Never thought about it like that

Sheesh - I feel like a groupie having left so many comments over at my 2 cents last Friday...honest David - I am NOT a stalker :). I've been woefully negligent in leaving this corner and adding comments. Is my slip showing? :)

Here's the deal - David's post (and link to Gene DeWitt's The Media Age blog) about the writer's strike possible impact on advertising was a new idea for me. Here's what he says:

"In his new blog The Media Age, media guru Gene DeWitt says newspapers and radio -- the long-suffering "other" mass media -- should be getting a closer look by advertisers who are faced with higher ad prices, fewer ad positions available and greater difficulty in reaching a broad spectrum of customers with TV sales messages."

First off I love the word media - love it! Mass media, targeted media, multi-media, new media, old media, traditional media, and cutting edge media - it all makes me tingle. I believe it is the rare word that cannot be over used. Second, the post and remarks sparked my brain - always a good thing. And thirdly, it got me to comment - feedback is a another vital part of living this new age and time. I'd never considered that as TV shows lose viewers, advertisers lose value. The same thing happens with newspapers. We lose readers and it impacts the advertiser. I'm not sure why the connection never happened before.

Third, we can agree ads have to go somewhere. They won't disappear. If everybody's gonna eat, somebody's gotta sell. Current belief says they are migrating to the medium you are currently reading. What goes up - must come down. What happens when page view numbers (or however you measure) go down? Do advertisers move to phones? podcasts? video? all of the above? I know advertising is changing. How fast and to what degree is yet to be determined. A lot depends on the success of those who do the advertising. Right now, combining print and online makes sense.

So thanks David and Gene

Here's a newsletter from MarketingProfs that should land in your inbox - get it now for a bit of inspiration!

Newspapers and Innovation

I love it when David Reich tosses in his 2 cents on newspapers and innovation - then takes a moment to send email and let me know he posted. Try as I might to keep up with newsreaders and rss feeds, they overwhelm me. Email communication is current. It gets my attention. Or maybe its most familiar. Some say email is already dead. We are living in an disastrously short life cycles if thats the case.

David references an article in Advertising Age by Marc Brownstein. Marc jumps on the "not quite dead yet" ship by writing that newspaper owners are entrepreneurial. They are not lacking in the desire to innovate. And they still make a little dough to boot. He admits newspapers don't have the same number of advertisers or readers as in the past. He suggests that some of each group have migrated to online. He argues that editorial staffs continue to write good - if not excellent - stories and that newspapers are willing to try new things.

Full disclosure which bears repeating - I work for a newspaper but everything I blog about them is my own thoughts and feelings. Here are a few innovative things we are doing where I work - blogs from staff and editors (no marketing blog yet but someday...), contests, community events and promotions, live AP updates, video blogs, niche publications, online comics and games, discussion boards, live coverage of daily news meetings, email notifications and marketing - plus we still deliver it to your door, if you choose. The toughest part is we do it with fewer and fewer people. Like David says, "eyeballs are eyeballs" and we're all trying to figure out where they are looking, what they're looking for and how to get them to pause for a moment.

Later -

Added 11.14 - Mark Goren's 3 part QAD at Transmission Marketing on the Canadian Newspaper Association campaign

Blogs and New Advertising

What do they say about the road to hell? It's paved with good intentions? My intention was to post sooner - a briefer hiatus, so to speak - and with no excuses - here goes.

This article* by Adrienne Fawcett from MediaPost - Marketing Daily caught my eye the other day. Call me a sucker for a good headline. Someday I'll be able to write one :)

8 Of 10 Americans Know About Blogs; Half Visit Them Regularly

Eight in ten is a whole pile of people - just like the picture over there. And 50% visit regularly - that's pretty amazing. Admittedly, its rare that I talk with anybody who doesn't know what a blog IS but it seems we are still in the early phase of what a blog can DO. We discover as we go - the stream ripples and rolls. And, of course, there are as many "whys" to blog as there are people. Here are excerpts from her article and my reactions:

"The high awareness is surprising given that blogging is an emerging media outlet," says Tom Mularz, senior vice president at Synovate eNation, which conducted the online survey of 1,000 U.S. adults. "The segmentation on awareness and usage, and on people having their own blogs, is driven by age, with obviously younger people more active in blogging." Nearly 90% of 25- to-34-year-olds know what a blog is, compared to 64.5% of those age 65-plus. Similarly, 78.4% of 18- to-24-year-olds report they have visited a blog, compared to just 44.7% of older Americans.

