Treading On Headlines: Newspapers Sink

“In 2009 and 2010, all the two-newspaper markets will become one-newspaper markets, and you will start to see one-newspaper markets become no-newspaper markets,” said Mike Simonton, a senior director at Fitch Ratings, who analyzes the industry, to The New York Times.

He is not alone in his assessment. Time magazine recently listed what it believes are the 10 most endangered newspapers in America, including: The Philadelphia Daily News, The Minneapolis Star Tribune, The Miami Herald, The Detroit News, The Boston Globe, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Chicago Sun-Times, The New York Daily News, The Fort Worth Star-Telegram, and The Cleveland Plain Dealer. The article also suggests eight of the 50 largest papers could be gone in the next 18 months. (Hat tip: Thomas Mitchell, editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, who has been posting a series called "Information wants to be free, reporters want to be paid" for some time.)

There is a rub too. According to a Nielsen Online report for the Newspaper Association of America, average monthly unique audience figures for newspaper Web sites grew by nearly 7.3 million in 2008 to 67.3 million visitors, an increase of 12.1 percent over 2007. Monthly unique visitors during the fourth quarter of 2008 averaged 68.2 million, an 8.6 percent increase over the same period a year ago (62.8 million).

So the reality is that newspapers are more popular than ever, but the business model is broken. It doesn't have to be, but it is because daily publishers operated in denial for almost a decade. Most of them, including the Orlando Sentinel, noted steep circulation declines as early as 2003. From our data, virtually all newspaper circulation graphs look similar if not the same.

The Solution Is Symbiotic Content Over Duplication

There are many reasons newspapers are failing, but the one we'll touch on today is the most obvious. When publications migrated online, they duplicated the content in entirety and then added more features to the online asset than the print publication could ever hope to support.

While this might have proved to be a successful model, dailies made the mistake of considering the online asset an entirely new revenue stream (thereby denying print advertisers the benefit of the online circulation as well). Had the advertisers been allowed to migrate online for free, dailies might have survived with a single revenue stream.

But instead of having one product, dailies created two. And in doing so, they became their own competition, with the better product only fetching mere pennies on the dollar in terms of advertising revenue. Another solution might have been to follow other models proven successful on the Web.

Instead of duplicating content, newspapers could have considered creating a more symbiotic model, with the print and online versions of the publication carrying similar but modified content. For example, the printed daily could have included the in depth coverage (the kind that kept newspapers competitive with broadcast over the last few decades), while the online versions could have summarized, editorialized, or provided actual supporting documentation (such as letters, court filings, etc.) for the print version.

Doing so would have driven print subscribers online and some online readers to subscribe. While there are many different degrees of differentiation for such a model, the basics are the same. There are plenty of companies that have already proven premium content still pays the rent. Sometimes, it even pays more than an annual subscription to a daily newspaper.

Not All Dailies Will Die, But News May Never Be The Same

If there is a bright side to the blight facing newspapers, it might be that the long-term future seems more promising than short term. Eventually, one can hope that the public will grow weary of increasingly yellow journalism (biased opinion masquerading as objective fact) and return to objectivity as once envisioned by Walter Lippmann.

This doesn't mean that I believe people will pay for objective reporting as it exists today, but I do think objectivity will eventually recapture its audience, assuming tomorrow's dailies will resist the urge to tamper with the term as today's dailies have done. (Not everyone wants to have their opinions validated. Some people still value the truth.)

Of course, once these publications have an audience, advertisers will follow. In fact, they'll be even more likely to follow as soon as marketers finally learn that circulation isn't the best measure. It hasn't been for some time.

Wading Intelligence: Perceptual Pools

"In reality, there is only one flower. But inside a perceptual bubble, there may be three." — Richard Becker

While the foundation of public relations remains unchanged, the environment in which it operates is changing. In 20 years, mainstream media expanded from four channels to 4,000 channels and the Internet from a few sources to a seemingly infinite stream with an entire library of new content being added every second of the day.

Infinite Information Creates Miniature Realities.

While perception is a common theme here, it was Dan Schnur, a leading political and media strategist speaking at New Media and Political Campaigns, held in the Aurora Forum at Stanford University, who perhaps best articulated the concept that as information expands, the informational pools people draw upon shrink. For individuals, the danger becomes one of isolation, or as Schnur noted, people are drinking from completely different pools of information, which eventually creates different realities.

"As empowering as this media is, it's also isolating," said Schnur. "We have an array of not just three new programs at 6:30 at night, and not just five radio stations on our car radio, but when we have 800 cable TV, an infinite number of radio stations, and an even larger number of Web sites, blogs, and e-mail opportunities, it becomes much more easier for us to pick and choose who we talk to, what we talk about, and what we hear."

