"President Reagan has noted that there are too many economic pundits and forecasters and has decided on an excess prophets tax"
Unknown
Mr. Magazine Vs. MPA in Number of New launches
Early May numbers show a healthy month in launches
By Samir Husni
http://mrmagazine.wordpress.com/2007/06/02/early-may-numbers-show-a-healthy-month-in-launches/
My early numbers for May show a total of 81 new magazines launched during last month. That brings the total number of launches this year to 283 so far which is still short 84 titles from the 367 total of the same period last year. Although it is too soon to say that this may be the beginning of the reverse of the decline in number of launches, it is however the highest number of launches this year (20 more than the previous high of 61 in January). Keep in mind that all the numbers used in Samir Husni's Guide to New Magazines (Volume 22 out now, you can order here) and Mr. Magazine website are numbers based on real physical possession of the magazines and not launch announcements or preview issues. To ensure your new magazine is included in the Guide or considered for review on our website, please send a copy of your first issue to: Samir Husni, Department of Journalism, The University of Mississippi, University, MS 38677.
-----------------------------------------------------
105 magazines launched in Q1: MPA
By Lauren Bell
http://www.dmnews.com/cms/dm-news/print-production/41264.html
The Magazine Publishers of America said 105 new magazines were published in the first quarter of 2007.
They represent a 4 percent increase in magazine launches over the same period last year.
Of the new titles launched or announced, 22 served affluent readers; seven focused on kids and teenagers; and six were on home and shelter. Twelve of the new titles were geared toward sports and recreation. Six new titles were created for African-American readers, and four magazines targeted the Hispanic market.
Titles launched by MPA members include Condé Nast Publications' Portfolio; Disney and ESPN's E Sports Parent N, Forbes' Forbes Life Executive Women and Hachette Filipacchi's Ty Pennington Style. Also launched by MPA members this year were Hearst Corp.'s 210SA, Rodale's Men's Health Living, Taunton Press' Be Sew Stylish, and Time Inc.'s Project Y, Your Look.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Israeli printing technology could deliver 1,000 pages a minute
Not everybody knows everything, so use everything you know."
Unknown
Israeli printing technology could deliver 1,000 pages a minute
By Stuart Winer
http://www.israel21c.org/bin/en.jsp? enZone=Technology&enDisplay=view&enPage=Blank Page&enDispWhat=object&enDispWho=Articles^l167 3
Imagine a bookstore that prints your purchases while you settle the bill or a personalized newspaper that contains only the news you want to read. Such expedient printing may soon become a reality using a new Israeli technology that will enable printing 1,000 pages a minute at affordable prices.
Two researchers from The College of Judea and Samaria - Moshe and Nissim Einat - have developed a revolutionary printing technique called Jetrix, which enables simultaneous high- speed printing of an entire page of text. The technology combines printing and Liquid Crystal Technology (LCD) methods to make a page-sized printing array that emits ink instead of light.
"We are reducing the limitations of printing heads," explains Moshe Einat, senior lecturer at the college's Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering.
Einat's inspiration for rethinking print methods came from flat-screen display technologies. In the past display screens used a cathode ray tube to 'scan' the picture across the screen similar to the way a printer fills a page with text. With LCDs a screen-sized array of light emitting diodes creates the displayed picture and simultaneously changes to display each new image. Einat posed the question whether the same concept could not be applied to a printed page?
"If you can do it with light, why not with ink?" he asked.
Early printers used a continuous jet of ink to print on pages but were later replaced by modern Drop On Demand (DOD) printers in which a traveling head of tiny nozzles squirts ink at the page. The dots combine to produce the desired print. Current printers use a single print head that scans across the page but mechanical and physical limitations present a range of barriers that cap print speeds.
Combining a multitude of ink nozzles together into larger print heads is complex and fraught with technical difficulties. Einat's solution is a matrix of printer heads fed by multiple ink chambers. With a matrix as large as the page, each head is fired only once per page allowing a much longer relaxation time and negating the need for a scanning head.
The key to the new technology is the way ink is fed to the print head. The Jetrix print head has no manifold and is comprised of segments containing micro- reservoirs of ink each connected to just a few nozzles. Each segment only provides ink to a few local nozzles making the segments autonomous.
With no direct connection between the different segments the matrix size can be increased without limit creating a print head as large as the paper.
"You can make a matrix of as many segments as you want," Einat told ISRAEL21c. The result is simultaneous printing of the entire matrix on the page. Released from the limitations of relaxation times and mechanical scanning high print speeds can be achieved without a loss in quality.
In Einat's view, the idea is more than just an innovation; it marks a turning point in core technology for printers. In the past print speed was limited by the rate at which ink could be transferred from the ink source to the page. The Jetrix head removes that barrier and the limiting factor will now become another part of the print process, such as the rate at which paper can be supplied to or output from the printer, or the time it takes the ink to dry on the pages.
So far Einat has made a matrix of 12 x 12 centimeters that demonstrated the theory is sound and that the capillary action is fast enough to keep the nozzles supplied with ink. Despite its size the prototype matrix contains 57,600 nozzles, so small that the delicate capillaries and nozzles were created with the same processes used to manufacture computer chips. The print head works only in black and white but Einat is confident that it can be adapted for color printing too.
Development has cost $140,000 funded by Israel's Industry and Trade Ministry and 'angel money'. Costs are kept low because much of the technology is based on existing LCD know-how, a fact that will also keep down the costs for full-size working printers. Current top of the range printers used to print bank statements and utility bills are able to print over a thousand pages a minute but the room-sized printers can cost over $100,000 a piece.
Einat predicts that a simple printer using his technology should be far more affordable, and even within the budget of home users. Such flexible and expedient printing has a wide range of applications.
"Anything that is printed today can be done with it," Einat says.
Rapid printing could lead to a variety of 'on demand' printing products. Bookstores could print books as the customer waits, and at 1,000 pages a minute, the wait wouldn't be very long. Printing on demand would make significant savings for publishers that today often see 40 percent of books remain on the shelves in stores.
'They could print right there in the shop, fresh off the press,' says Einat who also envisions vending machines at airports printing books for travelers as they wait to board a flight.
The print method may also give a new lease of life to newspapers and magazines that are losing customers to Internet-based media. A press could run off thousands of personalized newspapers that contain only the news topics that interest each individual reader.
The Jetrix print head was first presented publicly at the Global Entrepolis Singapore in 2006 and since then has been generating broad interest from the print industry. Several global printer companies are keeping a keen eye on developments with the expectation of a full-working printer. In the meantime Einat plans to build an even larger prototype before moving on to a full-size working printer.
Should the technology prove itself, it may also expand into other industries. Einat theorizes that the same principle could be used to print microcircuits, which would revolutionize that industry, although he concedes that at the moment, that is still a long way off.
Unknown
Israeli printing technology could deliver 1,000 pages a minute
By Stuart Winer
http://www.israel21c.org/bin/en.jsp? enZone=Technology&enDisplay=view&enPage=Blank Page&enDispWhat=object&enDispWho=Articles^l167 3
Imagine a bookstore that prints your purchases while you settle the bill or a personalized newspaper that contains only the news you want to read. Such expedient printing may soon become a reality using a new Israeli technology that will enable printing 1,000 pages a minute at affordable prices.
Two researchers from The College of Judea and Samaria - Moshe and Nissim Einat - have developed a revolutionary printing technique called Jetrix, which enables simultaneous high- speed printing of an entire page of text. The technology combines printing and Liquid Crystal Technology (LCD) methods to make a page-sized printing array that emits ink instead of light.
"We are reducing the limitations of printing heads," explains Moshe Einat, senior lecturer at the college's Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering.
Einat's inspiration for rethinking print methods came from flat-screen display technologies. In the past display screens used a cathode ray tube to 'scan' the picture across the screen similar to the way a printer fills a page with text. With LCDs a screen-sized array of light emitting diodes creates the displayed picture and simultaneously changes to display each new image. Einat posed the question whether the same concept could not be applied to a printed page?
"If you can do it with light, why not with ink?" he asked.
Early printers used a continuous jet of ink to print on pages but were later replaced by modern Drop On Demand (DOD) printers in which a traveling head of tiny nozzles squirts ink at the page. The dots combine to produce the desired print. Current printers use a single print head that scans across the page but mechanical and physical limitations present a range of barriers that cap print speeds.
Combining a multitude of ink nozzles together into larger print heads is complex and fraught with technical difficulties. Einat's solution is a matrix of printer heads fed by multiple ink chambers. With a matrix as large as the page, each head is fired only once per page allowing a much longer relaxation time and negating the need for a scanning head.
The key to the new technology is the way ink is fed to the print head. The Jetrix print head has no manifold and is comprised of segments containing micro- reservoirs of ink each connected to just a few nozzles. Each segment only provides ink to a few local nozzles making the segments autonomous.
With no direct connection between the different segments the matrix size can be increased without limit creating a print head as large as the paper.
"You can make a matrix of as many segments as you want," Einat told ISRAEL21c. The result is simultaneous printing of the entire matrix on the page. Released from the limitations of relaxation times and mechanical scanning high print speeds can be achieved without a loss in quality.
In Einat's view, the idea is more than just an innovation; it marks a turning point in core technology for printers. In the past print speed was limited by the rate at which ink could be transferred from the ink source to the page. The Jetrix head removes that barrier and the limiting factor will now become another part of the print process, such as the rate at which paper can be supplied to or output from the printer, or the time it takes the ink to dry on the pages.
So far Einat has made a matrix of 12 x 12 centimeters that demonstrated the theory is sound and that the capillary action is fast enough to keep the nozzles supplied with ink. Despite its size the prototype matrix contains 57,600 nozzles, so small that the delicate capillaries and nozzles were created with the same processes used to manufacture computer chips. The print head works only in black and white but Einat is confident that it can be adapted for color printing too.
Development has cost $140,000 funded by Israel's Industry and Trade Ministry and 'angel money'. Costs are kept low because much of the technology is based on existing LCD know-how, a fact that will also keep down the costs for full-size working printers. Current top of the range printers used to print bank statements and utility bills are able to print over a thousand pages a minute but the room-sized printers can cost over $100,000 a piece.
Einat predicts that a simple printer using his technology should be far more affordable, and even within the budget of home users. Such flexible and expedient printing has a wide range of applications.
"Anything that is printed today can be done with it," Einat says.
Rapid printing could lead to a variety of 'on demand' printing products. Bookstores could print books as the customer waits, and at 1,000 pages a minute, the wait wouldn't be very long. Printing on demand would make significant savings for publishers that today often see 40 percent of books remain on the shelves in stores.
'They could print right there in the shop, fresh off the press,' says Einat who also envisions vending machines at airports printing books for travelers as they wait to board a flight.
The print method may also give a new lease of life to newspapers and magazines that are losing customers to Internet-based media. A press could run off thousands of personalized newspapers that contain only the news topics that interest each individual reader.
The Jetrix print head was first presented publicly at the Global Entrepolis Singapore in 2006 and since then has been generating broad interest from the print industry. Several global printer companies are keeping a keen eye on developments with the expectation of a full-working printer. In the meantime Einat plans to build an even larger prototype before moving on to a full-size working printer.
Should the technology prove itself, it may also expand into other industries. Einat theorizes that the same principle could be used to print microcircuits, which would revolutionize that industry, although he concedes that at the moment, that is still a long way off.
Google's Book Search available in publisher sites
"Books are lighthouses erected in the great sea of time"
Edwin P. Whipple (American author and lecturer 1819-1886)
Google's Book Search available in publisher sites
For the first time, the Book Search engine will be available outside of google.com, and publishers can tailor searches so that only their own books will show up as results
By Juan Carlos Perez, IDG News Service
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/06/01/Google-Book-Search-available-in-publisher-sites_1.html
Google is making its controversial Book Search engine available to publishers interested in putting it on their Web sites.
This is the first time Google's Book Search service has been available outside of its main site in the Google.com domain.
This co-branded search program benefits Google because the search engine will now be available more broadly. Meanwhile, publishers benefit by offering an additional search service to their Web site visitors.
Publishers can tailor the index of their search engine so that only books published by them show up in the query results, Google said Friday. As in the main Book Search site, these result pages give users the option to link to online shops that sell the listed books.
Interestingly, one of the publishers that put Book Search on its Web site is The McGraw-Hill Companies. Along with other major publishers, McGraw-Hill is suing Google for copyright infringement over Google's ongoing project to scan millions of copyright books without permission.
Although McGraw-Hill's position may seem at first contradictory, it stems from the fact that Google's Book Search service has two main pieces.
One focuses on securing formal partnerships with publishers, obtaining their permission to scan books and giving them control over how much of those books can be displayed by Google for free.
McGraw-Hill is one of about 10,000 publishers that participate in this partner program with Google that have collectively made available about 1 million titles for scanning so far, said Tom Turvey, director of Google Book Search partnerships. About 50 publishers have embedded Book Search in their sites already, and many more are in line to do so, Turvey said. McGraw-Hill didn't immediately reply to a request for comment.
Simultaneously, McGraw-Hill objects to the other portion of the Book Search operation, in which Google partners with major academic libraries to scan large portions of their collections. Those library scanning operations often involve copyrighted books, which Google is digitally copying without obtaining permission from publishers and authors.
U.S. Book Sales Increases Will Slow, Report Says
By Heather Burke
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601205&sid=a3K0Wiv14iD8
June 1 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. book sales will increase less than 4 percent annually during each of the next five years as the publishing industry competes with the Internet and other media, a study found.
Sales climbed 3.1 percent to $35.7 billion in 2006, according to the Book Industry Study Group Inc. Titles sold rose 0.5 percent to 3.1 billion, the New York-based trade group said in the 2007 edition of Book Industry Trends, released today.