Not sure I agree its "obviously" younger people "active" in blogging - although I'm closer to 65 than to 34 so everybody's younger. I'm just being a little picky with words today. What IS obvious would be blogs are transforming communication and conversation. Which is what good advertising and marketing should be about.

Almost half of the respondents said they visit blogs to be entertained. What types of entertainment have they given up now that they are reading and writing blogs? Any emerging media poses a threat to traditional media, but at present, 87% of the people who read blogs said they don't spend less time with other media now that they're reading blogs. Of the 13.3% who do say they have ditched old media habits, newspapers, television and magazines have taken the biggest hits.

This makes confusing sense. I'm a little surprised at the almost 90% of blog readers spending the same amount of time with other media? Are people sleeping less? There are still 24 hours every day - right? And the low 15% who've ditched traditional media. Much of what we in the newspaper business tend to hear is just the opposite - high percentages ditching at a more rapid rate. This is today's good news - tomorrow might be different. Will reading blogs become a habit? A ritual for future readers?

Ad spending on blogs is still in its infancy....a recent study by Nielsen BuzzMetrics and Nielsen's BASES research division found that new products with higher ad spending on traditional media tend to generate greater buzz in the blogosphere. But the eNation study, conducted in late July, shows there is real potential for ads on blogs. Among people who have visited a blog (485), 43.2% said they have noticed ads on blogs, and three out of 10 people in this group said they have clicked on ads while visiting a blog. Among the youngest consumers, a whopping 61.2% of 18- to 24-year-olds said they have noticed ads on blogs.

My initial impression is that ad delivery online must take a different form quickly. What we see today on blogs (and websites) seems to be not so cleverly disguised subliminal messaging. Does it really sell anything OR is the network (community) we associate with more the influence than the ad? I'm leaning toward hearing about a product or service from someone I trust being the "close" of a sale. Here seems to be the real potential and not a banner ad. I believe blogs - and those who blog - help in this step toward a making a decision.

Some advertisers are trying to slip brand names in through the blogosphere's back door by recruiting bloggers to write favorably about their brands. Recently, a rep for Marvin Windows and Doors sent a flattering (exact replica) e-mail to several house-bloggers (including this reporter at The Fixer Upper House) to "better understand how Marvin can better interact and inform you as a home remodeler and blogger." She offered to provide "how to" tips and recommendations along with updates on company innovations and products. The company's "end, end goal," the rep said in a follow-up note, is to expand "Marvin's footprint as an expert in windows and doors." She teased at the potential for future promotions and advertising, but added, "That's really several months away."

Some organizations see the potential in building the conversation. Note how the representative says future promotions and advertising are several months away. We are still trying to figure this whole thing out. The future is huge.

So who's blogging? Eight percent of Americans have their own blog. "That's high, given that blogging was unheard of a few years ago," says eNation's Mularz. It's also surprising that more women than men are bloggers (given that men tend to dominate the computer/tech fields). Nearly 14% of men versus 20% of women have blogs, eNation reports.

To contact Adrienne - go to her blog. She's a friendly sort and responded promptly to my email.

I remain conflicted with online advertising. There has GOT to be a better way.

* need registration to view - its free. Just depends on how many registrations you want to juggle. Which brings up a whole other topic - for a later post.

Some Good News for Papers

Last night, I read the first chapter of Joan Didion's The Year of Magical Thinking. It's brief chapter but, my goodness, it is powerful. Reviews describe it as her memoir. The story weaves around the unexpected death of her husband at the dinner table one December evening. The main thrust of the initial chapter is how ordinary is our day to day living.

I can't get it out of my mind. My life didn't change as dramatically as Ms. Didion's due to the day of this post - my outlook was definitely jolted. In the end, an altered view is good for me - and you, too.

Today began the same as every other day - a morning walk at sunrise. The only rule my walking partner and I have? We don't talk about the job*. Both of us work for our local newspaper. He's been in advertising since dirt was discovered. I'm in circulation and marketing for about half as long. But the topic is something we have in common. Invariably, the conversation will turn to it. We've spent portions of our three miles talking about past, present and future of newspapering. It gets in your blood. Too often we hear other's opinions that newspapers are dying a slow and painful death. Some kind exercise in building self esteem, eh? The focus is on the death of print. As popular as the online portion of the paper has become, print still pays the bills.

Today when I saw this MediaPost research brief, I was delighted.

Four Out of Five Newspaper Website Readers Also Read the Printed Edition

...81% of newspaper website users also read the printed newspaper in the last 7 days. Crossover users (those who used both print and online newspapers in the past 7 days) have deep affinity with both their printed newspaper and their newspaper website, and 83% say "I love both my printed newspaper and visiting my newspapers website."...

