Print Publishing on the Web

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Howard Stevens on June 12, 2008 at 1:40pm

Since the goal of most publishers, print and online, is to generate revenue, the consideration to give away premium content needs to measured in light of the additional traffic--and subsequent ad revenue--that it will generate. Obviously, this answer is going to vary wildly based on the nature of the content, temperament of your readers and your overall business model. But I would say that "hope" should not factor very heavily into any decisions that could potentially erode existing revenue streams.

I believe that one of the goals of online publishing should be to deliver value to your readers that you couldn't otherwise in print. This incremental value can be converted into tangible dollars, either through additional ad revenue, premium memberships, or a more in-depth understanding of your readers interests, behaviors and demographics. The site we are currently on is an excellent example of one such site that is no doubt focused on garnering a better understanding of its readers as well as promote a greater sense of loyalty.

Allowing readers to connect and share experiences, post editorial responses, publish photos and otherwise engage with content in ways that could never be feasible in print is an excellent way to generate premium content rather than cannibalizing existing print revenues. Then once the financial models support it, publishing "premium" content simultaneously online and in print (or perhaps even online instead of print) won't require any hope at all.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by David Pilcher on June 12, 2008 at 2:22pm

I agree with Howard. Content is a very valuable commodity and not something you want your readers to be able to circumvent subscriptions or revenue streams. Online website content can be updated quickly and regularly – meaning new and different information can be put online vs. the print edition. I’ve seen some websites share regular content and then highlight premium content topics that are available by subscription only.

Digital magazine content that mirror the print edition can include additional features as well: video’s (advertisers video’s or from the publisher on a variety of topics relating to the magazine), online poles can be taken and tallied, immediate links to blogs or relating websites, audio clips on topics, flash animation to further engage the readers and more. And by having digital editions online you can add to your verified circulation (depending on your digital provider), distribute copies via e-mail and even add revenue by selling the digital edition with the print edition or as a standalone subscription model.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John Matyskiel on June 24, 2008 at 3:48pm

"Content is a very valuable commodity". Maybe. Like anything else, it's value is whatever the market says it is. Right now there's lots of "good enough" content available free and fast. If people don't want to pay for something, it's value is .......?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Richard Michem on September 21, 2008 at 1:20pm

Howard, I would have to disagree with you statement that the goal of most publisher is to generate revenues. If you look at the history of magazine. Most magazine publisher did not start a magazine, with the thinking in mind. I wonder how much money I am going to made from this venture. They started it with I have something I want to say> This is the kind of magazine, I want to read. If other people want to read it and I made some money then good. That is the reason, I believe that a lot of magazines are having a hard time. The modern publisher, is treating magazine as a business and ONLY A BUSINESS, not as an idea.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Amanda on June 13, 2008 at 5:10pm

I say as long as you have strong conversion architecture in place on the pages, let it roam free! The New York Times just let go of their premium content (formerly TimesSelect)and just look how their traffic soared:

Think about all of the thousands of pages of content you have sitting around in archives that no one is ever going to see. Even with a membership library, your users are still only seeing a small percentage of what you have. Taking it from behind the firewall skyrockets the number of pages you have on your website and gives you supreme visibility in the search engines. Add some conversion architecture to let them sign up for a free email newsletter (that eventually will sell them a product) and that's where you can make your money if you're product-driven. If you're ad-driven, it's easy. More pages = more page views = more advertising revenue.

We're in the process of unrolling our membership website (loaded with premium) content right now, so I know your position very well :) But the fact remains that it's not doing anyone any good if no one is seeing the content. If it's behind a firewall, Google isn't picking it up and therefore the only people who access those pages are those already on your site. If that old content isn't on the web yet, hire a bunch of interns and get rolling :)

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by PJ Gach on June 14, 2008 at 2:52pm

Quite a lot of my writing/editing experience has been on the 'net. And I've slowly seen attitudes change towards the viability of having a web presence.