The outcome of this endless array of options affords us the opportunity to customize our information to such a degree, that we invent our own world view, which may be completely different from the world view of another person who made different choices. Schnur doesn't mean different opinions. He means different facts all together.

For example, if one person chooses Bill Maher, Daily Kos, and Media Matters, and another chooses Rush Limbaugh, Town Hall, and NewsBusters, both would develop opposing views of the new administraton, stimulus bill, and economic direction of the country. They would not just have different opinions, but an entirely different set of facts upon which to validate those opinions rather than drawing different conclusions based upon the same facts.

The outcome was made apparent last week after my post on fear communication, especially as it pertained to President Obama. In sharing the idea offline, two different people with polar political viewpoints had two different impressions of whether I was right about the communication. In fact, it took a recent affirmation from former President Clinton before that observation was even accepted by one of them.

The Danger of Validating Opinion.

The danger is two-fold. As people go to sources of information that validate what they believe instead of challenging them, the continuing transformation of media could further polarize perceptions as it aims to increase circulation by catering exclusively to that audience. Jonathan Alter, columnist and senior editor for Newsweek magazine, also at the Aurora Forum, recognized it as a troublesome trend.

"The definition of good journalism that I believe in [correct attribution: Finley Peter Dunne] comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable," said Alter. "The problem is that if the comfortable is not listening to you because you are not agreeing with them or comforting them, you get a different kind of journalism where you afflict the already afflicted and comfort the already comfortable."

The challenge becomes increasingly problematic because unpopular or even objective viewpoints become ignored, labeled as biased, or drowned out by diatribe. As individuals, and especially as communicators, it becomes especially important to drink from as diverse of information pools possible to maintain as broad of a world view as possible — accepting viewpoints that challenge us more than than validate our ideas.

The Challenge for Communication.

The challenge, especially as mainstream media struggles to adapt to a new market conditions, is that many publics may not be inclined to sample opinion outside their comfort zones. This creates an especially challenging environment for public relations because the trend is not isolated to politics.

Specifically, the challenge becomes applying a foundation that remains to some an increasingly diverse environment where two different people, living next door, could have as different realities as people living half a world away. It's at the heart of what Geoff Livingston called the "Communicators are in a perpetual losing battle for the attention of inundated minds." Except, it's not limited to advertising or communication. It applies to social media too. It only takes a click for consumers to unfollow.

Or to reframe the thought, take what Abraham Lincoln said — "Character is like a tree and reputation like its shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the real thing." — and then recognize that people find trees uncomfortable.

Surfing For Survival: The Fourth Estate

"But what if the old media dies much more quickly? What if a hurricane comes along and obliterates the dunes entirely? Specifically, what if The New York Times goes out of business—like, this May?" — Michael Hirschorn, The Atlantic

When The New York Times released an October earnings report that revealed drastic measures must be taken or the paper would be forced to default on $400 million debt, some people, including journalists like Hirschorn, woke up wondering what if what once seemed like a slow a painful death for print might be hastened before they could develop a viable online business migration model. And what would that mean for journalism? And what would that mean for public relations?

The New York Times is not alone. Any time I spoke about social media last year, I carried some disappointing circulation statistics with me — most papers were down double digits: Boston Globe, down 10.1 percent; Philadelphia Inquirer, down 11.0 percent; the Miami Herald, down 11.8 percent; the Detroit News, down 10 percent; the Houston Chronicle, down 11.6 percent. And that says nothing about the Tribune Co. bankruptcy.

A few weeks ago, Thomas Mitchell, editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, noted "Information wants to be free, reporters want to be paid" in a column that reminds readers that newspapers survive to provide substance. He's right. Anyone can offer up opinion. Anyone can cater to the masses for link love and pats on the back. But not everyone will "sit through the council meeting and sift through the volumes of bureaucratic paperwork" or be able to disassemble and reassemble it in order to objectively educate the public as to what it means to them.

True enough, as that was the same point Paul Mulshine, opinion columnist for the Newark Star-Ledger, made in the The Wall Street Journal. And I heard similar comments while sitting on a panel with Bruce Spotleson, group publisher at Greenspun Media; Jon Ralston, columnist and commentator on state politics, and Flo Rogers, general manager of Southern Nevada's KNPR. Increasingly, the public seems more interested in news that supports their worldview than the last remnants of objective journalism.

Sure, the old model must change. But what newspapers need to remember is they can't wait for someone else to invent it. Most models will be different. Some might shrink print content while driving more readers online for additional content. Some might create online communities for the strongest sections. Some might place a greater emphasis on another medium like video. Some will attempt to give up the one-way new stream and encourage journalists to engage the public, something BusinessWeek seems to be experimenting with, but with mixed reception. And some, well, some will surely just lay down and die. But what if they all did?