Publishers increasingly vie for readers with the Internet, cable television and other media. U.S. book sales will be buoyed this year by Scholastic Corp.'s ``Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,'' the seventh and final book of the series, which comes out July 21. The novels have sold more than 325 million copies worldwide and made author J.K. Rowling a billionaire.
``Book sales are slowing down, although not dramatically,'' said Edward Atorino, a media analyst with Benchmark Co. in New York. ``Part of the slowdown will be from the lack of `Harry Potter' and competition from electronic communications.''
Book sales at publishers including Bertelsmann AG's Random House Inc., are forecast to climb 3.9 percent to $37.1 billion in 2007, the report said. The annual sales gain is projected to decline almost each year through 2011, when publishers may report a 2.7 percent increase in revenue.
Juvenile trade hardcover sales probably will jump 9 percent in 2007 to $1.83 billion, then dip 0.4 percent in 2008.
School Books
Workbooks and textbooks for elementary and high school students may post some of the biggest sales gains, climbing about 7 percent annually for the next three years. Sales of such books climbed 1 percent to $4.75 billion in 2006.
Educational sales may increase because more states plan to buy new textbooks in reading, math and other subjects through 2009, said Atorino.
The BISG study was compiled using financial data from publicly traded companies, analyst reports, industry group information, statistical data, government reports and book industry experts.
A May 22 report by the Association of American Publishers found sales fell 0.3 percent to $24.2 billion in 2006. The group uses Census data and sales figures from 81 publishers to compile its estimates.
Edwin P. Whipple (American author and lecturer 1819-1886)
Google's Book Search available in publisher sites
For the first time, the Book Search engine will be available outside of google.com, and publishers can tailor searches so that only their own books will show up as results
By Juan Carlos Perez, IDG News Service
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/06/01/Google-Book-Search-available-in-publisher-sites_1.html
Google is making its controversial Book Search engine available to publishers interested in putting it on their Web sites.
This is the first time Google's Book Search service has been available outside of its main site in the Google.com domain.
This co-branded search program benefits Google because the search engine will now be available more broadly. Meanwhile, publishers benefit by offering an additional search service to their Web site visitors.
Publishers can tailor the index of their search engine so that only books published by them show up in the query results, Google said Friday. As in the main Book Search site, these result pages give users the option to link to online shops that sell the listed books.
Interestingly, one of the publishers that put Book Search on its Web site is The McGraw-Hill Companies. Along with other major publishers, McGraw-Hill is suing Google for copyright infringement over Google's ongoing project to scan millions of copyright books without permission.
Although McGraw-Hill's position may seem at first contradictory, it stems from the fact that Google's Book Search service has two main pieces.
One focuses on securing formal partnerships with publishers, obtaining their permission to scan books and giving them control over how much of those books can be displayed by Google for free.
McGraw-Hill is one of about 10,000 publishers that participate in this partner program with Google that have collectively made available about 1 million titles for scanning so far, said Tom Turvey, director of Google Book Search partnerships. About 50 publishers have embedded Book Search in their sites already, and many more are in line to do so, Turvey said. McGraw-Hill didn't immediately reply to a request for comment.
Simultaneously, McGraw-Hill objects to the other portion of the Book Search operation, in which Google partners with major academic libraries to scan large portions of their collections. Those library scanning operations often involve copyrighted books, which Google is digitally copying without obtaining permission from publishers and authors.
U.S. Book Sales Increases Will Slow, Report Says
By Heather Burke
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601205&sid=a3K0Wiv14iD8
June 1 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. book sales will increase less than 4 percent annually during each of the next five years as the publishing industry competes with the Internet and other media, a study found.
Sales climbed 3.1 percent to $35.7 billion in 2006, according to the Book Industry Study Group Inc. Titles sold rose 0.5 percent to 3.1 billion, the New York-based trade group said in the 2007 edition of Book Industry Trends, released today.
Publishers increasingly vie for readers with the Internet, cable television and other media. U.S. book sales will be buoyed this year by Scholastic Corp.'s ``Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,'' the seventh and final book of the series, which comes out July 21. The novels have sold more than 325 million copies worldwide and made author J.K. Rowling a billionaire.
``Book sales are slowing down, although not dramatically,'' said Edward Atorino, a media analyst with Benchmark Co. in New York. ``Part of the slowdown will be from the lack of `Harry Potter' and competition from electronic communications.''
Book sales at publishers including Bertelsmann AG's Random House Inc., are forecast to climb 3.9 percent to $37.1 billion in 2007, the report said. The annual sales gain is projected to decline almost each year through 2011, when publishers may report a 2.7 percent increase in revenue.
Juvenile trade hardcover sales probably will jump 9 percent in 2007 to $1.83 billion, then dip 0.4 percent in 2008.
School Books
Workbooks and textbooks for elementary and high school students may post some of the biggest sales gains, climbing about 7 percent annually for the next three years. Sales of such books climbed 1 percent to $4.75 billion in 2006.
Educational sales may increase because more states plan to buy new textbooks in reading, math and other subjects through 2009, said Atorino.
The BISG study was compiled using financial data from publicly traded companies, analyst reports, industry group information, statistical data, government reports and book industry experts.
A May 22 report by the Association of American Publishers found sales fell 0.3 percent to $24.2 billion in 2006. The group uses Census data and sales figures from 81 publishers to compile its estimates.
Monday, June 04, 2007
BoSacks Readers Speak Out: on Time Inc, Dow Jones, Mr. Magazine, MRI and Dignity
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats."
Howard Aiken (American computer engineer and mathematician 1900-1973)
BoSacks Readers Speak Out: on Time Inc, Dow Jones, Mr. Magazine, MRI and Dignity
www.bosacks.com
Re: Time Inc. Waves to Gossip Sites on Its Way to the Bank
Ann Moore's arrogance is truly stunning! "Get out of the way. The People editors are coming." Does Ms. Moore think that 71 page views per website visitor is a GOOD thing? To me, that says that some people have a LOT of time on their hands. Once again, will someone please identify the advertisers who want to reach an audience that does nothing more intellectually stimulating than spend that much time at People.com? I think Ann Moore has been in her Time Inc. job too long, and there is a real need for a reenergized leader to better manage the company before it is too late. I'll bet Don Logan would not have even acknowledged celebrity news. He had too much class for that.
(Submitted by a Senior Director of Manufacturing)
Re: Dow Jones Desperately needs Murdoch? Oh, please!
What i find so funny about the generally negative response that Murdoch has gotten from the media elite is that he is far more astute about digital media than they are. The man finds niches that are underserved or un-served and goes after them relentlessly. It was dumb to start another broadcast network, because they already had three. Why start another news channel? We already have CNN and MSNBC. Cartoons in prime time? That was out when the Flintstones were cancelled... and then we got Homer Simpson.
This move to get WSJ is more like a shot across the bow to NBC who has put its CNBC eggs in the Dow Jones basket. If Murdoch owns Dow Jones or WSJ, NBC is left without a partner for CNBC as Rupert gets a gem that he can use to build Fox Business News. I think many in the media hate Murdoch because he keeps outFOXing his critics (pun intended).
(Submitted by an Industry Analyst)
Re: Dow Jones Desperately needs Murdoch? Oh, please!
Mudoch doesn't want to buy the Journal for respectibility. He wants to get people who own data (database business) and who have managed to create web properties that bring in significant cash because they are so good at what they do. It's not that they need him, but that he needs them. Buying MySpace may have been smart - or not, as enough time hasn't gone by to see. But whether a wise or foolish purchase, it was only that: a purchase of something that became a fad. The WSJ online is an *engineered* phenomenon, and the vast majority of the web hasn't figured out how to accomplish something similar.
(Submitted by a Writer)
RE: Magazines Feeling Postal Pinch
Could the USPS do a better job of driving us all out of business if they tried? Now that I think of it and based on performance, if that were their goal they would very likely be much less efficient and effective in accomplishing it. It is a relatively straightforward matter to defend oneself from the overt intentions of government, and government sponsored monopolies. It is the unintended effects, springing from their innate ineptitude, that will get you.
(Submitted by a Printer)
Re: Mag Sag: Readership Growing Older
Wait until 2009 when all the special deals go away, ie. using up leftover air miles on discontinued credit cards and airline bonus miles. My wife and I have been getting these types of subscriptions going on 2 years and we will not renew any of them.
(Submitted by a Paper Person)
Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: MRI Audience Numbers
I'm with you, Bo, that "Handguns" figure is a load of crapola. I use 2
readers per 1 copy for my "readership" figures, based on my own survey data
of MY readers. I actually prefer just to give advertisers my printrun figures.
Anything higher is ... well, I already used that word, didn't I?
(Submitted by a Publisher)
Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: MRI Audience Numbers
Even if it's true that that the statistics say that Handgun Magazine gets 47.1 readers per copy, it ain't so.
You are correct. But I probably read my copy of the magazine (That's a shooting enthusiast pun!) 47.1 times. That should count for something.
(Submitted by a Printer)
Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: MRI Audience Numbers
If you think about it, magazines must be playing with the definition of "read." So, a magazine on the rack at a store that gets flipped through by, say, 15 people but not purchases has been "read" 15 times. Or they over-estimate library/public use copies. But the lack of questioning on the part of this article is disturbing. Forget 47.15 readers a month - even BH&G's claim of 5 readers per copy seems lunacy.
(Submitted by a Writer)
RE: MORT SLASHES MAGAZINE STAFF
Question: U.S. News is a closely held private company, so how does the
New York Post know that it "loses millions of dollars a year"?
Answer: It got a tip from Vice President Gephardt.
I have never seen a P&L for U.S. News, but I would be surprised if it is
losing millions. It certainly isn't losing as much money as the New York
Post.
(Submitted by a Publishing Director)
Re: THE DEATH OF PRINT NEWS is inevitable
Bob, this is the freshest, most intelligent article I've read in a very long time on the new publishing model of how to adjust to print's decline and online's rise and what the media companies need to do to make it work.
(Submitted by a weekly senior production operations manager)
RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Shred Of Dignity
I find it curious that some people wish to hold the circulation reporting of a magazine to a higher standard than they apply to the content it reports. Funny world.
(Submitted by a Printer)
RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Shred Of Dignity
Samir gets it right when he says "(celebrity) magazines are more like Prozac for the readers", but Janice Min is also right in trying to maintain a semblence of editorial integrity in a publishing category with very low standards for truth and objectivity. If there is a problem, it is that people reading the made-up stories and fabrications are not smart, or cynical, enough to understand that "just because you read it in a newspaper doesn't necessarily mean it is true." Bonnie Fuller, Min's predecessor at US and now the mud slinging honcho at AMI's Star, is at the other (lower) end of the integrity spectrum. (Min also has the discipline and understanding of editorial closing deadlines, unlike Ms. Fuller, and Janice always meets them, which is why her newsstand sales have soared during her last three years at US. Titles distributed on time ALWAYS sell better than titles that are late, regardless of the category.)
Intentional fabrication of stories and bogus cover lines may trick the reader for a while, but when a publication has lost editorial integrity, then it's Game Over time. Readers either keep buying for the sheer entertainment value, like watching a soap opera, or else they're just not very bright. Either way, can someone tell me which advertisers want to reach the consumers in either category? Not a sustainable business model, in my opinion.
(Submitted by a Senior Director of Manufacturing and Distribution)
Re: Tab Wars: Breaking News or Faking News?
Bo, In the "Tab Wars" article, for "Professor" Husni to dismiss the responsibility of journalism in celebrity reporting and suggest we should all be happy with some type of "gossip" grouping disclaimer that lets publishers say anything about stars for the purpose of entertainment is perhaps the most wrong headed thing I have ever heard him say. Mr. Husni shows no respect for truth and fosters the destructively cynical view that's all one big entertainment. Wonder how he would react if it were his life or family being misreported about for the purpose of selling crappy magazines! Worse, we should question this position for a University journalism program.
Bravo to Us for having the guts to call out its smarmy competitors, if they want to copy People and Us let it start with practices of integrity. If magazines want to have internal "gossip" columns with disclaimers about truth, well fine, if that's the best we can do. Is Us just saving it's own hide? You bet, and why shouldn't it? Is this honest competition? Ironically it is a lesson Us learned from People long ago.
Do we take ourselves too seriously in publishing? Ever ask yourself the consequence of the opposite. Here's something serious, Samir Husni disgraced himself in this article and I've had just about enough from this guy who's never contributed a damn thing to the magazine article except his own self aggrandizing. "Mr. Magazine?" Perhaps, he paid for that title it was not awarded and he obviously won't ever be confused as "Mr. Journalism," or "Mr. Integrity" for that matter.
(Submitted by a Senior Publishing Director)
Re: Tab Wars: Breaking News or Faking News?
There's a big difference between pleasing your customers and pandering to them. If you don't have enough self respect to do your work correctly, you customers will start to lose respect, and the next step is that they'll find something else to do. Perhaps I'm misremembering, but aren't some of the biggest gossip rags having large financial troubles? If it's insulting to a reader to assume he or she can't figure out when titles are full of crap, isn't it doubly insulting to peddle that crap?
(Submitted by a Writer)
RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Shred Of Dignity
Bob, Magazine editors rarely, if ever, refer to another magazine in their pages. This is a short-sighted because magazine readers read more than one magazine and are making comparisons all the time between magazines. (We know they read multiple magazines because most magazine subscriptions are sold via direct mail to readers of other magazines.) So I think it's great that US is providing their own take on how magazines in their category stack up. It will make for good reading.
My favorite instance of one magazine referring to another is when Spy started a column in its magazine of letters to the New Yorker. The New Yorker didn't have its own letters column, so Spy provided that forum for New Yorker readers. It was fun and provocative editorial material. PS - I LOVE the Weekly World News.