Note the word love. Thats an emotion we all want to hear about our products :)

Crossover (those that read both) users visit their newspaper website to:

• Access breaking news (96%)
• Find articles seen previously (85%)
• Find things to do/places to go (72%)

I was a little (a lot) surprised at the nearly 100% who access breaking news - doesn't anybody work anymore?!?! :) - Fact is the highest traffic on our site is 9AM to 5PM. I'd reckon you got to find something interesting during your breaks :)

The study found that newspaper website-only users are 55% female, while crossover users are only 48% female. The main reasons newspaper website-only users cited for using newspaper websites include:

• Accessing local news (84%)
• Entertainment information (74%)
• Food or restaurant information (58%)

Newspaper website-only users are web-savvy group as 52% write or read blogs and 46% have joined a web community.

Yes to local, local, local...and to places where we spend greenbacks! Advertising and marketing sells!

Contrary to some perceptions, the web has not hurt overall newspaper consumption, as 87% of crossover users report that their time spent with newspaper media has increased or remained the same versus only 12% who say time spent has decreased.

Time crunch? What time crunch? We still have 24 hours and it still depends on how you slice it.

The last time you read or looked into any printed copy of the (Newspaper Name):

• Read last 7 days: 81%
• Read 8-30 days ago: 9%
• Read longer than 30 days ago: 7%
• Never Read: 3%

This was a study commissioned by Newspaper National Network so they got to ask the questions. Its not a huge sample. (here's a link to the download for the study)

Still it offers encouragement and affirmation of the value in printed matters.

And here are a couple kick butt newspaper media sites I've recently frequented:

Media Blog - Howard lists 8 reasons to be hopeful if you work for a newspaper. Check them out - you'd be surprised!

The Newspaper Business - Mark has a great post on a futuristic vending machine. And other fine stuff - stuff being a technical newspaper word :)


*The actual rule is we can talk about 3 things - retirement, vacation and women - we ARE guys after all :)

Voyeurgasm

I snatched the word voyeurgasm - we like to watch - from a fascinating iMedia Connections article by Michael Tchong. Michael is a trend analyst with an ubercool site and blog. The article is well written, challenging and worth the time spent reading it. He presented me an "AHA" moment.

He focuses on 5 trends to watch - or else! They are voyeurgasm, digital lifestyle, time compression, unwired and generation X-tasy. His riff on digital lifestyle is what keeps rattling around my brain.

Once something is called a lifestyle it is beyond a trend. Its reality, Its fact. Its fascinating to be a part of it. Tchong's lens is well polished and very focused in the lifestyle.

"The growing proliferation of consumer electronics -- the average U.S. household now owns an average of 26 consumer electronics devices according to the Consumer Electronics Association -- is the whirlwind force that's fueling a whole new consumer culture, one that's changing the rules of the marketing game."

No fooling! The learning curve for devices is pretty steep when 8 year olds are climbing into a chair to using the computer. You've got iPhones, Blackberrys, Treos and phones that record video. Not to mention those goofy things that blink on your ear :) I was at a friends 60th birthday party in January. Rather than playing Hangman on the table cloth (it was an Italian joint), his 8 and 11 year old grand daughters were tapping into a little game - beats the heck out of listening to old people talk about Grandpa :).

Social networking is evolving the conventions of conversation, communication and culture. One might argue that conversation and communication is an output of culture. And what better defines our culture than our media? How much is our media consumption changing?

"The latest media consumption data...NBC's average prime-time audience of 4.8 million people ending June 2 was the smallest since at least 1991, reports Nielsen Media Research. You'd have to go back to the days of black-and-white TV to find a smaller figure. Meanwhile, "CBS Evening News" reached only 5.5 million people that week, its smallest audience since 1987...Meanwhile, newspaper readership is falling all over the world. Even in the newspaper-crazy U.K., the overall yearly decline for dailies is almost 4 percent. Asked why people do not read newspapers, more than half of survey respondents to a Harris poll conducted in six countries (including the U.S., U.K., France, Italy, Spain and Germany) pointed to lack of time (in Spain the figure was lowest, at 44 percent)".

No time to read? This is a refrain that became a resounding chorus in the last 10 years. Its something we all battle. Its the number one reason given for not taking the newspaper. And for stopping delivery. Don't we still have 24 hours? What happened to time? Here is where the author makes his most valuable point to this marketer -

"A new Media-Screen report sheds light on this trend. Broadband users, the heaviest consumers of media, spend an hour and 40 minutes -- 48 percent of their spare time -- online on a given weekday."