Ethics & The Fourth Estate

It's a question I ask myself every year while I prepare to teach public relations skill sets that seem a little less valued today than they were last year or the year before that. Do they even know that the burden of business ethics might fall all the more on their shoulders? That's one question Bill Sledzik, associate professor in the School of Journalism & Mass Communication at Kent State University, has on his mind as well.

"I worry that too many PR types will place client interest ahead of public interest, expediency ahead of ethics," he writes. "They have in the past, and social media makes it that much easier today."

He might be right to worry. Even where there aren't ethical lapses, the slips seem more frequent (even among those who profess transparency). There are a few who already seem all too comfortable walking right up to the ethical line (if not crossing it) or redefining it to fit their needs. Even more don't really understand ethics all that well. When I share ethical challenges in a class, for example, the informal fail rate has been as high as 90 percent.

It may get worse before it gets better. A survey recently conducted by the Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics (SCCE) and the Health Care Compliance Association (HCCA) reveals that the declining economy might increase the risk of legal and ethics violations in business. In fact, more than 85 percent of 600 compliance and business ethics professionals felt that the current economy greatly or somewhat increases the risk of compliance and ethics failures with only one percent offering a contrarian opinion. (The complete survey results can be downloaded here).

"There's good and bad news here," observed Roy Snell, the CEO of SCCE and HCCA. "We're finding that companies are increasingly seeing compliance and ethics as an integral part of their business and not a luxury to be discarded during an economic downturn. But, at the same time, we're seeing stagnant budgets or potential declines in resources at a time of increased risk for failures. That's creating a gap that could prove to be a dangerous chasm for business to cross."

And what if they do cross it? Without a viable Fourth Estate, there may be less risk and consequence. Yesterday, it used to be a suitable ethical review sum up to end with a single quip — unless you would be proud to see what you say or do on the front page of The Wall Street Journal or New York Times, then don't say or do it. Today, you can buy space on the front page instead. And tomorrow, there might not be one to care.

Overloading Communication: Too Much Frequency

"If you have something pertinent to say you neither have to say it to very many people -- only those who you think will be interested -- nor do you have to say it very often . . . if it is interesting, once is enough. If it is dull, once is plenty." — Howard Gossage

Leave it to George Parker to tell it like it is as only he can. While one can never get too much of a good thing, most things aren't good enough so we get too much of it.

For example, some might say Sprint's CEO Dan Hesse has the right tools to fix the company, but few people want to hear him talk about technology with all the depth of a single Twitter Tweet over and over and over again. Yawn. Yes Dan, we call them phones.

Too much dull messaging can be a bad thing on television. And too much dull messaging can be a bad thing online, which seems to be what partly prompted Steven Hodson to write this piece on social media for the Inquisitr. Ho hum. Some people share so much content quantity that they forget about content quality.

But do you know what? As long as social media measurements, much like television, continue to skew toward reach and frequency, it's likely we'll get more of the same.

Removing Customers: They Don't Want You

Ever since Blu-Ray started selling 100 units for every 98.71 units of HD-DVD last year, the writing was on the wall. There was going to be change. And for some, change for the sake of change would be painful.

Earlier this year, Netflix sent some consumers in a tail spin after announcing that it will carry high definition videos in the Blu-Ray format backed by Sony and others, but not in the HD-DVD standard once backed by Toshiba. Today, in what appears to be a licensing deal gone temporarily wrong as opposed to an answer to Microsoft's Xbox Live campaign, the Xbox 360 will not stream Sony Columbia Pictures Films. (Sony Pictures Entertainment movies are still available.) Sony Columbia Pictures Films doesn't want Xbox 360 customers.

Did you get all that? Netflix didn't want Toshiba customers. Now, Sony Columbia Pictures doesn't want Netflix customers, at least not those using an Xbox 360. And, long term, it seems doubtful Netflix will want Blu-Ray customers because the adoption rate is less than stellar.

Sure, Netflix remains vigilant in communicating that the company's current business strategy is still firmly rooted in DVD technology, but most weeks it communicates a growing number of streaming deals. However, when you compare a few choice quotes from Netflix, they don't add up:

"There are 100 million DVD players in U.S. households. If you really think people are going to stop renting DVDs, you need to lie down until that thought passes.” — Barry McCarthy, CFO, Netflix.

"As watching instantly becomes a more prominent part of the Netflix service, our goal is to have all of our streaming content licensed for all of our partner devices. We're doing well in this area, but it will take some time before we fully achieve that goal." — Steve Swasey, vice president of corporate communications, Netflix.

More and more, it seems electronic companies keep asking consumers to replace hardware at a dizzying pace just so they can replace all their media content once again (just in time for the next new hardware) or, perhaps long term, only allow them to borrow content from time to time for a monthly subscription price model that made cable companies profitable.