(Submitted by a Publisher)
Re: Parsons: 'Not an Advocate' of Selling Time Inc
So Richard Parsons is "not an advocate" of selling Time Inc. I consider myself very fortunate to have worked at Time Inc for more than ten years at the end of the hey-day...through the 1980's, when Ray Cave was editing a first class, respected, timely (no pun intended) and newsworthy magazine. It was a great time, very satisfying, and continued until Robber Baron Steve Ross (remember him?) did his financial tricks and let the Wall Street Fox in with the chickens. I think that thirty years from now, business historians will look back on American industry (not just Time Inc., or publishing and printing, but everything) and write that management decisions that were made by companies in response to pressure to meet Wall Street targets effectively destroyed American Business. Greed is good, or that's what they thought in the 1990's with Time Warner and AOL Time Warner. It was great to have been part of a class act in publishing. Sort of like being lucky enough to take the Queen Mary I on the last transatlantic crossing from London to New York. End of an era, never to be repeated.
(Submitted by a Senior Manufacturing Publishing Director)
Howard Aiken (American computer engineer and mathematician 1900-1973)
BoSacks Readers Speak Out: on Time Inc, Dow Jones, Mr. Magazine, MRI and Dignity
www.bosacks.com
Re: Time Inc. Waves to Gossip Sites on Its Way to the Bank
Ann Moore's arrogance is truly stunning! "Get out of the way. The People editors are coming." Does Ms. Moore think that 71 page views per website visitor is a GOOD thing? To me, that says that some people have a LOT of time on their hands. Once again, will someone please identify the advertisers who want to reach an audience that does nothing more intellectually stimulating than spend that much time at People.com? I think Ann Moore has been in her Time Inc. job too long, and there is a real need for a reenergized leader to better manage the company before it is too late. I'll bet Don Logan would not have even acknowledged celebrity news. He had too much class for that.
(Submitted by a Senior Director of Manufacturing)
Re: Dow Jones Desperately needs Murdoch? Oh, please!
What i find so funny about the generally negative response that Murdoch has gotten from the media elite is that he is far more astute about digital media than they are. The man finds niches that are underserved or un-served and goes after them relentlessly. It was dumb to start another broadcast network, because they already had three. Why start another news channel? We already have CNN and MSNBC. Cartoons in prime time? That was out when the Flintstones were cancelled... and then we got Homer Simpson.
This move to get WSJ is more like a shot across the bow to NBC who has put its CNBC eggs in the Dow Jones basket. If Murdoch owns Dow Jones or WSJ, NBC is left without a partner for CNBC as Rupert gets a gem that he can use to build Fox Business News. I think many in the media hate Murdoch because he keeps outFOXing his critics (pun intended).
(Submitted by an Industry Analyst)
Re: Dow Jones Desperately needs Murdoch? Oh, please!
Mudoch doesn't want to buy the Journal for respectibility. He wants to get people who own data (database business) and who have managed to create web properties that bring in significant cash because they are so good at what they do. It's not that they need him, but that he needs them. Buying MySpace may have been smart - or not, as enough time hasn't gone by to see. But whether a wise or foolish purchase, it was only that: a purchase of something that became a fad. The WSJ online is an *engineered* phenomenon, and the vast majority of the web hasn't figured out how to accomplish something similar.
(Submitted by a Writer)
RE: Magazines Feeling Postal Pinch
Could the USPS do a better job of driving us all out of business if they tried? Now that I think of it and based on performance, if that were their goal they would very likely be much less efficient and effective in accomplishing it. It is a relatively straightforward matter to defend oneself from the overt intentions of government, and government sponsored monopolies. It is the unintended effects, springing from their innate ineptitude, that will get you.
(Submitted by a Printer)
Re: Mag Sag: Readership Growing Older
Wait until 2009 when all the special deals go away, ie. using up leftover air miles on discontinued credit cards and airline bonus miles. My wife and I have been getting these types of subscriptions going on 2 years and we will not renew any of them.
(Submitted by a Paper Person)
Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: MRI Audience Numbers
I'm with you, Bo, that "Handguns" figure is a load of crapola. I use 2
readers per 1 copy for my "readership" figures, based on my own survey data
of MY readers. I actually prefer just to give advertisers my printrun figures.
Anything higher is ... well, I already used that word, didn't I?
(Submitted by a Publisher)
Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: MRI Audience Numbers
Even if it's true that that the statistics say that Handgun Magazine gets 47.1 readers per copy, it ain't so.
You are correct. But I probably read my copy of the magazine (That's a shooting enthusiast pun!) 47.1 times. That should count for something.
(Submitted by a Printer)
Re: BoSacks Speaks Out: MRI Audience Numbers
If you think about it, magazines must be playing with the definition of "read." So, a magazine on the rack at a store that gets flipped through by, say, 15 people but not purchases has been "read" 15 times. Or they over-estimate library/public use copies. But the lack of questioning on the part of this article is disturbing. Forget 47.15 readers a month - even BH&G's claim of 5 readers per copy seems lunacy.
(Submitted by a Writer)
RE: MORT SLASHES MAGAZINE STAFF
Question: U.S. News is a closely held private company, so how does the
New York Post know that it "loses millions of dollars a year"?
Answer: It got a tip from Vice President Gephardt.
I have never seen a P&L for U.S. News, but I would be surprised if it is
losing millions. It certainly isn't losing as much money as the New York
Post.
(Submitted by a Publishing Director)
Re: THE DEATH OF PRINT NEWS is inevitable
Bob, this is the freshest, most intelligent article I've read in a very long time on the new publishing model of how to adjust to print's decline and online's rise and what the media companies need to do to make it work.
(Submitted by a weekly senior production operations manager)
RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Shred Of Dignity
I find it curious that some people wish to hold the circulation reporting of a magazine to a higher standard than they apply to the content it reports. Funny world.
(Submitted by a Printer)
RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Shred Of Dignity
Samir gets it right when he says "(celebrity) magazines are more like Prozac for the readers", but Janice Min is also right in trying to maintain a semblence of editorial integrity in a publishing category with very low standards for truth and objectivity. If there is a problem, it is that people reading the made-up stories and fabrications are not smart, or cynical, enough to understand that "just because you read it in a newspaper doesn't necessarily mean it is true." Bonnie Fuller, Min's predecessor at US and now the mud slinging honcho at AMI's Star, is at the other (lower) end of the integrity spectrum. (Min also has the discipline and understanding of editorial closing deadlines, unlike Ms. Fuller, and Janice always meets them, which is why her newsstand sales have soared during her last three years at US. Titles distributed on time ALWAYS sell better than titles that are late, regardless of the category.)
Intentional fabrication of stories and bogus cover lines may trick the reader for a while, but when a publication has lost editorial integrity, then it's Game Over time. Readers either keep buying for the sheer entertainment value, like watching a soap opera, or else they're just not very bright. Either way, can someone tell me which advertisers want to reach the consumers in either category? Not a sustainable business model, in my opinion.
(Submitted by a Senior Director of Manufacturing and Distribution)
Re: Tab Wars: Breaking News or Faking News?
Bo, In the "Tab Wars" article, for "Professor" Husni to dismiss the responsibility of journalism in celebrity reporting and suggest we should all be happy with some type of "gossip" grouping disclaimer that lets publishers say anything about stars for the purpose of entertainment is perhaps the most wrong headed thing I have ever heard him say. Mr. Husni shows no respect for truth and fosters the destructively cynical view that's all one big entertainment. Wonder how he would react if it were his life or family being misreported about for the purpose of selling crappy magazines! Worse, we should question this position for a University journalism program.
Bravo to Us for having the guts to call out its smarmy competitors, if they want to copy People and Us let it start with practices of integrity. If magazines want to have internal "gossip" columns with disclaimers about truth, well fine, if that's the best we can do. Is Us just saving it's own hide? You bet, and why shouldn't it? Is this honest competition? Ironically it is a lesson Us learned from People long ago.
Do we take ourselves too seriously in publishing? Ever ask yourself the consequence of the opposite. Here's something serious, Samir Husni disgraced himself in this article and I've had just about enough from this guy who's never contributed a damn thing to the magazine article except his own self aggrandizing. "Mr. Magazine?" Perhaps, he paid for that title it was not awarded and he obviously won't ever be confused as "Mr. Journalism," or "Mr. Integrity" for that matter.
(Submitted by a Senior Publishing Director)
Re: Tab Wars: Breaking News or Faking News?
There's a big difference between pleasing your customers and pandering to them. If you don't have enough self respect to do your work correctly, you customers will start to lose respect, and the next step is that they'll find something else to do. Perhaps I'm misremembering, but aren't some of the biggest gossip rags having large financial troubles? If it's insulting to a reader to assume he or she can't figure out when titles are full of crap, isn't it doubly insulting to peddle that crap?
(Submitted by a Writer)
RE: BoSacks Speaks Out: Shred Of Dignity
Bob, Magazine editors rarely, if ever, refer to another magazine in their pages. This is a short-sighted because magazine readers read more than one magazine and are making comparisons all the time between magazines. (We know they read multiple magazines because most magazine subscriptions are sold via direct mail to readers of other magazines.) So I think it's great that US is providing their own take on how magazines in their category stack up. It will make for good reading.
My favorite instance of one magazine referring to another is when Spy started a column in its magazine of letters to the New Yorker. The New Yorker didn't have its own letters column, so Spy provided that forum for New Yorker readers. It was fun and provocative editorial material. PS - I LOVE the Weekly World News.
(Submitted by a Publisher)
Re: Parsons: 'Not an Advocate' of Selling Time Inc
So Richard Parsons is "not an advocate" of selling Time Inc. I consider myself very fortunate to have worked at Time Inc for more than ten years at the end of the hey-day...through the 1980's, when Ray Cave was editing a first class, respected, timely (no pun intended) and newsworthy magazine. It was a great time, very satisfying, and continued until Robber Baron Steve Ross (remember him?) did his financial tricks and let the Wall Street Fox in with the chickens. I think that thirty years from now, business historians will look back on American industry (not just Time Inc., or publishing and printing, but everything) and write that management decisions that were made by companies in response to pressure to meet Wall Street targets effectively destroyed American Business. Greed is good, or that's what they thought in the 1990's with Time Warner and AOL Time Warner. It was great to have been part of a class act in publishing. Sort of like being lucky enough to take the Queen Mary I on the last transatlantic crossing from London to New York. End of an era, never to be repeated.
(Submitted by a Senior Manufacturing Publishing Director)
10 obvious things about the future of newspapers you need to get through your head
"All the great things have been denied and we live in an intricacy of new and local mythologies, political, economic, poetic, which are asserted with an ever-enlarging incoherence."
Wallace Stevens (American Poet whose work explores the interaction of reality and what man can make of reality in his mind. 1879-1955)
10 obvious things about the future of newspapers you need to get through your head
Posted by Ryan Sholin
http://www.ryansholin.com/2007/06/02/10-obvious-things-about-the-future-of-newspapers-you-need-to-get-through-your-head/
1. It's not Google's fault. Get over it, professor. Blaming search engines is like blaming the library. "Oh no, please don't let readers actually find stories from my newspaper and then click through to my site to read them, anything but that!" Forget it.
2. It's not Craig's fault. Newspaper classifieds suck and they have for years. Either develop simple database applications with photos and maps to let your users actually find what they're looking for, or partner with a good third-party vertical who can. Anything less is a waste of your time.
3. Your major metro newspaper could probably use some staff cuts. If you're not writing about local news, your paper's readers are probably getting what you do from somewhere else. Get over it. CNN and ESPN are not new, and nytimes.com wasn't far behind. Write local. There are plenty of cooks and painters and poets in your neighborhood. Go out and meet them.
4. It's time to stop handwringing and start training. If your editors are still writing navelgazers about the cataclysmic changes in the business instead of starting training programs to teach some new tricks to you and that guy in the cubicle next door, that's a problem. Stop whining and move on.
5. You don't get to charge people for archives and you certainly don't want to charge people for daily news content. Pulling your copy behind walls where it can't be seen by readers on the wider Web. Search rules. Don't hide from it.
6. Reporters need to do more than write. The new world calls for a new skillset, and you and Mr. Notebook need to make some new friends, like Mr. Microphone and Mr. Point & Shoot.
7. Bloggers aren't an uneducated lynch mob unconcerned by facts. They're your readers and your neighbors and if you play your cards right, your sources and your community moderators. If you really play it right, bloggers are the leaders of your networked reporting projects. Get over the whole bloggers vs. journalists thing, which has been pretty much settled since long before you stopped calling it a "Web blog" in your stories.
8. You ignore new delivery systems at your own peril. RSS, SMS, iPhone, e-paper, Blackberry, widgets, podcasts, vlogs, Facebook, Twitter - these aren't the competition, these are your new carriers. Learn how to deliver your content across every new technology that comes into view on the horizon, and be there when new devices go into mass production.
9. J-schools can either play a critical role in training the next generation of journalists, or they can fade into irrelevancy. Teach multimedia, interactivity and data, or watch your students become frustrated and puzzled as they try to get jobs with five clips and a smile.
10. Okay, here comes the big one: THE GLASS IS HALF FULL. There is excellent work being done in the new world of online journalism and it's being done at newspapers like the Washington Post and the Lawrence Journal-World and the San Jose Mercury News and the St. Petersburg Times and the Bakersfield Californian and all sorts of papers of all sizes. You don't need millions of dollars or HD cameras or years of training to make it happen; all you need is the right frame of mind. So let's stop writing and groaning about how things used to be different, and let's start building our own piece of the new world of newspapers brick by brick, story by story.
Wallace Stevens (American Poet whose work explores the interaction of reality and what man can make of reality in his mind. 1879-1955)
10 obvious things about the future of newspapers you need to get through your head
Posted by Ryan Sholin
http://www.ryansholin.com/2007/06/02/10-obvious-things-about-the-future-of-newspapers-you-need-to-get-through-your-head/
1. It's not Google's fault. Get over it, professor. Blaming search engines is like blaming the library. "Oh no, please don't let readers actually find stories from my newspaper and then click through to my site to read them, anything but that!" Forget it.