Seems pretty darn obvious. What we're doing is trading online time for reading and/or TV time. Its not so different than trading today (work) for tomorrow (play). I'd subconsciously made this connection but had never seen it written so plainly. Further evidence that more eyes makes better focus. And another reason I will never be christened a trend analyst :)

Read the article to satisfy your curiosity about the other 4 trends.

Michael Tchong's ubercool site
iMedia article

Mainstream News vs Blogstream Views

We keep talking about it and at some point, professional journalists will "get it". Will bloggers take the place of journalists? Nope - at least I hope not. Will journalists learn that readers are the true reason to write and just may have something to add? Absolutely. I think they instinctively know it now. But never before has the potential been imagined. If newspaper websites develop robust blog conversations and offer the opportunity for feedback - journalists will share and learn. Look back at your own learning curve since starting to blog. I know mines pretty darn steep. Conversation makes all of us better citizens. And bottom line - thats the point of a good newspaper.

David Reich has a great post titled Doing it for Money. Thats merely the title because the real conversation starts on the topic of citizen journalists vs. mainstream media. While not specifically focused on newspapers, he sites statistics from an article in Advertising Age. He plucks this -

A We Media/Zogby Interactive poll showed 72 percent of adults are dissatisfied with the quality of journalism in America, and 55 percent say bloggers are important to the future of journalism. Citizen journalism will play a significant role in how we get our news in the future, say 74 percent.

Take a moment to follow Cam Beck's brutally honest and transparent comments. This is the what I really dig about sharing via a blog. Its a "difficult to describe" intangible - sharing that leads to learning about one another. Its at least part of what keeps me posting to this place.

Recently, a sports writer friend of mine said "Blogging just takes up more of my time". At first, I scoffed. Then I read the story he was working on. I can only imagine the time involved in chasing down rumor, getting quotes, making phone calls, waiting for return calls - all on deadline - for a morning story. But you know what? It was factual and verifiable. It was the well researched. It involved history of relationship with the major characters in the story. You don't get that from a blogger.

Imagine if there was a mechanism in place to collaborate? I'd take that in a New York minute :)

The Prize in the Paper

Wiley Miller's Non Sequitur is one of my favorite cartoons. The Friday May 11, 2007 episode jumped out at me. Here's the link for a better view.

Happy Friday!

Newspapersaurous

David Reich has an excellent analysis of a WSJ Op/Ed piece by Walter Hussman, publisher for the Arkansas Democrat-Express, on how to sink a newspaper. David calls his blog my 2 cents but today I feel like its worth way more than 2 cents! I'd say he gives a dime's worth :) The reason? Its about the comments and the conversation that follows the post. Call it a cheap thrill but anytime blog creators and readers talk about newspapers its a happy day in the neighborhood. It means they care about the community here and where they live. Its easy NOT to read a newspaper - easier still not to pay attention to issues affecting the local world. You know, the one you pay taxes to and expect the water to flow when you flush the toilet. I'm being a little harsh but lets face it - culturally we've slipped a notch or two when citizens don't find $.50 worth of value in their local fish wrap. That has got to be one bad newspaper! But thats the way it is...its not my point, however.

To paraphrase the post, Hussman makes the case that some newspapers blew the cannonball through the hull of the ship by giving away their news on line - and they are paying for it now. Hussman says its a mistake to give away then news that publishers spend hard earned money on. His model suggests a mix of free and paid. I think thats the way to go, too.

Giving it away was very popular as the WWW expanded - or is that exploded?!?! - about 15 years ago. As the Yahoos, MSNs, and Googles developed ways to get the news out cheaper, faster, 24/7/365 - newspapers continued to print everyday AND tried to get news online. In the not too distant past high speed connections to the home became available. Then we got cellphones - or is that vice versa? Then we get Blackberries or Treos or iPods...all of which can send/receive "news" messages. Now this thing called Web 2.0 whereby even a dinosaur (my wife's term) like me can create - and publish - a blog. This is a very brief history of publishing through my lens. And the "publish for free" battle is still being fought .

Its about the worthy and worthwhile comments David's readers make - Matt Dickman, Techno//Marketer Supreme, (dig his Monday post on the term "blog" :) weighs in by asking why would anybody pay for news when its free? Good question - I don't actually pay for free news either - unless you count time as money (which my Boss does). But my time is of less value than my money. Matt pays for WSJ news online. Its a value to him. And he reads his local news online. Check this post he published after reading a story in the NYT. Now there's a good use of bloggers. I also think, secretly, that Matt reads a printed newspaper more often than he admits ;). he certainly grasps the concept of relevance.