My first experience for writing on the 'net was for the Internet arm of a national music mag, and at the time length of piece etc., wasn't really a concern. The net, back in '98 was treated as something sort of odd; it was acknowledged that there were readers (users), but few firms understood how to implement it for additional revenue and readership. I was also a freelancer for the 'net arm of a different national music mag than the one I first cited for quite a few years. The web side had its own editorial arm and was independent of the print side. It wasn't unusual for two reporters from the publication, one web and one print to cover the same event or interview the same artist.

It wasn't until after 9/11, when as a corollary effect of that tragedy and the ancillary economic slide, where a few publications (print and web) folded that the national mag I was associated with, decided to streamline its editorial staff, remove a lot of the editorial online staff and responsibilities and have the print side become more involved in the web side.

As a reporter and editor, I've seen, what I'll politely call a quirky stand from pr firms and advertising agencies towards web publications, i.e they have a hard time taking them seriously and feel that most of them are blogs. Which, I feel is rather odd, as so many members of the reading public are on the 'net, have been on the 'net and will continue to be on the 'net reading the online arms of publications as well as reading publications that are solely on the 'net.

Any advertiser or pr firm who continues with the outmoded business model that the 'net isn't really a serious publishing tool is going to miss the boat as it were.

The 'net isn't just for fanboys or girls waiting with bated breath for the latest piece of "news" about their fav artist; it has been and will continue to be a strong viable tool for the dissemination of information.

Having met advertising reps who place online ads, they still seem to think that the audience is primarily made up of teens and tweens.

At present I am a contributing writer and a columnist for an online publication. This publication is only found online, has a readership of 800,000 unique readers/users a month and has attracted adverts from Bridgestone Tires, car manufacturers and the like. However, when talking to pr firms, the first reaction from them is that this is a blog. Doesn't matter that the publication has a full editorial staff, doesn't matter that the publication has 13 city sites and is growing faster than print publications, doesn't matter that the publication is attracting their desired demo, they have an outmoded view of what and who is on the 'net.

Until attitudes change towards online publications and their very strong viability to reach intended audiences and understand that there really is quite a lot of money to be made, there is going to be a continued dichotomy between real usage and revenue, and a lot of people balking about it, because quite frankly, they just don't "get it."

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mike Trammell on June 19, 2008 at 11:10pm

Very informative, what site do you work for?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by PJ Gach on June 20, 2008 at 8:53am

Thanks Mike. I write for EDGE Publications; it has 13 city sites, 800,000 readers a month and yet I get emails stating,"oooh, can you put this on your blog." No matter how many times I patiently explain to them that this is not a blog, that I am merely a member of the staff, I get emails like this.

An email like that is a signal to me that pr firms and advertising agencies are not investigating the online publishing companies enough or are too lazy to try to understand the structures and strictures of them.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Erika Geiss on June 24, 2008 at 2:23am

PJ,

You are so right about the need for attitudes to change, this is an issue that also occurs with digital editions, where we've had the experience of a PR rep denouncing a digital edition as being "merely an e-zine," and who even went as far as to suggest that online magazines aren't "real" (that is, worth her time to pursue advertising with). The advertisers who are going to see real results from click-throughs (whether in an online magazine or a digital edition) are the ones who will embrace the fact that there are many modes for magazine media. (How's that for an alliteration?) And in turn, the electronic publications will also benefit by gaining those advertising dollars from the "early" adopters who do "get it." Unfortunately though, part of the problem is that there are many sites that call themselves "online magazines," but are nothing more than blogs or article mines for that matter, which unfortunately puts our end of the industry at risk for being lumped in with electronic publications that don't adhere to the same standards and practices that we do as industry professionals. (That's not a slam against blogs by the way, there are a lot of excellent blogs out there, with writing that's worthy of magazine publication.)