2. It's not Craig's fault. Newspaper classifieds suck and they have for years. Either develop simple database applications with photos and maps to let your users actually find what they're looking for, or partner with a good third-party vertical who can. Anything less is a waste of your time.
3. Your major metro newspaper could probably use some staff cuts. If you're not writing about local news, your paper's readers are probably getting what you do from somewhere else. Get over it. CNN and ESPN are not new, and nytimes.com wasn't far behind. Write local. There are plenty of cooks and painters and poets in your neighborhood. Go out and meet them.
4. It's time to stop handwringing and start training. If your editors are still writing navelgazers about the cataclysmic changes in the business instead of starting training programs to teach some new tricks to you and that guy in the cubicle next door, that's a problem. Stop whining and move on.
5. You don't get to charge people for archives and you certainly don't want to charge people for daily news content. Pulling your copy behind walls where it can't be seen by readers on the wider Web. Search rules. Don't hide from it.
6. Reporters need to do more than write. The new world calls for a new skillset, and you and Mr. Notebook need to make some new friends, like Mr. Microphone and Mr. Point & Shoot.
7. Bloggers aren't an uneducated lynch mob unconcerned by facts. They're your readers and your neighbors and if you play your cards right, your sources and your community moderators. If you really play it right, bloggers are the leaders of your networked reporting projects. Get over the whole bloggers vs. journalists thing, which has been pretty much settled since long before you stopped calling it a "Web blog" in your stories.
8. You ignore new delivery systems at your own peril. RSS, SMS, iPhone, e-paper, Blackberry, widgets, podcasts, vlogs, Facebook, Twitter - these aren't the competition, these are your new carriers. Learn how to deliver your content across every new technology that comes into view on the horizon, and be there when new devices go into mass production.
9. J-schools can either play a critical role in training the next generation of journalists, or they can fade into irrelevancy. Teach multimedia, interactivity and data, or watch your students become frustrated and puzzled as they try to get jobs with five clips and a smile.
10. Okay, here comes the big one: THE GLASS IS HALF FULL. There is excellent work being done in the new world of online journalism and it's being done at newspapers like the Washington Post and the Lawrence Journal-World and the San Jose Mercury News and the St. Petersburg Times and the Bakersfield Californian and all sorts of papers of all sizes. You don't need millions of dollars or HD cameras or years of training to make it happen; all you need is the right frame of mind. So let's stop writing and groaning about how things used to be different, and let's start building our own piece of the new world of newspapers brick by brick, story by story.
Glamorous Smoking Ads in Fashion Mags Leave Bad Taste for Some
"While gossip among women is universally ridiculed as low and trivial, gossip among men, especially if it is about women, is called theory, or idea, or fact."
Andrea Dworkin
Glamorous Smoking Ads in Fashion Mags Leave Bad Taste for Some
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,277040,00.html
NEW YORK - Not long ago, fax machines and e-mail inboxes at Vogue, the world's premier fashion magazine, were briefly assaulted with thousands of angry letters. Not about the latest gorgeously photographed fashion trends or beauty products in its influential pages, but about a single, colorful ad: for Camel No. 9 cigarettes.
"If you draw income from the advertisement of tobacco," Heidi Thompson of Freeport, Ill., wrote in one letter, "you are as guilty as big tobacco companies in selling the health and future of so many of our youth in order to pad your bank accounts."
The letters were part of a grass roots campaign by an anti-smoking group to get Vogue to drop ads for the new, prettily packaged Camels, which they and others feel are targeted to younger women and teenagers.
But it isn't just Vouge. Pick up nearly any fashion magazine this month -- Glamour, Harper's Bazaar, Lucky -- and you'll see a colorful cigarette ad mixed in with articles on beauty, fitness, nutrition and glowing skin.
You won't find them in a number of other countries. A European Union law, for example, bans tobacco print ads on grounds they glamorize smoking and promote it among young people.
But in the United States, where TV and radio ads were banned long ago and billboards more recently, print ads are the final frontier in tobacco advertising, aside from store displays and the like. And to anti-smoking groups, their presence, though waning, is especially tasteless in fashion magazines and others aimed at young women -- at a time when lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in women.
"Research out there shows that young people are susceptible to advertising," says Ellen Vargyas, counsel for the American Legacy Foundation, established in the wake of the 1998 settlement between the states and the tobacco industry. "I wish the publications themselves would look hard at what they're doing. Readers look to them to see what's cool, and what's trendy -- and they see cigarettes."
Her organization sponsored a major tobacco report issued last week by the Institute of Medicine, a branch of the National Academy of Sciences. The report, which called on Congress and the president to give the FDA power to regulate tobacco, also had a recommendation for print ads: that they be restricted to black and white text only -- no images.
That would certainly thwart the impact of the Camel No. 9 campaign, whose ads use shiny paper, sophisticated colors like teal and fuschia, and accents of lace to achieve a sense of feminine chic. Those ads have provoked accusations, including from a group of U.S. senators, that R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., maker of Camels, is trying to lure teens and younger women to smoke. (The company says it seeks only to sway established adult smokers.)
But they've also aroused anger at the magazines printing the ads. The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids says volunteers around the country sent Vogue more than 8,000 protest e-mails or faxes earlier this month. It says it got no response, other than a couple of scribbled notes faxed back on letters that had been addressed to editor Anna Wintour. "Will you stop? You're killing trees!" read one note shown to The AP.
A spokeswoman for Conde Nast Publications, which publishes Vogue, said neither Wintour nor publisher Thomas Florio were available for an interview. "Vogue does carry tobacco advertising. Beyond that we have no further comment," said the spokeswoman, Maurie Perl. She also said no one at Glamour, Lucky or W, also Conde Nast publications, would be available. Editors at Essence magazine, which also carries tobacco ads and is owned by Time Inc., also declined comment.
Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, says that while print ads are on the decline, he's still concerned about fashion magazines, and especially the iconic Vogue, because "they have far more impact on teenage girls than almost any other written media. And that's the reason the tobacco industry is in these magazines."
Magazine analyst Samir Husni says it's "oddly hypocritical" for magazines to run articles about health issues, including cancer, and then have tobacco ads nearby. "What they're saying is that they value their ad customers more than their million or two million readers," says Husni, of the University of Mississippi. "Country after country is banning cigarette ads in magazines."
Tobacco companies spent $13.1 billion on promotional spending in 2005, the last year for which there were figures, according to a recent report by the Federal Trade Commission. Most of that went into price discounts for consumers. On magazine ads, they spent $17.2 million in the first quarter of 2007, according to the Magazine Publishers of America.
A number of magazines refuse to accept tobacco ads: just a few are Men's Health, Self, and Money, according to a list provided by the Tobacco-Free Periodicals Project.
But most fashion magazines do. In current June issues, for example, Lucky, Vogue and Glamour have Pall Mall ads in bright orange. Harper's Bazaar advertises American Spirit and Camel No. 9 in an issue that interviews Cate Edwards, daughter of Elizabeth Edwards, about her mother's fight against advanced breast cancer.
One possible contributing factor for the continued presence of tobacco ads in fashion magazines: the stubborn prevalence of smoking in the fashion world, particularly among models.
"All the girls smoke," says Michael Vollbracht, creative director at Bill Blass. "I was doing a fashion show, and all these beautiful young things were smoking outside. They looked at me like I was an old fuddy-duddy."
One prominent player in the fashion industry says it's "jarring" to think that fashion magazines print tobacco ads -- but confesses she flips by them without noticing.
"I'll bet if you told a lot of people there are cigarette ads in fashion magazines, they'd say, 'you're kidding,"' says Nian Fish, creative director and senior vice president at KCD, which produces shows for top fashion houses.
Both she and Vollbracht feel that the fashion industry itself shouldn't have to address alone a much broader social issue.
"We're a capitalist society, aren't we?" Vollbracht said. "We have to take it up with our government. The fashion industry can only do so much."
Andrea Dworkin
Glamorous Smoking Ads in Fashion Mags Leave Bad Taste for Some
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,277040,00.html
NEW YORK - Not long ago, fax machines and e-mail inboxes at Vogue, the world's premier fashion magazine, were briefly assaulted with thousands of angry letters. Not about the latest gorgeously photographed fashion trends or beauty products in its influential pages, but about a single, colorful ad: for Camel No. 9 cigarettes.
"If you draw income from the advertisement of tobacco," Heidi Thompson of Freeport, Ill., wrote in one letter, "you are as guilty as big tobacco companies in selling the health and future of so many of our youth in order to pad your bank accounts."
The letters were part of a grass roots campaign by an anti-smoking group to get Vogue to drop ads for the new, prettily packaged Camels, which they and others feel are targeted to younger women and teenagers.
But it isn't just Vouge. Pick up nearly any fashion magazine this month -- Glamour, Harper's Bazaar, Lucky -- and you'll see a colorful cigarette ad mixed in with articles on beauty, fitness, nutrition and glowing skin.
You won't find them in a number of other countries. A European Union law, for example, bans tobacco print ads on grounds they glamorize smoking and promote it among young people.
But in the United States, where TV and radio ads were banned long ago and billboards more recently, print ads are the final frontier in tobacco advertising, aside from store displays and the like. And to anti-smoking groups, their presence, though waning, is especially tasteless in fashion magazines and others aimed at young women -- at a time when lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in women.
"Research out there shows that young people are susceptible to advertising," says Ellen Vargyas, counsel for the American Legacy Foundation, established in the wake of the 1998 settlement between the states and the tobacco industry. "I wish the publications themselves would look hard at what they're doing. Readers look to them to see what's cool, and what's trendy -- and they see cigarettes."
Her organization sponsored a major tobacco report issued last week by the Institute of Medicine, a branch of the National Academy of Sciences. The report, which called on Congress and the president to give the FDA power to regulate tobacco, also had a recommendation for print ads: that they be restricted to black and white text only -- no images.
That would certainly thwart the impact of the Camel No. 9 campaign, whose ads use shiny paper, sophisticated colors like teal and fuschia, and accents of lace to achieve a sense of feminine chic. Those ads have provoked accusations, including from a group of U.S. senators, that R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., maker of Camels, is trying to lure teens and younger women to smoke. (The company says it seeks only to sway established adult smokers.)
But they've also aroused anger at the magazines printing the ads. The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids says volunteers around the country sent Vogue more than 8,000 protest e-mails or faxes earlier this month. It says it got no response, other than a couple of scribbled notes faxed back on letters that had been addressed to editor Anna Wintour. "Will you stop? You're killing trees!" read one note shown to The AP.
A spokeswoman for Conde Nast Publications, which publishes Vogue, said neither Wintour nor publisher Thomas Florio were available for an interview. "Vogue does carry tobacco advertising. Beyond that we have no further comment," said the spokeswoman, Maurie Perl. She also said no one at Glamour, Lucky or W, also Conde Nast publications, would be available. Editors at Essence magazine, which also carries tobacco ads and is owned by Time Inc., also declined comment.
Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, says that while print ads are on the decline, he's still concerned about fashion magazines, and especially the iconic Vogue, because "they have far more impact on teenage girls than almost any other written media. And that's the reason the tobacco industry is in these magazines."
Magazine analyst Samir Husni says it's "oddly hypocritical" for magazines to run articles about health issues, including cancer, and then have tobacco ads nearby. "What they're saying is that they value their ad customers more than their million or two million readers," says Husni, of the University of Mississippi. "Country after country is banning cigarette ads in magazines."
Tobacco companies spent $13.1 billion on promotional spending in 2005, the last year for which there were figures, according to a recent report by the Federal Trade Commission. Most of that went into price discounts for consumers. On magazine ads, they spent $17.2 million in the first quarter of 2007, according to the Magazine Publishers of America.
A number of magazines refuse to accept tobacco ads: just a few are Men's Health, Self, and Money, according to a list provided by the Tobacco-Free Periodicals Project.
But most fashion magazines do. In current June issues, for example, Lucky, Vogue and Glamour have Pall Mall ads in bright orange. Harper's Bazaar advertises American Spirit and Camel No. 9 in an issue that interviews Cate Edwards, daughter of Elizabeth Edwards, about her mother's fight against advanced breast cancer.
One possible contributing factor for the continued presence of tobacco ads in fashion magazines: the stubborn prevalence of smoking in the fashion world, particularly among models.
"All the girls smoke," says Michael Vollbracht, creative director at Bill Blass. "I was doing a fashion show, and all these beautiful young things were smoking outside. They looked at me like I was an old fuddy-duddy."
One prominent player in the fashion industry says it's "jarring" to think that fashion magazines print tobacco ads -- but confesses she flips by them without noticing.
"I'll bet if you told a lot of people there are cigarette ads in fashion magazines, they'd say, 'you're kidding,"' says Nian Fish, creative director and senior vice president at KCD, which produces shows for top fashion houses.
Both she and Vollbracht feel that the fashion industry itself shouldn't have to address alone a much broader social issue.
"We're a capitalist society, aren't we?" Vollbracht said. "We have to take it up with our government. The fashion industry can only do so much."
Friday, June 01, 2007
Has Kent Brownridge Finally Nabbed Dennis?
"All maxims have their antagonist maxims; proverbs should be sold in pairs, a single one being but a half truth"
William Mathews
Has Kent Brownridge Finally Nabbed Dennis?
Grapevine Declares Quadrangle the Winner, but No Official Word Yet
By Nat Ives
http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=117034
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Magazine pros inside and outside of Dennis Publishing hear that the auction for the company seems to be complete, with winner Quadrangle Group down to crossing t's and dotting i's on a deal.
Maxim will be the biggest prize for the Quadrangle-Brownridge team.