So what are they really saying? Your children's children won't know what a DVD is (or Blu-Ray for that matter) and they might not know what a book is either. While we keep aiming to make content more portable, the side effect might be that content becomes increasingly controlled and temporary. That will be painful. But as mentioned, change for the sake of change is always painful.

Shifting Concepts: Newspapers Need To Look At TV

And so it begins. The Christian Science Monitor has become the first national newspaper to abandon print and move its daily content online. While the publication will print a weekend magazine, the move represents a shift that many other national dailies will eventually follow.

“Everybody’s talking about new models,” John Yemma, editor of The Monitor said. “This is a new model.”

According to The New York Times, smaller papers have already made the transition, including The Capital Times in Madison, Wis. and The Daily Telegram in Superior, Wis., which will only publish a print edition two days a week.

The downside, as most newspapers know, is that such moves cannot replace the revenue gap between print and online ads. It will not, at least not as long as newspapers continue to look at the new space like print. Instead, they might consider entirely new constructs.

One of the better examples some newspapers might follow is Hulu, which offers free, ad-supported videos of TV shows and movies from NBC, FOX, and other networks. The joint project has been successful enough to beat YouTube hands down.

Within a few months, Hulu has grown to 142 million streams with 6.3 million unique viewers, according to Nielsen Online. It is now the sixth-most-popular online video brand in the United States, surpassing ESPN, CNN, MTV, and Disney.

Part of the success is related to its advertising approach. Fewer advertisements means fewer program interruptions for viewers and less competition for advertisers. It's a win-win, with some additional twists that include viewer rated commercials, ad selection, and interactive games.

“The notion that less is more is absolutely playing out on Hulu,” Jason Kilar, the chief executive of Hulu, told The New York Times. “This is benefiting advertisers as much as it is benefiting users.”

It only makes sense that broadcast would weather convergence a little easier than print, which is why it might be time for print to give up traditional modeling all together. It needs to think more like broadcast and I don't just mean arming journalists with video cameras.

What I mean is: newspapers that are migrating more content online need to quickly develop better advertising vehicles than banner ads to stay viable. The only alternative is to continually cut staff to match shrinking circulations, which no one can really afford to do anymore. Why?

Journalists are already overtaxed on time. The result is that many newspapers have given up on digging deeper and vetting facts in favor of "he said, she said" reporting. "He said, she said" reporting only resembles objective reporting in that it leaves readers to sort out which "he" or "she" might be right or telling the truth. Unless newspapers hold a higher standard and provide trusted content, it seems to me they will risk losing even more readers in a space where content is still king.

Spotting Convergence: Wall Street Journal

With the Newspaper Association of America (NNA) expecting newspaper advertising to drop another 11 percent this year, The Wall Street Journal and Washington Post are already looking to evolve. Both publications are training journalists to shoot video while reporting.

"We've put dozens of cameras out in the hands of reporters," Alan Murray, deputy managing editor of the The Wall Street Journal, said in a brief online interview with Beet.tv. "By putting video cameras in their hands, it gives them another way to tell their stories."

Both publications began recruiting and training reporters since June, which was part of their restructuring in July. They are also actively recruiting talented video journalists worldwide to shoot and edit video on a freelance basis through recruiters. Meanwhile, the Washington Post has trained more than 185 reporters.

To illustrate how rapidly convergence is taking place, consider this post from August 2006 or this post from March 2007. Both were written at a time when new media still seemed far far away. But nowadays, it's old media that seems a distant memory.

As predicted, old media is dead. There is only media, aging new and adapting old, sharing the same space online. In other words, it no longer pays to ride a horse in a world of automobiles.

Campaigning For A Weak Economy: $100 Million

Kearsarge Global Advisors (KGA), a government affairs and communications firm based in Washington D.C., calculates that nearly $100 million has been spent in negative messages about the economy.

To put that number into perspective, it is the same amount Ford spent marketing the 2008 Chevy Malibu, Microsoft spent marketing Windows 2000, and Gillette spent marketing the MACH3 razor. And, of course, none of these products had the benefit of daily earned media and a few million blogs.

"As businesses and government seek to build confidence in the markets, they should also consider the direct affect these ads are having on people throughout the country," said Jim Courtovich, managing partner of KGA. "The trend in spending on these negative messages has no end in sight and could be a continued drag on confidence in the markets."

This isn't to say that current economic challenges aren't real, but it does acknowledge how negative messaging can exacerbate problems. According to the release, KGA says the bulk of these negative messages (51 percent) came from presidential candidates. The balance came from congressional and state races. Why?

Simple. Most people don't want change when the cheese tastes good.

Pushing Print Down: Gloomy Headlines

The Newspaper Association of America (NNA) says newspaper advertising is going to drop another 11 percent this year. Even more troublesome is that the NNA isn't so bullish on online ad revenue growth for newspapers this year, which it sees as low as 1.8 percent. Maybe next year will better, the report says.

