advertisers feel today.
“[The line] has been self-governed and self-policed—you’ve put the handcuffs on yourselves,” Steve Sturm, group VP of strategic research and planning at Toyota Motor North America said. “The federal government, the state government, they haven’t told you to do it. You put up all these roadblocks” that other media don’t have. And a younger generation of potential readers, he said, “don’t play by the same rules you play by.”
Dead on. One of the things that I learned in doing dozens of reader focus groups and readership studies is that the readers don’t care nearly as much about the actual brand name of the content as the editors would like to think they do. Consumers just want good honest, credible and accurate content that helps them in some way or to enjoy for entertainment. No one cares about all the editorial awards or devotion to “church and state”. It’s all about leads, ROI and moving product for the savvy marketer, not having their ad appear across from “pure” award winning editorial. Think about American Idol – it is essentially a commercial for Ford, Coke, AT&T and iTunes wrapped in a talent show. It is a brilliant marriage of content and sponsorship. Consumers get content they love, and marketers get a private media channel for their brands.
Today’s consumer, of all ages, is extremely media savvy and knowing. They can tell the difference between marketing messages and content. Editors need to give the consumer more credit for understanding the dynamic between marketing and content. The prevalence of corporate sponsorships, product placement, content relevant Web ads and custom media have made consumers come to expect marketing messages and content together in one package. In fact, I would argue they find it more valuable.
A magazine’s key asset is its database and the relationship with the people in that database. That is what they should be leveraging to compete. Marketers are tired of renting media channels in print publications when they can own their custom media channels using original content and targeted content delivery. Print can still be a valuable marketing tool when used as part of a private media solution that provides value for the reader and targeted messaging for the marketer.
As Steve Sturm mentions, younger consumers have a whole different perception of media and content. Magazine publishers are going to have to make some hard decisions and quickly. The old way of doing business is gone forever.

1 comment
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link
http://www.kingfishmedia.com/thinktank/2008/04/23/magazines-30-how-about-custom-media-10/trackback/
May 5, 2008 at 12:05 pm
John
Digital revaluation in print media is worked well. Online readership is increased dramatically from the past three years. All the publishers are presenting their publications through online to attract the advertisers, increase the readers and generate the revenues.