There is no official word, even for the Dennis insiders, but the smoke suggesting a Quadrangle win has thickened to the point that observers are convinced of fire. Ron Burkle's Yucaipa Cos. is believed to have also bid on Dennis -- publisher of Maxim, Blender and Stuff -- in the final round last week. One narrative making the rounds has Dennis delaying any announcement about Quadrangle in the hopes that the Burkle team could be persuaded, even this late in the process, to top the Quadrangle bid.
Brownridge vs. Wenner?
If Quadrangle does close on Dennis -- and barring any last-minute change of heart from Dennis founder Felix Dennis -- it will return former Wenner Media No. 2 Kent Brownridge to the industry at last. It will, moreover, put him in competition with his old boss Jann Wenner. Blender and Rolling Stone compete in the music category while Maxim and Men's Journal have some overlap among men.
Maxim will be the biggest prize for the Quadrangle-Brownridge team. The lad craze may have cooled but it hasn't cratered; Maxim's paid and verified print circulation has found a plateau around 2.5 million. Ad pages are off 2.58% in the first half, per Media Industry Newsletter, but its digital and licensing operations are substantial -- with probably plenty more potential. Blender is still finding its way but has grown steadily since its introduction in 2001.
What to do with Stuff?
The biggest question for the new owner will be Stuff. The title's original role was defensive, complicating an effort by eMap to play the lad game in the U.S. with an edition of FHM here. But eMap killed the U.S. FHM last December, so Stuff's preventative role is essentially gone. That could free the brand for improvement and even redefinition, or give the new owners cover to close it and fill its subscriptions with Maxim. Its most recent paid and verified circulation report showed a 4.8% decline, while its 2007 ad pages through June are 5.68% lower than in the first half of last year, according to MIN.
Mr. Dennis hired Allen & Co. to explore a sale of his titles in early 2006, although company executives and their spokesman declined to comment on "rumors" to that effect until February 2007, when they finally confirmed the poorly kept secret.
Observers said the Dennis portfolio may go for somewhere in the range of $220 million to $250 million. If a deal gets done, Mr. Dennis will retain ownership of The Week, his growing current-events weekly.
William Mathews
Has Kent Brownridge Finally Nabbed Dennis?
Grapevine Declares Quadrangle the Winner, but No Official Word Yet
By Nat Ives
http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=117034
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Magazine pros inside and outside of Dennis Publishing hear that the auction for the company seems to be complete, with winner Quadrangle Group down to crossing t's and dotting i's on a deal.
Maxim will be the biggest prize for the Quadrangle-Brownridge team.
There is no official word, even for the Dennis insiders, but the smoke suggesting a Quadrangle win has thickened to the point that observers are convinced of fire. Ron Burkle's Yucaipa Cos. is believed to have also bid on Dennis -- publisher of Maxim, Blender and Stuff -- in the final round last week. One narrative making the rounds has Dennis delaying any announcement about Quadrangle in the hopes that the Burkle team could be persuaded, even this late in the process, to top the Quadrangle bid.
Brownridge vs. Wenner?
If Quadrangle does close on Dennis -- and barring any last-minute change of heart from Dennis founder Felix Dennis -- it will return former Wenner Media No. 2 Kent Brownridge to the industry at last. It will, moreover, put him in competition with his old boss Jann Wenner. Blender and Rolling Stone compete in the music category while Maxim and Men's Journal have some overlap among men.
Maxim will be the biggest prize for the Quadrangle-Brownridge team. The lad craze may have cooled but it hasn't cratered; Maxim's paid and verified print circulation has found a plateau around 2.5 million. Ad pages are off 2.58% in the first half, per Media Industry Newsletter, but its digital and licensing operations are substantial -- with probably plenty more potential. Blender is still finding its way but has grown steadily since its introduction in 2001.
What to do with Stuff?
The biggest question for the new owner will be Stuff. The title's original role was defensive, complicating an effort by eMap to play the lad game in the U.S. with an edition of FHM here. But eMap killed the U.S. FHM last December, so Stuff's preventative role is essentially gone. That could free the brand for improvement and even redefinition, or give the new owners cover to close it and fill its subscriptions with Maxim. Its most recent paid and verified circulation report showed a 4.8% decline, while its 2007 ad pages through June are 5.68% lower than in the first half of last year, according to MIN.
Mr. Dennis hired Allen & Co. to explore a sale of his titles in early 2006, although company executives and their spokesman declined to comment on "rumors" to that effect until February 2007, when they finally confirmed the poorly kept secret.
Observers said the Dennis portfolio may go for somewhere in the range of $220 million to $250 million. If a deal gets done, Mr. Dennis will retain ownership of The Week, his growing current-events weekly.
Defying slump by pursuing the rich
"I would rather earn 1% off a 100 people's efforts than 100% of my own efforts."
John D. Rockefeller
Defying slump by pursuing the rich
By Alana Semuels, Times Staff Writer
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-magazines31may31,1,4995781.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
The rich are different, and so is what they're reading.
Which is why the quest for wealthy eyeballs is booming despite a soft print market.
That trend will be underscored today with the expected announcement that investor Roy E. Disney's Shamrock Capital Advisors has sold Los Angeles-based Modern Luxury Media for nearly $250 million.
Local private equity player Clarity Partners is buying a controlling interest, winning an auction involving about 30 parties.
Modern Luxury publishes such upscale city magazines as San Francisco, Angeleno and Riviera, which has Orange County and San Diego editions. The acquisition of the company comes as other print publications are struggling to attract advertisers and keep up circulation.
"Luxury magazines have been spreading like wildfire," said Peter Kreisky, president of Kreisky Media Consultancy.
The growth has been fueled by controlled circulation, in which companies send free magazines to people living in affluent ZIP Codes.
Luxury magazines appeal to advertisers and investors because they can reach a specific type of consumer in a way that general circulation publications can't. According to Modern Luxury, the median household income of Angeleno readers is $305,000.
"In today's world, advertisers are looking to target their advertising and be more efficient," said Steve Royer, managing director of Burbank-based Shamrock Capital Advisors.
Magazines published by the company are filled with ads from national luxury brands such as Neiman Marcus Group Inc., Cartier and Louis Vuitton, said Chief Executive Michael Kong.
"A great deal of what has propelled our growth is the explosion of luxury goods worldwide," Kong said.
But some believe that regional luxury magazines may be near saturation, said Seija Goldstein, a New York-based consultant to regional publications.
When Shamrock bought a controlling stake in Modern Luxury in November 2004, the company published three magazines, in Chicago, Los Angeles and Orange County, with total revenue of $18 million a year.
Since then, it has expanded into nine more markets and increased revenue to $70 million. The company now reaches 645,000 households and 3.5 million readers a month.
Shamrock is selling its stake for nearly five times what it paid in 2004, according to those familiar with the deal.
Beverly Hills-based Clarity, which manages $1 billion in assets, was attracted by the controlled circulation and the potential for growth in new markets, general partner Joshua Gutfreund said via e-mail.
Kong says Modern Luxury and Clarity plan to continue to grow by branching out into new markets nationally and internationally, and by acquiring other regional magazines.
Modern Luxury has come under fire in some cities. Its acquisition of the magazine San Francisco in November 2005 was disparaged by the San Francisco Chronicle, which ran a story questioning whether the magazine would "lose its edge."
The Chronicle then alleged that a January 2006 story was pulled from the magazine because Modern Luxury didn't want to offend an advertiser.
Kong said the incident was "blown out of proportion," but said the magazines generally contain articles on lifestyle, fashion, arts and culture, rather than investigative journalism.
"As a general industry statement," he said, "it's very hard to make your living in the news and information area as a monthly magazine."
John D. Rockefeller
Defying slump by pursuing the rich
By Alana Semuels, Times Staff Writer
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-magazines31may31,1,4995781.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
The rich are different, and so is what they're reading.
Which is why the quest for wealthy eyeballs is booming despite a soft print market.
That trend will be underscored today with the expected announcement that investor Roy E. Disney's Shamrock Capital Advisors has sold Los Angeles-based Modern Luxury Media for nearly $250 million.
Local private equity player Clarity Partners is buying a controlling interest, winning an auction involving about 30 parties.
Modern Luxury publishes such upscale city magazines as San Francisco, Angeleno and Riviera, which has Orange County and San Diego editions. The acquisition of the company comes as other print publications are struggling to attract advertisers and keep up circulation.
"Luxury magazines have been spreading like wildfire," said Peter Kreisky, president of Kreisky Media Consultancy.
The growth has been fueled by controlled circulation, in which companies send free magazines to people living in affluent ZIP Codes.
Luxury magazines appeal to advertisers and investors because they can reach a specific type of consumer in a way that general circulation publications can't. According to Modern Luxury, the median household income of Angeleno readers is $305,000.
"In today's world, advertisers are looking to target their advertising and be more efficient," said Steve Royer, managing director of Burbank-based Shamrock Capital Advisors.
Magazines published by the company are filled with ads from national luxury brands such as Neiman Marcus Group Inc., Cartier and Louis Vuitton, said Chief Executive Michael Kong.
"A great deal of what has propelled our growth is the explosion of luxury goods worldwide," Kong said.
But some believe that regional luxury magazines may be near saturation, said Seija Goldstein, a New York-based consultant to regional publications.
When Shamrock bought a controlling stake in Modern Luxury in November 2004, the company published three magazines, in Chicago, Los Angeles and Orange County, with total revenue of $18 million a year.
Since then, it has expanded into nine more markets and increased revenue to $70 million. The company now reaches 645,000 households and 3.5 million readers a month.
Shamrock is selling its stake for nearly five times what it paid in 2004, according to those familiar with the deal.
Beverly Hills-based Clarity, which manages $1 billion in assets, was attracted by the controlled circulation and the potential for growth in new markets, general partner Joshua Gutfreund said via e-mail.
Kong says Modern Luxury and Clarity plan to continue to grow by branching out into new markets nationally and internationally, and by acquiring other regional magazines.
Modern Luxury has come under fire in some cities. Its acquisition of the magazine San Francisco in November 2005 was disparaged by the San Francisco Chronicle, which ran a story questioning whether the magazine would "lose its edge."
The Chronicle then alleged that a January 2006 story was pulled from the magazine because Modern Luxury didn't want to offend an advertiser.
Kong said the incident was "blown out of proportion," but said the magazines generally contain articles on lifestyle, fashion, arts and culture, rather than investigative journalism.
"As a general industry statement," he said, "it's very hard to make your living in the news and information area as a monthly magazine."
Time Inc. Waves to Gossip Sites on Its Way to the Bank
"While gossip among women is universally ridiculed as low and trivial, gossip among men, especially if it is about women, is called theory, or idea, or fact."
Andrea Dworkin
Time Inc. Waves to Gossip Sites on Its Way to the Bank
Ann Moore heads one of the most traditional, sprawling, old-school magazine publishing companies - and says she's not at all worried about scrappy upstart gossip Web sites.
"Smaller gossip sites think they are big and powerfull . . . but get out of the way. The People editors are coming," said Ms. Moore, the chairman and CEO of Time Inc.
TMZ.com, another Time Warner property, may currently attract the most unique monthly visitors, she said, but brands like People are more valuable from a business stand point. And that translates to fierce loyalty when readers go online: She said the average reader of People.com views 71 pages during a visit. "You don't see that on any other celebrity site."
While sites like TMZ and PerezHilton.com are famous for their snarky comments, Ms. Moore said taking the high road - or at least a slightly higher road - is better for business. "We still fact check, we are not mean spirited and we are accurate," she said. "You can't make as much money in the mean-spirited arena. I'll leave that to someone else." Ms. Moore said advertisers want to buy celebrity news that is "safe."
"It is definitely not too late for the big [print] brands to establish their brands on the Internet," Ms. Moore said, noting that People waited until last year to shift from a subscription model to a free, ad-based site. She waited to make the change until there was enough online advertising to support the business, a shift that occurred in 2006.
And she said the move has paid off: People.com got some 17.5 million page views when it reported Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt were expecting a baby, 25 million when Baby Shiloh was born, 28 million following the wedding of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, and a whopping 51.7 million page views following the Oscars.
And in case those numbers didn't convey her point, Ms. Moore summed up: "People is the most powerful magazine, and the most profitable magazine, on the planet."
Andrea Dworkin
Time Inc. Waves to Gossip Sites on Its Way to the Bank
Ann Moore heads one of the most traditional, sprawling, old-school magazine publishing companies - and says she's not at all worried about scrappy upstart gossip Web sites.
"Smaller gossip sites think they are big and powerfull . . . but get out of the way. The People editors are coming," said Ms. Moore, the chairman and CEO of Time Inc.
TMZ.com, another Time Warner property, may currently attract the most unique monthly visitors, she said, but brands like People are more valuable from a business stand point. And that translates to fierce loyalty when readers go online: She said the average reader of People.com views 71 pages during a visit. "You don't see that on any other celebrity site."
While sites like TMZ and PerezHilton.com are famous for their snarky comments, Ms. Moore said taking the high road - or at least a slightly higher road - is better for business. "We still fact check, we are not mean spirited and we are accurate," she said. "You can't make as much money in the mean-spirited arena. I'll leave that to someone else." Ms. Moore said advertisers want to buy celebrity news that is "safe."
"It is definitely not too late for the big [print] brands to establish their brands on the Internet," Ms. Moore said, noting that People waited until last year to shift from a subscription model to a free, ad-based site. She waited to make the change until there was enough online advertising to support the business, a shift that occurred in 2006.
And she said the move has paid off: People.com got some 17.5 million page views when it reported Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt were expecting a baby, 25 million when Baby Shiloh was born, 28 million following the wedding of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, and a whopping 51.7 million page views following the Oscars.
And in case those numbers didn't convey her point, Ms. Moore summed up: "People is the most powerful magazine, and the most profitable magazine, on the planet."
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
The Merger Frenzy Explained
"A budget is just a method of worrying before you spend money, as well as afterward."