The other part of the problem of "not getting it," is that I don't think many PR people are staying up-to-date with current trends or engaging in the kind of professional development that would spark a behavioral change or at the very least, a tiny shift in their approaches.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by OlegR on June 23, 2008 at 1:14pm

Dear Cara,

Yes - advertising is the major revenue source for publishers who publish their premium content online for free.
But please do not forget that there are numerous technologies and strategies that dramatically increase your online advertising revenues.
As one of them I would like to mention text-mining.
It is a technology that takes your content, pulls out all the names/places/entities/noun phrases/fact vs. opinion/even tone from every sentense of your content, ranks all this extra info according to the relevancy to the subject and embeds it as metadata to your content.
There are numerous strategies that let you leverage that extra information you derived to better monetize your content. These strategies help you:
1. increase number of unique visitors through better, more relevant SEO
2. increase number of pageviews through relevant content linking
3. enable targeted content/advertising (thus increasing number of pageviews and your ad pricing)
4. enable user profiles, behavioral tracking, consumer behavior information collection, etc. etc.etc.
5. enable targeted web2.0 applications with their own monetization schemas

and I can go on forewer.
The point that I'm making is online is able to completely replace print advertising, but only if it is done properly - with utilization of latest technology and knowhow.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by PJ Gach on June 24, 2008 at 1:28pm

Erica-

I think you raise a few very interesting points in your thesis regarding the differences between blogs, digital magazines and online magazines. Although to tell you the truth, to me a digital and an online magazine is the same thing- it's a magazine on the 'net.

There are blogs who have excellent writers and their product looks very professional. However, there are also blogs out there (some of which shall remain nameless), who shamelessly try to get free products from pr firms, have poor editorial direction and an overweening sense of self. These so-called "editors" with their intense self-entitled attitudes have soured many pr people (I think), in dealing with online pubs as a whole.

Conversely, I worked at a large metropolitan newspaper whose sales department couldn't sell an ad to a 12 year old with a large allowance.

When it comes down to advertising, whether you are online or print, if you don't have a strong sales team, nothing can be achieved.

Regarding being an online publication, I am not sure that that posit is correct, as there exists The Huffington Post, Salon.com, Perez Hilton, Gawker and it's permutations that are only found online and have advertising.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Michael Zingalis on October 7, 2008 at 4:32pm

I'm work for a cms vendor! - Sorry for posting twice today so close together...we had an extra strong batch of coffee this morning, and all of my projects are ahead of schedule.
---
Quote From Rich:
"Most magazine publisher did not start a magazine, with the thinking in mind. I wonder how much money I am going to made from this venture."

I looked for www.charitypublishing.com, but it was purchased already. lol.
---

I would like to focus on Scott Karp's complaint about getting an email from google before the site itself.

So in essence, this guy is complaining becuase the site he was looking at lacked the funcationality he liked...so he found someone else to do it for him...but was aggravated that the initial company didn't have it in the first place. I know timing on story release was in there, but it is the function that counts...becuase that is the only way he even knew where it was on the web.

This is becuase they do not have an automated email alert system. CMS Systems do exist that not only allow daily scheduled email alerts based on either taxonomy selection or literal keyword definitions specifically by clients. They just weren't using it, and therefore google snatched up the function for them. [Like: I would like articles that have my name in them sent to me via email when they come up on the site.] I recently saw a system that emailed people when a college team won a specific game with some of that teams products (shirts / sweaters / etc) in the email. So criteria based email alerts are not some functionality monopoly that only google has.

If it's not centralized, and you are not in control of the content then these events should not be a shock...it should be expected.

As for the whole 'give it away' concept, it doesn't have to be an all or nothing scenario. If a circ system is associated to the site you can have a tie in for print access, and always promote print by tying the two sub options together, or even seperately at a lower cost for online only. There's more, but this post is already long enough.

I posted some of the items that we do in this post where they were talking about channel management. Some of the techniques apply here relative to content monetization.
link to discussion from mediapro

There is a post above this one from Oleg on his content mining services / software. If you had a cms system that allowed you to create the keyword / link / cost / tracking...why would you pay another company, or do a profit swap? What is it that ad sales people get paid to do anyways?

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last