Part of the challenge goes beyond the migration pains of moving print to an increasingly digital world. The recession is slowing down local media markets. According to American Express' Open Small Business Monitor as reported by AdvertisingAge, concerns about cash flow have risen since and capital-investment plans are among the lowest since the study first began. Just under half of small-business owners plan to cut back or delay marketing expenditures.

Such cutbacks go much further than impacting newspapers. Local radio and television stations are feeling the pinch. And, along with them, so are the agencies paid to produce the work. Public relations doesn't seem to be exempt, but the idea it owns social media is tenuous at best.

Now everyone wants a piece of any space showing the slightest signs of growth. But trying to crowd ten "social media experts" in a boat built for two seems pretty risky, especially if the pitch sounds even more snake oil than every other Tuesday.

So who will fare well in the communication industry? Like always, companies with diversified interests and relatively few cash cows tend to fare better. Local retail is still very strong and necessary services (like plumbing and electrical) are outpacing others. It's also the reason that some agencies are, so far, content to offer messages of strength.

Why? It's not rocket science. When economic times seem tough, you tend to want to work with those who seem largely unaffected.

You know what I mean? It's hard to buy a newspaper ad when everyone seems to think their money is best spent elsewhere and the industry's decline shows few signs of flattening any time soon. I don't think that's a good thing, but it will not change until newspapers stop forecasting their own demise.

Digging Holes For Bloggers: Naked Boy

Sometimes, the best rule of thumb for bloggers is to think before taking action. Take J. Son, who produces Naked Boy News, for example. He almost jeopardized the entire jury selection process in the ongoing O.J. Simpson trial.

He jeopardized the trial by contacting two jurors and allegedly claiming to be with CNN. However, in this trial, like many trials, the court had previously ordered restraint by members of media to ensure an unbiased jury. In fact, media attempting to contact jurors would be in violation of a court order and charged with contempt of court and/or have their their press credentials confiscated.

Upon learning the contact came from a blogger, District Judge Jackie Glass said she could control media representatives, but couldn’t stop the public from trying to speak to prospective jurors. Other than hoping to tell him to knock it off, the judge has taken the position that there is nothing she can do.

”The folks on the street — I cannot control them,” District Judge Jackie Glass told the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

I disagree. While I tend to be an advocate for the relatively few bloggers who hope to cross over into civil journalism, I also believe J. Son should be held in contempt of court just as any other publisher would.

If he is not held accountable, his actions will hurt bloggers over the long term by pressuring the courts and others to define what is a 'legitimate' journalist. Doing so would not only be bad for bloggers, but for everyone.

It’s simple really. Bloggers acting as or claiming to be journalists need to accept the responsibilities of journalists or else they risk a future where journalists will become licensed by the state and the First Amendment a mere privilege. With freedom comes responsibility.

Learning The Hard Way: NBC Returns To iTunes

There are two ways to learn. One of them is the hard way.

Almost one year ago to the day, NBC Universal (NBCU) made one of the worst decisions since it entered the digital media arena — it effectively banned itself from Apple iTunes. With the launch of iTunes 8 a few days ago and its fall schedule falling in place, NBCU seems to have finally learned the hard way and come back.

Of course, rumors of the peacock’s return to iTunes have been out there for some time. In January, Jeff Zucker, CEO of NBC, made a massive public relations dance move, shifting from the position that iTunes had destroyed the music industry to saying "We've said all along that we admire Apple, that we want to be in business with Apple."

When the rumors first surfaced in January, Engadget could only speculate as to NBC’s reasons. Today, it seems more clear. Apple has refined its terms of service and NBC will generate more revenue, assuming consumers want to spend $1 more for a high definition version of a television show.

The return might even be bittersweet. The SciFi Channel — which returns to iTunes along with NBC, USA, Bravo, NBC News, and Sleuth — praises the new deal, but then goes on to add “there's not much reason get your shows from iTunes instead of streaming them for free on NBC.com or Hulu.”

Wow! I’ve never seen a company tell consumers not to purchase its programming before. But then again, advertising revenue has always trumped consumer purchases at the networks. Ask any television show fan groups.

Since the SciFi Channel doesn’t seem to get it, we’ll help spell it out: NBC has always been smart about some of its moves into the digital arena like Hulu but dumb when it comes to understanding one critical component — portability.

Apple has created a platform that seamlessly allows me to purchase programs that I can watch on my computer, iPod, iPhone, or flat screen TV. Unfortunately, any HD purchases I might make will have to wait because the system requirements remove that portability selling point and/or double up on storage space.