Unknown
The Merger Frenzy Explained
By Jon Fine
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_21/b4035034.htm
This is how the market views media right now: It loves video assets when they're in the hands of a well-regarded conglomerate like News Corp. or Walt Disney. It likes companies with data that people will pay serious money for, like financial-information providers Thomson and Reuters . It also likes players with a commanding presence in one media space and an Internet strategy that's considered smart, like cable giant Comcast and broadcaster CBS. It doesn't like companies owning content and distribution perceived to be commoditized, like newspapers and radio. And when Wall Street hates a company that is admired in other quarters for its holdings, that company becomes deal bait.
Understanding all of that helps explain May's flurry of big potential hookups. (In brief: News Corp.-Dow Jones, Microsoft merging all or some of its media operations with Yahoo!'s , Thomson-Reuters, the speculation that Gannett might or should pursue help-wanted giant Monster.com And understanding why, beyond simple earnings growth, the Street likes or dislikes a media company offers insights into the next deal or merger targets.
Considering the billions of dollars squandered in past deals that chased a mirage of synergy, it pains me to write the following sentence: The performances of News Corp. (stock up about 40% in the past two years) and Disney (up 34%) show that the markets like big, multi-platform combinations of content and distribution better than almost anything in media, especially when they're paired with a new-media story (hello, MySpace!) the Street prefers. That fact, and News Corp.'s $5 billion-plus in cash reserves, enabled Murdoch to offer a 66% premium for Dow Jones.
SO DID THIS: Dow Jones traffics in premium information-consider the nearly 1 million subscribers claimed by wsj.com, The Wall Street Journal's online arm, plus the Factiva database service. But Dow Jones' stock isn't being valued like that of data players Thomson and Reuters, both of which were up over 25% in the past two years even before merger talks were made public. Dow Jones, whose stock had gone sideways for years before Murdoch's bid, is being treated like a newspaper company. If Dow Jones had had a couple of years of Reuters and Thomson-esque gains-and, um, decent profits-it would have been much harder for Murdoch to offer such a premium. And while Reuters' and Thomson's gains are fine, they don't match those of another key data player. The McGraw-Hill Companies, which owns such data assets as Standard & Poor's and consumer ratings service J.D. Power & Associates (as well as BusinessWeek), has outperformed the stocks of even News Corp. and Disney in the past two years. Don't think this escaped the notice of Thomson's and Reuters' management.
Yahoo, another underperformer, has familiar ills-management missteps, coupled with the misfortune of facing direct comparisons with Google. That is making its stock lag behind where it should be. (As a dominant online player, Yahoo at least qualifies for being liked, if not to the lofty status of being loved, by Wall Street.) Hence the talks with Microsoft, the theory being that a combo or partnership would allow them to compete with Google. Similarly, those suggesting that Gannett hook up with Monster may remember how key Web acquisitions-comparison-shopping sites Shopzilla and uSwitch -helped newspaper-and-cable conglomerate E.W. Scripps outperform its newspaper brethren, at least until those properties came up short.
Based on the current lay of the land, there is one company to watch: Viacom. It owns top-tier content, including Comedy Central and Paramount Pictures, yet its stock has badly trailed market indexes since it was uncoupled from CBS in January, 2006. Taking the day's dynamic to a logical extreme leads you to Viacom and Yahoo linking up. You'd get near-matchless Web distribution paired with content perfect for slicing and dicing online. You'd also get, I would bet, a corporate culture clash that would make your hair curl. But in moments like these, who knows? Of course, deal flurries often end badly. Just ask AOL Time Warner, whose stock took five years to begin its long climb back.
For Jon Fine's blog on media and advertising, go to www.businessweek.com/innovate/FineOnMedia
Unknown
The Merger Frenzy Explained
By Jon Fine
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_21/b4035034.htm
This is how the market views media right now: It loves video assets when they're in the hands of a well-regarded conglomerate like News Corp. or Walt Disney. It likes companies with data that people will pay serious money for, like financial-information providers Thomson and Reuters . It also likes players with a commanding presence in one media space and an Internet strategy that's considered smart, like cable giant Comcast and broadcaster CBS. It doesn't like companies owning content and distribution perceived to be commoditized, like newspapers and radio. And when Wall Street hates a company that is admired in other quarters for its holdings, that company becomes deal bait.
Understanding all of that helps explain May's flurry of big potential hookups. (In brief: News Corp.-Dow Jones, Microsoft merging all or some of its media operations with Yahoo!'s , Thomson-Reuters, the speculation that Gannett might or should pursue help-wanted giant Monster.com And understanding why, beyond simple earnings growth, the Street likes or dislikes a media company offers insights into the next deal or merger targets.
Considering the billions of dollars squandered in past deals that chased a mirage of synergy, it pains me to write the following sentence: The performances of News Corp. (stock up about 40% in the past two years) and Disney (up 34%) show that the markets like big, multi-platform combinations of content and distribution better than almost anything in media, especially when they're paired with a new-media story (hello, MySpace!) the Street prefers. That fact, and News Corp.'s $5 billion-plus in cash reserves, enabled Murdoch to offer a 66% premium for Dow Jones.
SO DID THIS: Dow Jones traffics in premium information-consider the nearly 1 million subscribers claimed by wsj.com, The Wall Street Journal's online arm, plus the Factiva database service. But Dow Jones' stock isn't being valued like that of data players Thomson and Reuters, both of which were up over 25% in the past two years even before merger talks were made public. Dow Jones, whose stock had gone sideways for years before Murdoch's bid, is being treated like a newspaper company. If Dow Jones had had a couple of years of Reuters and Thomson-esque gains-and, um, decent profits-it would have been much harder for Murdoch to offer such a premium. And while Reuters' and Thomson's gains are fine, they don't match those of another key data player. The McGraw-Hill Companies, which owns such data assets as Standard & Poor's and consumer ratings service J.D. Power & Associates (as well as BusinessWeek), has outperformed the stocks of even News Corp. and Disney in the past two years. Don't think this escaped the notice of Thomson's and Reuters' management.
Yahoo, another underperformer, has familiar ills-management missteps, coupled with the misfortune of facing direct comparisons with Google. That is making its stock lag behind where it should be. (As a dominant online player, Yahoo at least qualifies for being liked, if not to the lofty status of being loved, by Wall Street.) Hence the talks with Microsoft, the theory being that a combo or partnership would allow them to compete with Google. Similarly, those suggesting that Gannett hook up with Monster may remember how key Web acquisitions-comparison-shopping sites Shopzilla and uSwitch -helped newspaper-and-cable conglomerate E.W. Scripps outperform its newspaper brethren, at least until those properties came up short.
Based on the current lay of the land, there is one company to watch: Viacom. It owns top-tier content, including Comedy Central and Paramount Pictures, yet its stock has badly trailed market indexes since it was uncoupled from CBS in January, 2006. Taking the day's dynamic to a logical extreme leads you to Viacom and Yahoo linking up. You'd get near-matchless Web distribution paired with content perfect for slicing and dicing online. You'd also get, I would bet, a corporate culture clash that would make your hair curl. But in moments like these, who knows? Of course, deal flurries often end badly. Just ask AOL Time Warner, whose stock took five years to begin its long climb back.
For Jon Fine's blog on media and advertising, go to www.businessweek.com/innovate/FineOnMedia
Korean Publisher Leads Way for Magazines to Flourish in Digital Age
Korean Publisher Leads Way for Magazines to Flourish in Digital Age
The Key Is Delivering Content Through Diverse Channels Anytime, Anywhere
By Rance Crain http://adage.com/columns/article?article_id=116898
If you want a scary look at how magazine ad volume in the U.S. will hold up to new digital media, go to Korea.
JoongAng M&B's Patzzi.com is a portal that combines material from all seven of the Korean group's magazines, plus shopping tips and media and marketing trends.
New-media advertising grew 21% in Korea last year vs. 1.2% for magazine ads -- and new media outpaces magazine ad volume $840 million to $495 million.
Jeong-Woo Kil, president-CEO of JoongAng M&B, a privately owned publisher of seven magazines, told the International Federation of the Periodical Press conference in Beijing this month how his company was responding.
JoongAng M&B, which has interests in newspapers, broadcasting and book publishing, created JMNet to provide broader platforms of content, including not only material from its own media but also from Time Inc., Hearst, the Washington Post Group, The New York Times Co. and Nikkei in Japan.
Mr. Kil said delivering magazine content through diverse channels anytime, anywhere is the key to competing in the digital age. A digital-content archive, he said, is the "centerpiece" for traffic control of digitized content including text, images and videos. Cooperation doesn't take place only on the digital front; his magazines provide content for his flagship newspaper.
As in the U.S., Korean portals -- not content providers -- are so far the digital winners. Google, Yahoo and Korea's indigenous portals, such as Naver, outperform media portals. Naver notches 10 million visitors per day and takes 30% of online-content users in Korea.
But Korean publishers are fighting back. Mr. Kil cited publisher Design House, which is digitizing its own magazine content and cooperating with Korean magazine companies to build a comprehensive hub or digital library.
Design House also developed Simon Search to help users navigate digitized magazine content. I've long felt that the big search engines are vulnerable when it comes to specialized content, and Design House is making relevant material easier to find. You can take a look at the right-hand-side images, and when you find a piece from the digital archives, you can retrieve exactly the same page view of the magazine.
JoongAng M&B's portal site, Patzzi.com, combines material from all seven of the group's magazines, plus shopping tips and media and marketing trends.
Mr. Kil said creating and producing video clips for TV, Web TV and mobile phones is "now a must, and not an option." His editors not only select items for videos but also participate in production. He showed a video clip shot as his magazine reporters worked on print and video content at the same time.
For the company's Friday travel magazine, readers share their experiences on blogs and the magazine develops travel packages based on the blogs. This, Mr. Kil said, is "a constructive cycle of sharing content and services" to raise revenue.
Even though Mr. Kil appears to me to be way ahead of us, he told FIPP he had "to confess that I face more questions than answers."
He, like us, is concerned about developing profit models and how to harmonize selling content to diverse devices and portals without cannibalizing content.
The key, it seems to me, is following Mr. Kil's pattern: Combining in one portal as much diverse information you can get your hands on. That creates a whole new product and brings to it a whole new group of readers.
The problem is that both the advertising and media industries in the U.S. don't seem very good at breaking down silos we've constructed to protect individual properties. The Asian view of looking many years ahead for success is more compatible with the digital world's reward for combining material across myriad evolving platforms. We think vertically; they think horizontally.
One Japanese publisher said his company views the digital world in the same way as any other fleeting development: "No matter how time passes ... our expectation for love and beauty, care and tenderness, never loses."
The Key Is Delivering Content Through Diverse Channels Anytime, Anywhere
By Rance Crain http://adage.com/columns/article?article_id=116898
If you want a scary look at how magazine ad volume in the U.S. will hold up to new digital media, go to Korea.
JoongAng M&B's Patzzi.com is a portal that combines material from all seven of the Korean group's magazines, plus shopping tips and media and marketing trends.
New-media advertising grew 21% in Korea last year vs. 1.2% for magazine ads -- and new media outpaces magazine ad volume $840 million to $495 million.
Jeong-Woo Kil, president-CEO of JoongAng M&B, a privately owned publisher of seven magazines, told the International Federation of the Periodical Press conference in Beijing this month how his company was responding.
JoongAng M&B, which has interests in newspapers, broadcasting and book publishing, created JMNet to provide broader platforms of content, including not only material from its own media but also from Time Inc., Hearst, the Washington Post Group, The New York Times Co. and Nikkei in Japan.
Mr. Kil said delivering magazine content through diverse channels anytime, anywhere is the key to competing in the digital age. A digital-content archive, he said, is the "centerpiece" for traffic control of digitized content including text, images and videos. Cooperation doesn't take place only on the digital front; his magazines provide content for his flagship newspaper.
As in the U.S., Korean portals -- not content providers -- are so far the digital winners. Google, Yahoo and Korea's indigenous portals, such as Naver, outperform media portals. Naver notches 10 million visitors per day and takes 30% of online-content users in Korea.
But Korean publishers are fighting back. Mr. Kil cited publisher Design House, which is digitizing its own magazine content and cooperating with Korean magazine companies to build a comprehensive hub or digital library.
Design House also developed Simon Search to help users navigate digitized magazine content. I've long felt that the big search engines are vulnerable when it comes to specialized content, and Design House is making relevant material easier to find. You can take a look at the right-hand-side images, and when you find a piece from the digital archives, you can retrieve exactly the same page view of the magazine.
JoongAng M&B's portal site, Patzzi.com, combines material from all seven of the group's magazines, plus shopping tips and media and marketing trends.
Mr. Kil said creating and producing video clips for TV, Web TV and mobile phones is "now a must, and not an option." His editors not only select items for videos but also participate in production. He showed a video clip shot as his magazine reporters worked on print and video content at the same time.
For the company's Friday travel magazine, readers share their experiences on blogs and the magazine develops travel packages based on the blogs. This, Mr. Kil said, is "a constructive cycle of sharing content and services" to raise revenue.
Even though Mr. Kil appears to me to be way ahead of us, he told FIPP he had "to confess that I face more questions than answers."
He, like us, is concerned about developing profit models and how to harmonize selling content to diverse devices and portals without cannibalizing content.
The key, it seems to me, is following Mr. Kil's pattern: Combining in one portal as much diverse information you can get your hands on. That creates a whole new product and brings to it a whole new group of readers.
The problem is that both the advertising and media industries in the U.S. don't seem very good at breaking down silos we've constructed to protect individual properties. The Asian view of looking many years ahead for success is more compatible with the digital world's reward for combining material across myriad evolving platforms. We think vertically; they think horizontally.
One Japanese publisher said his company views the digital world in the same way as any other fleeting development: "No matter how time passes ... our expectation for love and beauty, care and tenderness, never loses."