Its about the comments - Ann Handley at MarketingProfs Daily Fix weighs in on the conversation with a passion statement for the NYT and web 2.0. MarketingProfs is not a newspaper but newspapers might think about stealing a page from their business model. Post a lot of stuff - most of it good - but invite the reader to pay for the real good stuff. Stuff being a technical term I picked up in grad school :)

Comments? you want comments? CK talks about the economy of sharing in todays publishing world. And she brings up the dough in newspapers comes from advertising. Isn't that where the dough online comes from - hmmmm? There seems to be a pattern developing here. You need people to read so advertisers can sell. The kicker is newspapers have figured out a way to measure those eyeballs - or so most advertisers believe - and online hasn't quite got there...its real close. But really, really, really - I'm not kidding - check out CK's post here. NOW! GO! CK's blog is all about interaction, relevance and conversation!

Mark Goren, Transmission Marketing publisher, newspaper fan and now I find out baseball free agent, adds to the dialogue with a great understanding of advertising revenues - print and online. More to come from Mark as we exchange more information.

David's post is a classic example of the feedback and encouragement that surrounds blog communities. That it focuses on newspapers - my livelihood - makes it a bonus. Newspapers in one form will be with us for a while. My belief is they will remain ink on paper for some time to come. There is no denying pixels on a screen add value to some readers. Its finding the balance for readers, advertisers and publishers. The dinosaur meets the computer.

Update: Pardon the Disruption adds to the conversation here.

The Fox Street Journal

David over at my 2 cents got me thinking about newspapering again today - as if I need a reason. He shares good news about online readership, particularly with the elusive 18-24 and 25-34 year old age groups. I love good news! Believe me, the newspaper business doesn't celebrate enough of it.

In addition, a brief that caught my eye this morning. Drinking coffee and eating a banana...sorry no bear claws today :)...I noted somebody wants to plunk down $5 billion for Dow Jones, the publishing company for the Wall Street Journal. I'm not a reader of WSJ but the bid made Page One - a prime piece of real estate. Columbia Journalism Review covers it here - darkly I might add. The Christian Science Monitor does a nice job here. MediaPost Publications gives it some play right here. Whether it comes to fruition or not, Rupert Murdoch buying THE brand in US financial news is a little bit creepy. Why does this guy - who already owns Fox News (using "news" lightly) and the London Times - want more?

Marketing Rag touches on the "conventional" wisdom. Which is that online revenue projects huge increases in the next 2-5 years and he wants to make more dough. Can't disagree and the guy was pretty shrewd buying MySpace but does MySpace generate the revenue of advertising dollars that newspapers do? Somebody tell me, please. Newspapers are a bargain right now. Advertising in them, too. Ask Google.

Here's the main issue for me - as more independently owned newspapers are gobbled up the balance of news tilts too far toward one voice. Thats a bad thing in a democracy. Call me old fashioned but Thomas Jefferson said it best:

Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.

of course he also said:

I do not take a single newspaper, nor read one a month, and I feel myself infinitely the happier for it.

I'm not too sure what happiness has to do with it :)

Heres a spoof on what we can expect from the new WSJ.

I added a new widget - rate this post. I'll see how it plays.

Thursday thought - fueled or fired?

Too often I just shut up. Sometimes you can't stay quiet. I've never listened to or seen Don Imus. Only briefly seen Howard Stern. They're in the same league as Rush Limbaugh in my book - name-calling, offensive, impolite, rude, arrogant, witless media personalities. They must have their fans as evidenced by ratings and the $$$ they command. Imus for certain has some new enemies. The rats are jumping ship.

All of these on-air personalities are protected by this little thing we call "free speech". I continue to try and make sense of the senseless. I probably feel its a bigger deal than some and a smaller deal than others. Sadly, its what we are as a citizenry - at least in current US culture.

It's hard to put into words how deplorable and uncaring his recent comments are to me. I can only imagine how it feels to be a young woman on the Rutgers basketball team. The public uproar will quiet him for a while. Given the benefit of the doubt, his apology is sincere. More on that later. He's horribly confused trying to equate being a "really nice guy" with being racist. They are not even remotely connected. The main story should make us all stop and think.

MSNBC fired him - or won't co-broadcast him - whatever the hell that means. Soon every major broadcast (NBC? CBS?) company will ditch him. Sponsors and advertisers are running like mad. Should he be fired? Probably. Will he find work again? Undoubtedly. Should he be made to shut up? Nope.

Here's what I'd like to happen. His face to face meeting with the team goes well. He should be nervous as hell. He realizes, through conversation, that he's part of a big racial wound in the world - and particularly the US. He goes on to be an advocate for understanding differences and sensitivity toward one another. We all become part of the solution to actually living what we believe to be true in a democracy - that all are created equal. That gender, race, color, creed makes no difference. It's hard work and we don't care for the really hard work.