There’s something else too. Apple needs to fix a glitch. Right now, if you select some shows in a standard format, they still default to HD in your shopping cart, making them impossible to purchase unless you have a dual-core 2.0 Ghz processor or better. So, for the time being, I’m blocked from buying certain shows until they sort it out or I upgrade my 2.1 Ghz “just before” dual core cpu.

More to the point, the return of NBC to iTunes sets the stage for how digital media will work on the net and it’s much more in line with our thinking when people were still telling us that convergence was nothing more than a fantasy. NBC and other networks need to focus on content creation to stay relevant.

Apple and others will become the digital distribution bridges while the finer points of convergence are finally sorted out. And networks have a long way to go before they understand public relations. You’re back on iTunes despite Hulu. Get over it.

Diminishing Returns: Magazine Publishers Market Online

With advertising continuing its trend toward straightforward communication, it’s no surprise magazines are looking to promote their product — advertising — with a simple straightforward message: “They make people want to buy things."

The Gawker, emphasizing that magazine ad pages are down more than seven percent, presents some tongue-in-cheek logic behind a campaign that appears mostly on the Internet. The Gawker also pulls our favorite sentence from the article that offers an explanation:

” The goal is to show that advertising in magazines encourages consumers to consider buying products — a phenomenon known as purchase intent — and stimulates them to go online to shop or to learn more about items they might want to buy.”

Wow! The logic is nothing new. Magazine publishers have been pushing this message — that print advertisements drive online searches, Web site visits, and word of mouth (among other things) — for some time but public relations and direct marketing wasn’t preventing the decline. Why not? Target audience.

The vast majority of print ad purchasers are at agencies. Yet, media buyers are much more likely to consume content online. But that has little to do with the real challenge that magazine publishers are facing today.

Most magazine publishers have spent so many years promoting cost per impression; it will require significant effort to reverse the most pervasive magazine marketing sales message in history. In fact, they have to retool their message to be more like the small publications they used to browbeat based on numbers provided by the Audit Bureau of Circulations because Internet content beats them in free content, niche consumers, and numbers. Is there anything left?

Yes, and no.

It seems to me that the only thing that magazine publishers can hope to do is refine their niche, improve quality content, and provide some or all of their content online while still retaining some semblance of differential between the print publication and online content. Impossible? Not really.

Entertainment Weekly seems to be doing a reasonable job at differentiating its online and print content. But Time seems slightly more challenged. Dwell, which is one young print publication I do enjoy receiving in the mail, not so well.

But more importantly, they might do a better job bundling print and online space. After all, if magazines have something right, it’s this: most advertisements are starting to have a singular mission — drive the consumer to the Web site where every inch of content is controlled by the company.

That’s something to think about. And so is the logic behind a marketing campaign that makes consumer look unhappy with their magazine-influenced purchases.

Making Noise: Boston Herald

Do newspaper publishers ever consider that stories like this might be the result of stories like this? [Hat tip: Steven Silvers]

Working For Funny: Derrie-Air Airlines

Philadelphia Media Holdings, which owns The Philadelphia Inquirer and Philadelphia Daily News, and its advertising agency, Gyro, had a clever idea. They decided to create a campaign for the fictional Derrie-Air airlines with the idea being to test the results of advertising in their print and online products, and “to stimulate discussion on a timely environmental topic of interest to all citizens.”

Philadelphia Media Holdings spokesman Jay Devine added that the goal was to "demonstrate the power of our brands in generating awareness and generating traffic for our advertisers, and put a smile on people's faces."

The campaign, which touts that air travelers will pay by the pound on the new luxury airline, is cute enough to make someone smile. But does it really accomplish any other goal?

Smiles aside, the campaign employs a value proposition that most companies cannot match (for thin people with light carry-ons anyway). And in reality, most offers are not that interesting. Of course it’s easier to gin up interest on fictional claims. Just ask Steorn. So in terms of generating awareness, any numbers will be nothing more than smoke, fire, and flash.

The same might be said about stimulating discussion on a timely environmental topic. Not many, if anyone, is talking or blogging about the environment because of this campaign. They’re simply talking about the campaign, and not even the cost of the paper needed to print it.

So as much as I enjoy something funny now and again, this campaign needs some sales before it can be called a success. For now, it's only real claim to fame seems to be that is made potential customers work harder for a laugh that any real ad could have delivered for better results. Hmmm ... now that's not so funny.

Talking Turkey: Andrew Cohen VS. Public Relations

The Buzz Bin is abuzz, providing a snapshot of the "kertuffle" over the CBS analyst Andrew Cohen’s remarks about the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA), which was prompted by former presidential press secretary Scott McClellan's new book.

Excerpt from McClellan’s book:

So I stood at the White House briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby.

There was one problem. It was not true.

Except from PRSA about the book:

In the wake of the recently published book by former presidential press secretary Scott McClellan, PRSA is calling for government reform and challenging the 2008 presidential candidates to adopt a communications policy engaging principles like those in the PRSA Member Code of Ethics.