Magazines feeling postal pinch
Magazines feeling postal pinch
High-circulation periodicals enjoy discounted rates, while smaller publications get hit with steep rate hikes.
By Teresa Stack and Jack Fowler,
TERESA STACK is president of the Nation.
JACK FOWLER is publisher of the National Review.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-stack28may28,1,5257005.story?ctrack=2&cset=true
THE COST OF getting magazines into your mailbox will shoot up July 15. How much? It depends.
Magazine publishers are facing a radical postage rate restructuring that favors those with large circulations and transfers costs to small- and mid-circulation publications.
Past increases to periodical postage were applied fairly equally across all publications. But this time, things are drastically different - and potentially damaging to the diversity of voices that our founders strove to foster when they created the national postal system.
Our respective magazines - the Nation and the National Review - sit on opposite ends of the political spectrum and disagree on nearly every issue. But we concur on this: These proposed postal rate hikes are deeply unfair.
It is not simply that we want to avoid a massive increase in our mailing costs, though that is a factor. More important to us is that we believe in a vibrant marketplace of ideas (where we each think our ideas will prevail). We are not afraid of intellectual competition; we welcome it.
For this latest round of rate hikes, the U.S. Postal Service proposed a 12% increase that would have affected magazines more or less equitably. Then, in an unprecedented move, that plan was rejected by the Postal Regulatory Commission, the body responsible for setting rates. Instead, it approved a complicated pricing system based on a proposal by Time Warner Inc., the largest magazine publisher in the country. Rather than base rates on total weight and total number of pieces mailed, the new, complex formula is full of incentives that take into account packaging, shape, distance traveled and more.
It adds up to this: discounts for some periodicals; as far as we can see, mostly the huge-circulation titles associated with firms like Time Warner. At smaller magazines like ours, rates will go up 15% to 25%. Research by McGraw-Hill Cos. concludes that the rate increases for some small-circulation publications could hit 30%.
Time Warner and the Postal Regulatory Commission say this scheme rewards efficiency. But the rates appear to have been adopted with little research into their effect on publishers and with no meaningful public input.
How will small magazines that operate on the economic margins - yet have an outsized effect on public discourse - accommodate $500,000 (in the case of the Nation and the National Review) in additional postage expense? Will we be forced to cut back on reporting, raise our prices, reduce our staffs or our number of pages to stay afloat? For some titles, the change may prove fatal. It certainly will make it more difficult to start a new magazine, and publishing will be less competitive as a result.
Time Warner and the postal commission seem to have little understanding of the crucial role the Postal Service has played in establishing an open marketplace of ideas. It has always been a central policy of the Postal Service to use its pricing mechanism to encourage smaller publications and competition.
Since the time of James Madison and the founders in the 1790s, it has been understood that low rates for small publications make it possible to have the rich, open and diverse media that a self-governing people require. This is what is at stake today. And because so much of the material online originates in print magazines, these postal rates could have the unintended effect of shrinking the digital marketplace of ideas as well.
We urge the relevant congressional committees to hold a hearing to investigate this coming crisis before it is too late. The last 215 years of postal policy were instrumental in the creation of the extraordinary free press we have in the U.S. today. We should not begin to overturn this magnificent tradition.
High-circulation periodicals enjoy discounted rates, while smaller publications get hit with steep rate hikes.
By Teresa Stack and Jack Fowler,
TERESA STACK is president of the Nation.
JACK FOWLER is publisher of the National Review.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-stack28may28,1,5257005.story?ctrack=2&cset=true
THE COST OF getting magazines into your mailbox will shoot up July 15. How much? It depends.
Magazine publishers are facing a radical postage rate restructuring that favors those with large circulations and transfers costs to small- and mid-circulation publications.
Past increases to periodical postage were applied fairly equally across all publications. But this time, things are drastically different - and potentially damaging to the diversity of voices that our founders strove to foster when they created the national postal system.
Our respective magazines - the Nation and the National Review - sit on opposite ends of the political spectrum and disagree on nearly every issue. But we concur on this: These proposed postal rate hikes are deeply unfair.
It is not simply that we want to avoid a massive increase in our mailing costs, though that is a factor. More important to us is that we believe in a vibrant marketplace of ideas (where we each think our ideas will prevail). We are not afraid of intellectual competition; we welcome it.
For this latest round of rate hikes, the U.S. Postal Service proposed a 12% increase that would have affected magazines more or less equitably. Then, in an unprecedented move, that plan was rejected by the Postal Regulatory Commission, the body responsible for setting rates. Instead, it approved a complicated pricing system based on a proposal by Time Warner Inc., the largest magazine publisher in the country. Rather than base rates on total weight and total number of pieces mailed, the new, complex formula is full of incentives that take into account packaging, shape, distance traveled and more.
It adds up to this: discounts for some periodicals; as far as we can see, mostly the huge-circulation titles associated with firms like Time Warner. At smaller magazines like ours, rates will go up 15% to 25%. Research by McGraw-Hill Cos. concludes that the rate increases for some small-circulation publications could hit 30%.
Time Warner and the Postal Regulatory Commission say this scheme rewards efficiency. But the rates appear to have been adopted with little research into their effect on publishers and with no meaningful public input.
How will small magazines that operate on the economic margins - yet have an outsized effect on public discourse - accommodate $500,000 (in the case of the Nation and the National Review) in additional postage expense? Will we be forced to cut back on reporting, raise our prices, reduce our staffs or our number of pages to stay afloat? For some titles, the change may prove fatal. It certainly will make it more difficult to start a new magazine, and publishing will be less competitive as a result.
Time Warner and the postal commission seem to have little understanding of the crucial role the Postal Service has played in establishing an open marketplace of ideas. It has always been a central policy of the Postal Service to use its pricing mechanism to encourage smaller publications and competition.
Since the time of James Madison and the founders in the 1790s, it has been understood that low rates for small publications make it possible to have the rich, open and diverse media that a self-governing people require. This is what is at stake today. And because so much of the material online originates in print magazines, these postal rates could have the unintended effect of shrinking the digital marketplace of ideas as well.
We urge the relevant congressional committees to hold a hearing to investigate this coming crisis before it is too late. The last 215 years of postal policy were instrumental in the creation of the extraordinary free press we have in the U.S. today. We should not begin to overturn this magnificent tradition.
Magazine companies start doing the work of advertising agencies
Magazine companies start doing the work of advertising agencies
By Louise Story
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/28/business/nast.1-61445.php
NEW YORK: Like executives at advertising agencies, Richard Beckman and his team talk to managers at consumer brand companies about the customers they want to reach. Four to six weeks later, they present a marketing and advertising plan.
But Beckman does not run an advertising agency. He is president of Condé Nast Media Group, a division of the magazine company that publishes titles like Vogue, Wired and The New Yorker. Over the past five years, Beckman has developed an agency-like business within Condé Nast's ad sales unit, generating new revenue by planning events for advertisers and creating advertisements that help sell more magazine pages.
Customarily, magazine companies have made money by selling ad space in their magazines or, more recently, on their Web sites. Now some of them have set up what amount to internal mini-agencies that work with clients to design campaigns for the media company's pages. Sometimes this work spills out into other forums, like radio and television ads.
Like Condé Nast, Meredith, which publishes such titles as Family Circle, More and Ladies' Home Journal, is now handling some creative work for its advertisers, and so is even Surface, a small, independent magazine dedicated to fashion and design. The trend poses a challenge to traditional agencies and has created some unusual partnerships (think of Vogue designing ads for Wal-Mart).
Condé Nast Media Group has been developing sweepstakes, television specials, radio ads, in-store events and, of course, magazine ads for companies like Dillard's, Kohl's, Grey Goose and Lexus. The unit, which relies on a panel of more than 100,000 consumers to evaluate advertising, generated about $200 million of revenue last year.
Beckman's group has drawn the most attention for Fashion Rocks, a concert and television special about music and the fashion industry. The event, now in its fourth year, ties in several large advertisers (like Chevrolet, Citigroup, L'Oréal and Cingular) and was featured last year in a custom magazine sent to Condé Nast subscribers.
This year, Condé Nast is planning another large event to sell to advertisers, Movies Rock. Produced by Beckman and some Hollywood heavyweights, it will feature music that has been influential in movies.
The idea behind both programs is to create major television events that showcase each advertiser. During the Fashion Rocks event last year, for example, Elton John performed a private show the night before that was streamed only onto Cingular Wireless cellphones. (AT&T, which now owns Cingular, has since started eliminating the Cingular brand name.)
Andrew McLean, president and chief client officer of Mediaedge:cia, the ad-buying agency that represented Cingular Wireless when it worked with Fashion Rocks, said that his client's work with Condé Nast had moved from "just buying bits of paper in a magazine to a much more multifaceted relationship." Mediaedge:cia is part of the WPP Group.
Beckman's unit also has access to relationships with celebrities who would not often work directly with advertisers. For example, Condé Nast arranged for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to appear in an ad for Lexus that also showcased the Waterkeeper Alliance, a water protection group that Kennedy heads.
"They have the cachet and the credibility for top-tier celebrities to want to partner with them," said Robin Steinberg, senior vice president and director of print investment and activation for MediaVest, an agency that buys media in the Publicis Groupe.
Condé Nast's internal agency evolved organically, but Meredith took a different approach. Last summer the company established Meredith 360, an advertising consulting group that operates as a business unit separate from the publishing group. Meredith has purchased three advertising agencies in the past year, allowing it to offer a broad spectrum of services.
"A lot of our different divisions do what a lot of different agencies do," said Nancy Weber, Meredith's chief marketing officer.
Meredith 360 charges for its services, while Condé Nast charges only for costs when it creates custom programs for advertisers, Beckman said. (Condé Nast also makes a profit from such events as Fashion Rocks.) The rate structure means that Condé Nast can often beat ad agencies on prices, Beckman said.
"We don't have to make money from our creative, because we make money from our media," he said.
Some advertisers think that's the way it should be. Condé Nast is currently working with CIT, the financial services company, on a series of interviews with people like the fashion designer Marc Ecko. The interviews are featured online, and Condé Nast will produce live events and magazine sections over the next several months for CIT.
Kelley Gipson, director of brand marketing and communications for CIT, said she did not expect to pay Condé Nast anything more than the cost of the advertising pages her company purchases.
"I look at it as part of the value chain for media," Gipson said. "We don't charge for it when we're working with our customers. We look at the opportunity to provide sort of intellectual capital as the glue in the relationship, so we challenge our media partners to think about it the same way."
By Louise Story
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/28/business/nast.1-61445.php
NEW YORK: Like executives at advertising agencies, Richard Beckman and his team talk to managers at consumer brand companies about the customers they want to reach. Four to six weeks later, they present a marketing and advertising plan.
But Beckman does not run an advertising agency. He is president of Condé Nast Media Group, a division of the magazine company that publishes titles like Vogue, Wired and The New Yorker. Over the past five years, Beckman has developed an agency-like business within Condé Nast's ad sales unit, generating new revenue by planning events for advertisers and creating advertisements that help sell more magazine pages.
Customarily, magazine companies have made money by selling ad space in their magazines or, more recently, on their Web sites. Now some of them have set up what amount to internal mini-agencies that work with clients to design campaigns for the media company's pages. Sometimes this work spills out into other forums, like radio and television ads.
Like Condé Nast, Meredith, which publishes such titles as Family Circle, More and Ladies' Home Journal, is now handling some creative work for its advertisers, and so is even Surface, a small, independent magazine dedicated to fashion and design. The trend poses a challenge to traditional agencies and has created some unusual partnerships (think of Vogue designing ads for Wal-Mart).
Condé Nast Media Group has been developing sweepstakes, television specials, radio ads, in-store events and, of course, magazine ads for companies like Dillard's, Kohl's, Grey Goose and Lexus. The unit, which relies on a panel of more than 100,000 consumers to evaluate advertising, generated about $200 million of revenue last year.
Beckman's group has drawn the most attention for Fashion Rocks, a concert and television special about music and the fashion industry. The event, now in its fourth year, ties in several large advertisers (like Chevrolet, Citigroup, L'Oréal and Cingular) and was featured last year in a custom magazine sent to Condé Nast subscribers.
This year, Condé Nast is planning another large event to sell to advertisers, Movies Rock. Produced by Beckman and some Hollywood heavyweights, it will feature music that has been influential in movies.
The idea behind both programs is to create major television events that showcase each advertiser. During the Fashion Rocks event last year, for example, Elton John performed a private show the night before that was streamed only onto Cingular Wireless cellphones. (AT&T, which now owns Cingular, has since started eliminating the Cingular brand name.)
Andrew McLean, president and chief client officer of Mediaedge:cia, the ad-buying agency that represented Cingular Wireless when it worked with Fashion Rocks, said that his client's work with Condé Nast had moved from "just buying bits of paper in a magazine to a much more multifaceted relationship." Mediaedge:cia is part of the WPP Group.
Beckman's unit also has access to relationships with celebrities who would not often work directly with advertisers. For example, Condé Nast arranged for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to appear in an ad for Lexus that also showcased the Waterkeeper Alliance, a water protection group that Kennedy heads.
"They have the cachet and the credibility for top-tier celebrities to want to partner with them," said Robin Steinberg, senior vice president and director of print investment and activation for MediaVest, an agency that buys media in the Publicis Groupe.
Condé Nast's internal agency evolved organically, but Meredith took a different approach. Last summer the company established Meredith 360, an advertising consulting group that operates as a business unit separate from the publishing group. Meredith has purchased three advertising agencies in the past year, allowing it to offer a broad spectrum of services.
"A lot of our different divisions do what a lot of different agencies do," said Nancy Weber, Meredith's chief marketing officer.