Update: From AP on Friday AM . There is also a Friday PM story from the AP via the SF Examiner which I'm not going to link (copyright and all that jazz) - you can read it in the paper in the morning :) - or online right now at your favorite newspaper site.

Essentially, the team accepted Mr. Imus apology and is in the "process of forgiving". As I rambled on above, this singular incident is not only an individual problem for Don Imus but societal as well. I am eternally hopeful that somewhere in the mess is a spark toward change. Alas, there are many who feel firing was too harsh. I say "tough".

And here's a fine blog entry on MP's Daily Fix by word wizard, Eric Frenchman, long time Rutgers Women's Basketball Team fan.

What do we want to learn?

Who Reads Newspapers Anymore?

It looks like a few people with blogs sure do! Let's start this with my standard disclaimer - I work for the local newspaper. I'm biased. And I love any talk about - for or against - newspapers. I don't write for the paper - I market it. Mark Goren at Transmission Marketing posted on an award-winning newspaper ad campaign and asks the question

"But did it sell any newspapers?"

According to Mark's sources the answer is a resounding "no". Not a surprise, as newspapers have watched circulation decline for a couple decades. Since I was in circulation for most of those 20 years, I've often asked the question, "Why did my boss keep me around?" :) David Reich at my 2 cents - whom I've shared comments with (if you haven't checked his blog - just do it) - posted about Mark's piece. He asks the question:

"Any other ideas to help newspapers grow their readership, whether in print or online?"

The three suggestions mirror Mark's and he gets comments from Lewis and Cam. Lewis is a newspaper guy and has added to my perspective. While I've not talked directly with Cam (about newspapers anyway) his comment goes directly to an online newspaper question - "Do you drive the reader from print to online or from online to print?" Then he suggests a more capital friendly approach to readers who get free content. I'm going to assume that means "Why not charge for the content?" And David follows up with a "what if" a newspaper website posted capsules of the story and pointed to the "full story" in the print edition. That would sell a few more single copy. You can read all this if you go to David's post.

Allow me a little ramble here. Its not my intent to be simplistic or presumptuous. But I do speak with pride. I think newspapers too often get a bum rap. Let's assume we all want a perspective on local news. It's what has sold the newspaper since the turn of the 20th century when more and more publishers got presses. For the purpose of this post, I'm talking US newspapers. Prior to that most of the news came from the big cities via transportation like Pony Express, the Union Pacific, etc. People got the news from the "national" viewpoint during the western US expansion. It provided (and still does) a daily history. I've recently read 3 books - Team of Rivals, Devil in the White City, and The Worst Hard Time - and am astounded at the local newspapers that are cited in both the prose and the bibliography.

But more than merely wanting a perspective on local news - we want to be part of the community. We want to know what's going on around us. As intelligent humans, we have a strong desire to help create a thriving environment where we exist. A local newspaper provides an "avenue of discovery" we can travel down. We want to be part of the solution - not the problem - and a good newspaper reports on the community. Good news and bad news - 365 days a year (366 in leap year) - and now, with online websites, 24/7.

Altruistic? Probably - and still circulation declines - one subscriber at a time. Readership is another measurement altogether. Some recent research shows total newspaper readership - which counts online - among 25-34 year olds is up 15% (source:Scarborough 2006) . A recent story in Editor & Publisher (industry bias to be sure) says the same thing in a different way. What we do here is give full online access to home delivery subscribers. We call it added value. You can subscribe online only for $7 a month - but I get home delivery so haven't paid real close attention.

If you are a local newspaper reader - Bravo - keep reading! My guess is that most of you are. When you get a chance - visit the paper in Spokane (links are everywhere on this blog:). Most of the website is accessible. Tell me what you think - or not. We have a long way to go in exposing the overall value of newspapers.

Here's an informative page -regarding advertising - from the Newspaper Association of America.

And thank you David, Mark, Lewis, Cam, Cord, and Robyn for carrying on the newspaper conversation. As our editor says - News is a Conversation.

Are you a Conversation Architect?

David Armano gave a presentation at MarketingProfs Thursday, March 29, 2007. He blogs a bit about how he felt following the talk here. My feeling is he's a bit tough on himself. I understand we all have communication preferences. We all feel there are arenas where we are more effective. But I feel he pulled together an enormous amount of information. He stated it clearly. I'm not sure you can ask for much more. Embedded below are the slides he used - courtesy of Slide Share where you might be able to see the text a little better.