Excerpt from Cohen about public relations:

Show me a PR person who is "accurate" and "truthful," and I'll show you a PR person who is unemployed.

The reason companies or governments hire oodles of PR people is because PR people are trained to be slickly untruthful or half-truthful. Misinformation and disinformation are the coin of the realm, and it has nothing to do with being a Democrat or a Republican.

Excerpt from Robert French, which mirrors much of the industry reaction:

You know, I see this latest example of PR bashing (from a news network that feeds off of media relations) to be just another in a long line of foolish, ignorant (and a bit arrogant) people. Even funnier, regarding this happening on CBS - of all places, it was their network that recently wanted to farm out some of their coverage to CNN and not do it themselves.

Except from PRSA’s rebuttal:

Regarding your commentary on today’s CBS Sunday Morning, the Board of Directors of the Public Relations Society finds it imperative to affirm the professionalism of public relations practitioners and to take exception with what we regard as a misguided opinion.

Except from Cohen’s rebuttal after the flack:

I am now the target of a public-relations effort to ridicule my effort, my points, my character and integrity. I expected nothing less. I mean, when you make fun of people whose job it is to burnish public images you’ve got to expect they are going to, well, burnish their own public images at the expense of your own. I am not taking it personally.

My take, part one:

Every year, I share two points to public relations professionals that might apply.

1. As a public relations professional, your reputation stays with you, not the company, organization, or government entity that asks you to lie. So, basically, don’t do it.

2. As a public relations professional, you cannot control what other people say; only how you react to what they say.

My take, part two:

I think we just witnessed a mainstream media version of a blog drama among eagles. How very quaint.

Adding Value: Print Shifts To Lead Generation

Magazine Publishers of America (MPA) is set to release a new study about the effectiveness of URLs being included in print magazines. The study confirms what many advertisers already know, magazine advertisements with URLs are more likely to drive readers to advertiser sites.

Specifically, MediaDailyNews said that home ads were 103 percent more likely, women’s services were 98 percent more likely, and travel categories were 186 percent more likely to drive consumers to Web sites. URLs on fashion ads also provided a 58 percent bump.

The study provides a solid case for integrated communication, with print advertisements serving as a lead generator for Web sites. Consumers are generally taken in by the singular message of the print advertisement and then explore Web sites for more options.

Consumer magazine Web sites are also showing strong traffic gains, up 11 percent over the first quarter of last year. With those Web sites averaging 70.7 million unique monthly visitors, well-planned media efforts can expand an advertiser’s total impression and total reach by reinforcing the print advertisements on magazine Web sites.

Both findings represent that the boundaries between traditional marketing and social media are not so opaque. What has changed seems to be that traditional advertising is shifting toward Internet lead generation as opposed to image advertising or direct sales.

Reaching Trends: Social Media Adoption

Accenture, a global management consulting, technology services and outsourcing company, released some compelling survey results. Its poll suggests: while not all companies are engaged in social media, media executives are focused on it.

Almost two-thirds of media executives (66 percent) surveyed see multiple-screen short-form content as the largest growth area over the next five years. Even better news for ad-supported online networks, almost the same amount said such content will continue to be the prevailing business model. (Partial Source: Broadcasting & Cable).

Fifty-two percent said digital will drive all media and may even replace traditional advertising in five years. Even more amazing, 68 percent said social media will continue to be the leading growth area.

“It is great news that media organizations are developing a consistent strategic view of the key growth areas, but execution is slow,” said Gavin Mann, digital media lead for Accenture’s Media & Entertainment practice. “There clearly remains a huge effort to put in place the necessary capabilities, and it is apparent that the size of the task is still not fully understood.”

The discrepancy between perception (that social media has yet to hit full adoption) and realty (adoption is hitting exponential growth of the adoption curve) is apparent. If large companies are not talking about adopting social media today, chances are that they are planning to launch a social media presence in the near future. So what’s the hold up?

Simple. While many executives are already participating in social media on various levels, many are unsure whether consumers are ready. However, as we recently saw in the Universal McCann report, consumers are more than ready — with over 80 percent of the U.S. population already participating in social media on some level.

In addition, most companies are moving into social media at a much faster pace than they have in other adoption cycles like cell phones and desktop computers. But social media, in particular, has set itself apart from other technology-driven innovations in that it has a concept-to-implementation rate of 90 days or less. That is must faster than most companies can operate.

“This is just the beginning for a rapidly changing landscape where the media content environment grows more fractious and the user gains more control and power,” said Mann. “Traditional, established content providers will have to adapt and develop new business and monetization models in order to keep revenue streams flowing.”