Meredith 360 charges for its services, while Condé Nast charges only for costs when it creates custom programs for advertisers, Beckman said. (Condé Nast also makes a profit from such events as Fashion Rocks.) The rate structure means that Condé Nast can often beat ad agencies on prices, Beckman said.
"We don't have to make money from our creative, because we make money from our media," he said.
Some advertisers think that's the way it should be. Condé Nast is currently working with CIT, the financial services company, on a series of interviews with people like the fashion designer Marc Ecko. The interviews are featured online, and Condé Nast will produce live events and magazine sections over the next several months for CIT.
Kelley Gipson, director of brand marketing and communications for CIT, said she did not expect to pay Condé Nast anything more than the cost of the advertising pages her company purchases.
"I look at it as part of the value chain for media," Gipson said. "We don't charge for it when we're working with our customers. We look at the opportunity to provide sort of intellectual capital as the glue in the relationship, so we challenge our media partners to think about it the same way."
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
The Case for Print Media Advertising in the Internet Age
The Case for Print Media Advertising in the Internet Age
Document #PICRM-2006-02
Research Area:
http://print.rit.edu/research/?page=item&id=102
Abstract: Executive Summary
The current landscape of audience fragmentation, Internet advertising, and required accountability for advertising expenditures is exerting great pressure on the ability of main-stream, ad-supported media to survive. How can established media such as printed magazines, newspapers, and printed inserts survive? We start our examination of the topic by reviewing the media usage patterns of U.S. adults and advertising expenditure data from 2004. The average American adult over the age of 18 consumed a total of 9 hours, 35 minutes of media per day (Lindsay, 2006): 44.5% of media time was spent with TV; 27.8% with radio; 5% each with Internet, newspaper and recorded music; and 6% with magazines and books combined.
The amount of advertising dollars spent on newspapers, consumer magazines, and business papers ads (including business magazines) accounts for approximately 40% of all media advertising expenditures in 2004 (Veronis Suhler Stevenson, 2004). Broadcast and cable TV and radio represent an additional 44% of the media advertising dollars spent. Although the Internet advertising category (including search and display advertising) was significantly smaller, it grew at a faster rate than all other media.
The desire for advertising accountability starts with this question: Does advertising affect consumer buying behavior? The impact of advertising has been measured on a variety of outcome measures such as aggregate sales for a brand, individual brand choice behavior, and the intermediate effects of awareness, beliefs and attitudes towards the advertised brand. The relatively few research studies that have examined the impact of advertising in different media show that print advertising performs well compared with other media. For example:
In a study of the top 100 advertisers, higher correlations were found between a firm's sales and the amount of print advertising it bought vs. sales and the amount it spent on broadcast advertising.
Magazine advertising was more effective than network TV advertising for promoting SUV brands over a 10-year period.
People who were exposed to printed newspaper advertising had a higher recognition of ad content than those who received an online version of the same advertising message.
For a food franchiser, the best sales resulted from advertising media spent concurrently on primary direct mail and national TV advertising.
In a Doubleclick study, the most influential sources of information affecting purchase decisions, overall, were word-of-mouth and salesperson sources. For individual product categories, printed advertising was the most influential source of information for consumers who purchased personal care / home care products, and the second most influential source for those purchasing consumer electronics and home improvement products.
In a study of newspaper readers, 78% reported that they used newspaper inserts to plan shopping, and 76% said that inserts helped them save money.
Dimensional mail yielded a 5.4% lead generation rate (vs. email at 3.27%), and co-op shared mail produced a 5.47% direct order rate vs. 4.16% for Internet banner ads.
While these research studies show the effectiveness of printed advertising, more robust methodologies must be developed in this new era of accountability. Two new audience response metrics are discussed that may deliver on this promise: single source databases and experimental designs. Single source databases such as the Apollo Project provide precise data to advertisers about the impact of exposure to a variety of advertising media on a participant's response of buying certain products and brands. An example of an experimental design methodology is presented in the book "What Sticks" by Briggs and Stuart (2006). The process begins with the specification of communication objectives at the outset of a campaign to define the use of appropriate metrics. The media mix optimization can be assessed when the outcome data (e.g., change in awareness) are gauged against the cost per response (CPR) for each ad medium. The Briggs and Stuart method may be a good model for all print media owners, publishers, and print services providers who need to prove, with every campaign, that print advertising delivers an acceptable return on the advertiser's investment.
Document #PICRM-2006-02
Research Area:
http://print.rit.edu/research/?page=item&id=102
Abstract: Executive Summary
The current landscape of audience fragmentation, Internet advertising, and required accountability for advertising expenditures is exerting great pressure on the ability of main-stream, ad-supported media to survive. How can established media such as printed magazines, newspapers, and printed inserts survive? We start our examination of the topic by reviewing the media usage patterns of U.S. adults and advertising expenditure data from 2004. The average American adult over the age of 18 consumed a total of 9 hours, 35 minutes of media per day (Lindsay, 2006): 44.5% of media time was spent with TV; 27.8% with radio; 5% each with Internet, newspaper and recorded music; and 6% with magazines and books combined.
The amount of advertising dollars spent on newspapers, consumer magazines, and business papers ads (including business magazines) accounts for approximately 40% of all media advertising expenditures in 2004 (Veronis Suhler Stevenson, 2004). Broadcast and cable TV and radio represent an additional 44% of the media advertising dollars spent. Although the Internet advertising category (including search and display advertising) was significantly smaller, it grew at a faster rate than all other media.
The desire for advertising accountability starts with this question: Does advertising affect consumer buying behavior? The impact of advertising has been measured on a variety of outcome measures such as aggregate sales for a brand, individual brand choice behavior, and the intermediate effects of awareness, beliefs and attitudes towards the advertised brand. The relatively few research studies that have examined the impact of advertising in different media show that print advertising performs well compared with other media. For example:
In a study of the top 100 advertisers, higher correlations were found between a firm's sales and the amount of print advertising it bought vs. sales and the amount it spent on broadcast advertising.
Magazine advertising was more effective than network TV advertising for promoting SUV brands over a 10-year period.
People who were exposed to printed newspaper advertising had a higher recognition of ad content than those who received an online version of the same advertising message.
For a food franchiser, the best sales resulted from advertising media spent concurrently on primary direct mail and national TV advertising.
In a Doubleclick study, the most influential sources of information affecting purchase decisions, overall, were word-of-mouth and salesperson sources. For individual product categories, printed advertising was the most influential source of information for consumers who purchased personal care / home care products, and the second most influential source for those purchasing consumer electronics and home improvement products.
In a study of newspaper readers, 78% reported that they used newspaper inserts to plan shopping, and 76% said that inserts helped them save money.
Dimensional mail yielded a 5.4% lead generation rate (vs. email at 3.27%), and co-op shared mail produced a 5.47% direct order rate vs. 4.16% for Internet banner ads.
While these research studies show the effectiveness of printed advertising, more robust methodologies must be developed in this new era of accountability. Two new audience response metrics are discussed that may deliver on this promise: single source databases and experimental designs. Single source databases such as the Apollo Project provide precise data to advertisers about the impact of exposure to a variety of advertising media on a participant's response of buying certain products and brands. An example of an experimental design methodology is presented in the book "What Sticks" by Briggs and Stuart (2006). The process begins with the specification of communication objectives at the outset of a campaign to define the use of appropriate metrics. The media mix optimization can be assessed when the outcome data (e.g., change in awareness) are gauged against the cost per response (CPR) for each ad medium. The Briggs and Stuart method may be a good model for all print media owners, publishers, and print services providers who need to prove, with every campaign, that print advertising delivers an acceptable return on the advertiser's investment.
Mag Sag: Readership Growing Older
"The great thing about getting older is that you don't lose all the other ages you've been."
Unknown
Mag Sag: Readership Growing Older
by Erik Sass
http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.san&s=60955&Nid=30756&p=93409
THE MEDIAN AGE OF MAGAZINE readers continued to creep upward in the last five years, according to annual surveys from Mediamark Research Inc. On average, a collection of more than 90 popular magazines in a variety of categories saw the median age of their readers increase two years, from 39.8 to 41.8, between spring 2002 and 2007.
Catering to an ad industry that is often focused on youth, magazine publishers might counter that two years isn't a big deal. What's more, median figures aren't "averages" in the traditional sense, but simply the midpoint of a group of data points. However, the two-year figure did outpace the population at large, where the median age increased 1.3 years from 43.4 to 44.7.
And while the trend isn't universal, it does affect many of the leading titles when it comes to targeting certain ad sectors. It also accounts for the baby-boomer population, especially the younger end, heading into their mid- to-late 40s.
MRI presents median-age data broken down by gender, as well as overall totals, allowing a more meaningful analysis of magazines with gender-specific appeal. For example, the median age of Consumer Reports' male audience--representing about 70% of its 4.3 million readers--rose three years from 46.1 in spring 2003 to 49.1 in spring 2007. Meanwhile, the median age of Men's Health's male audience rose 2.2 from 2002-2007, from 35.8 to 38, as Men's Journal rose 5.7 years from 33.8 to 39.5. Golf Digest's median male age rose 4.3 years to 48.5, as Esquire's jumped five years to 43.
These magazines are indicative of a broader trend that also saw the median age of male readership rise one to two years at Rolling Stone, Popular Mechanics, Popular Science, Outside, Outdoor Life, and Men's Fitness. Auto enthusiast titles, which generally target men, also experienced gains--with Automobile jumping 4.1 years, Car and Driver 3.3 years, Hot Rod 2.1 years, Motor Trend 3.8 years, and Road & Track 3.4 years.
Titles on the other side of the gender divide have also experienced an upward trend, including fashion and lifestyle books. From spring 2002 to spring 2007, the median age of female readers increased 2.1 years at Allure (to 30), three years at Bride's (to 32.9), 1.8 years at Glamour (to 33.4), three years at Harper's Bazaar (to 41.3), 2.4 years at Redbook (to 45.4), 4.3 years at Self (to 38.2), and 2.1 years at Woman's Day (to 49.8).
Shelter and lifestyle titles also rose by varying degrees. The median age of female readers increased 3.4 years at Better Homes & Gardens (to 48.8), 2.9 years at Country Living (to 49.8), 3.8 years at Family Circle (to 52), 2.8 years at Good Housekeeping (to 50.1), 3.5 years at House & Garden (to 51.8), five years at Ladies' Home Journal (to 53.2), and five years at Martha Stewart Living (to 46.6).
General interest titles, including newsweeklies, also experienced overall median age increases from 2002-2007. Here, Time rose two years to 45.8, U.S. News & World Report rose 4.4 years to 50.3, and Vanity Fair jumped 5 years to 41.7. Smithsonian is up 3.6 years to 54. The median age rose 3.7 years at Barron's, to 49.5, and 2.8 years at BusinessWeek, to 46.4.
Unknown
Mag Sag: Readership Growing Older
by Erik Sass
http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.san&s=60955&Nid=30756&p=93409
THE MEDIAN AGE OF MAGAZINE readers continued to creep upward in the last five years, according to annual surveys from Mediamark Research Inc. On average, a collection of more than 90 popular magazines in a variety of categories saw the median age of their readers increase two years, from 39.8 to 41.8, between spring 2002 and 2007.
Catering to an ad industry that is often focused on youth, magazine publishers might counter that two years isn't a big deal. What's more, median figures aren't "averages" in the traditional sense, but simply the midpoint of a group of data points. However, the two-year figure did outpace the population at large, where the median age increased 1.3 years from 43.4 to 44.7.
And while the trend isn't universal, it does affect many of the leading titles when it comes to targeting certain ad sectors. It also accounts for the baby-boomer population, especially the younger end, heading into their mid- to-late 40s.
MRI presents median-age data broken down by gender, as well as overall totals, allowing a more meaningful analysis of magazines with gender-specific appeal. For example, the median age of Consumer Reports' male audience--representing about 70% of its 4.3 million readers--rose three years from 46.1 in spring 2003 to 49.1 in spring 2007. Meanwhile, the median age of Men's Health's male audience rose 2.2 from 2002-2007, from 35.8 to 38, as Men's Journal rose 5.7 years from 33.8 to 39.5. Golf Digest's median male age rose 4.3 years to 48.5, as Esquire's jumped five years to 43.
These magazines are indicative of a broader trend that also saw the median age of male readership rise one to two years at Rolling Stone, Popular Mechanics, Popular Science, Outside, Outdoor Life, and Men's Fitness. Auto enthusiast titles, which generally target men, also experienced gains--with Automobile jumping 4.1 years, Car and Driver 3.3 years, Hot Rod 2.1 years, Motor Trend 3.8 years, and Road & Track 3.4 years.
Titles on the other side of the gender divide have also experienced an upward trend, including fashion and lifestyle books. From spring 2002 to spring 2007, the median age of female readers increased 2.1 years at Allure (to 30), three years at Bride's (to 32.9), 1.8 years at Glamour (to 33.4), three years at Harper's Bazaar (to 41.3), 2.4 years at Redbook (to 45.4), 4.3 years at Self (to 38.2), and 2.1 years at Woman's Day (to 49.8).
Shelter and lifestyle titles also rose by varying degrees. The median age of female readers increased 3.4 years at Better Homes & Gardens (to 48.8), 2.9 years at Country Living (to 49.8), 3.8 years at Family Circle (to 52), 2.8 years at Good Housekeeping (to 50.1), 3.5 years at House & Garden (to 51.8), five years at Ladies' Home Journal (to 53.2), and five years at Martha Stewart Living (to 46.6).
General interest titles, including newsweeklies, also experienced overall median age increases from 2002-2007. Here, Time rose two years to 45.8, U.S. News & World Report rose 4.4 years to 50.3, and Vanity Fair jumped 5 years to 41.7. Smithsonian is up 3.6 years to 54. The median age rose 3.7 years at Barron's, to 49.5, and 2.8 years at BusinessWeek, to 46.4.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)