First off, let me say David, Mack Collier, and Gavin Heaton are the triumvirate that nudged me into this "blogging" thing. To varying degrees they move me along. (Here's where I always stumble - by rights every one of you who visit here are the ones nudging me along - it's beyond humbling). I'd like to capsulize the main ideas of David's emerging media conversation that effected me the most.

The obvious - and foremost - thing for us to remember is we serve people. Whatever our vocation, calling, job, gig - call it what you will - if we are not putting people first - it won't work. We might call them customer, consumers, readers...but cut to the chase...and its people. And people want good experiences. Part of a good experience is good design. In order to help create good experiences, we need to be good designers. Design is not about making something look good - thought that is part of it - but its more about creating an experience that is pleasurable. I would say its about imparting a degree of happiness into the receiver of the message. Both Starbuck's and O'Hare airport are designed well - just differently. As bloggers, part of what we do is design conversation around topics of common interest. We are designers. Slide 8 debunks "designer" myth. Slide 9 shows some excellent design elements. The Target prescription bottle almost makes me want to come up with some sort of malady - just so I can get medicine in that container!

I could spend a long time on slide 10. It shows the building blocks of a digital experience. Built on a firm foundation of brand, business and users, Armano states the fundamentals as usefulness, usability, and desirability. Take some time looking at the questions asked in each pillar. The final two pillars take the experience beyond the expected - to sustainable and social. What this point says to me is if we want our brands to stick around they must maintain AND evolve. In emerging technology, they must also be social. I feel this is part of a blogs value. This part of the conversation naturally turns toward ROI - something I am aware of and my boss consistently reminds me. It is, however, difficult to quantify the time spent building a social network. Intuitively, we know it pays. But where does the rubber meet the road? After all, the bottom line got that title for some reason :)

The next group of slides are examples of digital experiences. I was impressed with some of what Dell is doing. My experience has been a bit less than satisfactory with them. We have a 2nd pc at home - it is a Dell. They packaged a whole bunch of extras on it. I have little problem navigating my way through a lot of it, but my bride is the main user. Her time at a keyboard is considerably less than mine (she's a nurse and deals with real people problems :) - start up was frustrating for her and, at times, still can be a pain. Mostly its the little things - filters, pop-ups, expired this and that. But it looks like Dell is reaching out. I'm impressed with how they've responded at Dell Hell. David devised a little Experience-o-Meter (if your reading, David, you really ought to patent it...maybe get one of these crazy geeks to build a widget! - imagine having it for pages and sites you visit - I'd like one that goes below acceptable for Windows Media Player - grrrrr) and he puts them beyond the basics and to the next level.

I was thrilled to see a newspaper site featured in the presentation - USA Today. While I'm a biased reader of my newspaper - The Spokesman-Review - just the fact that newspapers are on the radar as media engaging emerging tech is encouraging. One day I'll go into the journey we are on here. In a nutshell, News is a Conversation is a major part of it. We are a paid registration site for most of the local news but there are many places you can move around. USA Today seems to be a step or 2 ahead of us insofar as building a social community. David rates them "next level" in places - not quite "beyond basics" in others. I too wonder about storing pictures on their site. One thing I can imagine is that they may decide to post member "snapshot" someplace on their site. Similar to getting your picture on the cover of the Rolling Stone (I guess its WIRED this generation) - one day you might say "A photo of mine was published in USA Today". Next is a little riff on You Tube, then examples of blogs - one which takes it to the next level, the other not so much.

The pair of slides that pulled it together were 31 and 32. They are pretty self-explanatory but its where the title of this post is stolen - as bloggers and marketers who blog - we need to become "conversation architects". I love that - what a great job title! Bravissimmo, Armano! The goal - to develop our blog, our brand and our organizations into valuable community experiences.

I'm not a Twitter user - though this presentation has me right on the edge. The conclusion focused on the enormous potential it holds for gathering a community. I was about to register last week and it was a day Twitter experienced crashes and problems. I get enough frustration without asking for it - so another time :)

Sharing is the best way of learning for me. I hope highlighting these points has helped reinforce some of your thinking. Even more, I hope you've found food for thought. Enjoy the weekend - I'm off for a nice bike ride! The sun is shining in Spokane!

"Newspapers: print, online...who cares?"

Post title is in quotes because it comes from David Reich over at my 2 cents. Always give credit where credit is due. I've been fortunate to take part in David's musings on newspapers the last couple weeks. David is my new favorite blogger because he has a category labeled "newspapers" :) - And he's convinced they're not quite dead. I've also been fortunate to be in the newspaper business - circulation and marketing - for over 20 years.

In the post, David cites an article in Media Life which talks about newspaper readership growing if we include print AND online. The article talks about the "younger, affluent audience" being reached online. Then David asks a great question:

"Why aren't newspaper publishers aggressively pushing this positive and welcome news to the ad community?"

I am decidedly not a newspaper publisher - but I work for a great one! I can answer the question through my lens alone - give a touch of recent history and maybe forecast a little. Newspapers have long been established via ink on paper. In the last 3-5 years, their online presence has grown enormously. Now newspapers can be read via pixels on a page, too. And a lot more information can be placed on a website. But print on paper is still the farm. Print pays the rent. It's still delivered, its portable, and you don't need a wireless card to read it. Who cares? The community you live in! Just like the community of bloggers with which you read and interact. Don't kid yourself - if you're part of a blogging community and somebody stops posting...the community cares. This assumes the blogs have value and worth.

Advertisers are only just beginning to see the audience that is attracted to newspaper websites. Just like they are seeing audiences attracted to blogger sites. But advertisers demand results (along with profits) and online measurements of readers are not exactly concrete - although they are improving. Does the last 3-5 years coincide with anything that is happening with online tracking/measurement? Page views, impressions, click-thrus, traffic reports...these are all new terms. Can they be verified? In some ways - yes. Mostly its like the Gary Larson cartoon "what dogs say and what cats hear" - the meaning gets lost in the translation. Isn't it an education process?

For too long, the newspaper business has looked for a silver bullet to stop circulation declines. Searching for the Holy Grail - reminder, nobodies ever found it :) Doesn't stop us from looking for it. It ain't there. Fewer people buy the local paper but my hunch is people still read it. And certainly people still buy things - which is what the ad community really wants. Newspapers and online are not the same but they both demand interaction. Just like a true community.

Whether its print or online - newspapers matter in the community.

Here and here are previous posts on newspapers.

Not Quite Dead Yet

One of my favorite Monty Python taglines.

I've had a couple conversations about media and newspapers with Lewis and Cord. We haven't gone into great detail. They gave me the chance to comment on great posts. Which is a chance to share thoughts and feelings. A-a-a-h - conversation and communication. I love it!

Just as I love whats called traditional media. Point of fact it pays the bills - its in my blood. Its been a tough battle with no end in sight. Competition for readers - and ad dollars - is fierce which is why I'm thrilled to have one at a time on this blog. Lets think for a minute how the media impacts us. Did you look or listen to any news today? Its rhetorical, so of course you did - in any number of ways - print, video, radio, digital. We all desire to carry on some sort of conversation on current events and topics of interest in our community. How long does new (emerging) media stay "new"?

Today the Center for Media Research sends a email message titled:

Death Of Newspapers Belied By Facts, Says WAN.

"According to new and revised data from the World Association of Newspapers, newspaper circulation is growing and new newspapers are being launched at a remarkable rate."

Read the entire report here.

MicroPersuasion weighs in with some stats on magazine advertising sales.

And LG posts an outstanding reason why some newspapers stumble. (I think he still loves the feel of print on paper :) - Some papers regain their stride, some don't. Local news sells the local paper. We can get world news from the vast expanse I'm typing into right now - the machine!

We're not quite dead yet. If you stopped subscribing to your local newspaper, did you have a reason? Take another look and see what you think. Let me know.

*technical question for anybody - for some reason the when I insert the typepad trackback url a message is returned "pings and trackback function must consist of HTTP" - so I've linked to the page url. Is this a problem on my end? (no wisecracks now)

Weighing In - What IS news?

When celebrities die, folks eat it up. Couple a celebrity with va-va-voom figure and a tragic life...its all over. Inundation in the media. Lewis Green rocked my Friday world today with this post. I was easing on into the weekend and he asks all these hard questions :) - I'm kidding, of course. Love hard questions. CK has a post here and a different question. Cam Beck weighs in with a comment at both spots. Keen insight!

My intrigue centers around newspapers and how it played in them. In casual chat around here yesterday it was foremost in everybody's mind. Would that people were as conversational about global warming, cures for cancer, or any other number of topics. I was rather dreading how it would play in this morning's paper. More specifically, I distinctly remember thinking "It's not front page news!" - but it is news. I'm not an editor. It ran on page 3 - right next to Scooter Libby trial.

Here's the recap from Newseum. If you don't want to link, it says of the 509 newspapers they track it was on the front page world wide. My unscientific glance found a handful with no mention on page one - but for arguments sake we'll go with the Newseum observation. So what's that say about us as readers? About newspapers? Does it matter? And don't hold back...I take nothing personally (or at least make a valid attempt).

I believe we are what we read. And we read what we are.