More than half (57 percent) of the respondents identified the rapid growth of user-generated content—which includes amateur digital videos, podcasts, mobile-phone photography, wikis and social-media blogs—as one of the top three challenges they face today. In other words, media is embracing social media because they want to be part of it before it bypasses them all together.

Some of our own independent research supports the Accenture poll with one key exception. User-generated content will continue to expand, but consumers are likely to want more guidance and content support from the platforms company’s create. Only about one in four participants in the U.S. wants to be a content creator.

Promoting Citizen Journalists: CNN

Valeria Maltoni, Conversation Agent, did her usual excellent job covering the debate between Jeff Jarvis and Michael Tomansky about citizen journalists. It's a conversation I'll be picking up tomorrow (today got away from me).

It's truly is a worthwhile discussion. I only wish those discussing it would give a nod to history, making the point that this is not a new debate and appreciating that the so-called formalization of journalism is a relatively new concept, spurred on largely by the Internet. But I'll save that for tomorrow.

Today, it seems fitting to mention something else about citizen journalism. Both CNN and The New York Times are considering methods that may lift up citizen journalists once and for all. Both are discussing the feasibility of allowing citizens to submit stories online, some of which will then be sourced for the news. Along with them, other media outlets see the potential of citizen journalism as especially useful to shine light on non-profit organizations.

Currently, it's also slated to be part of "The Impact Of The Internet On Media And Community Outreach," a presentation being delivered by Veronica De La Cruz, news anchor and Internet correspondent for CNN’s flagship morning news program “American Morning.” Her speech will be given at The Lions HealthFirst Foundation Inaugural Dinner in Las Vegas on May 16.

I don't expect most people outside Las Vegas will hear too much about the event. Seating is limited to 50 people. I'll do my best to cover portions of it. Veronica De La Cruz is always very accommodating.

The dinner also comes at great time for the Lions HealthFirst Foundation, a public charity that maintains a community health education and preventive screening program for the purpose of reducing the rate of stroke, heart attacks, and cancer.

Sadly, the continuing health scare in southern Nevada has caused a 40 percent drop in participation of this low cost and free health screening program. It’s a travesty because the foundation had nothing to do with the crisis and their screenings are completely non-invasive.

Copywrite, Ink. is among the sponsors, along with Aaron Lelah Jewelers; CNN; Las Vegas International Lions Club; McCormick & Schmick’s; and Herb Perry, public affairs director for CBS Radio Group. All proceeds from the event will benefit Lions HealthFirst Foundation.

Eye-popping Predictions: The Genius Of Perception

The newest trend in communication seems to be the art of prediction.

A quick search on Google reveals some 15.4 million results that contain the word “predicts,” with more than 15,800 appearing in media stories — 400 in the last 24 hours alone. Prediction racks up another 11,000 hits, many trumped up with words like eye-popping, chilling, and current (which gives a nod to the idea that predications change, frequently).

Yep. The hypothetical hyperbole, which we often advise clients to avoid, is king of the hill. It’s become easier than ever to find someone with a crystal ball.

• The Alliance Trust predicts that household expenditures in Britain over the next 12 months will continue to decline as the credit crunch continues to squeeze on people’s finances.

• The Rage predicts that Carrie, in the movie “Sex and the City,” will either fall down a manhole as she rushes to meet the girls for brunch or asphyxiate herself with a Fendi boa.

• Researchers can now predict which button a subject will press 60 percent of the time, slightly better than a random guess.

• The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) predicts a “silent tsunami” in which high food prices across the globe could force as many as 100 million people into hunger.

The latter is significant at the moment because it’s partly true. Increasing demand from developing countries and poor crop yields are to blame for rising rice prices, up 70 percent this year.

However, the reporting of rice shortage predications is causing restaurants to stock up on and hoard rice and major supermarkets to place limits on the product, which has caused even more demand, making the world rice shortage an almost certain self-fulfilling prophecy.

You can make predications too. It’s easy.

There are several great ways to bend perception into reality, but two have become all my all-time favorites.

The non-committal prediction.

The weather will continue to change for a very long time.

The genius of this prediction is that it is no prediction at all, but rather simply a statement of fact, much like predicting a recession. Sooner or later, it happens. You know, like the CIBC predicting gas to hit $7 per gallon by 2012. Heck, I can do better than that. I’ll guess $10 a gallon, unless we do something about it.

The extended timeline prediction.

Within the next 50 or 100 years, something will happen, anything really.

The genius of this is that you can float a long-term prediction, based upon any number of qualifiers, and have a slightly better chance than a random guess. If it happens, you claim credit as a genius. If it does not happen, no one will remember anyway.

Personally, I think it would be just dandy if journalists started rating predictions on their apparent validity and then giving them a less serious, but more accurate terminology — wild guesses. There are only a paltry 58 of those.

Advertising Empty: Recession Creates Cuts

While The Wall Street Journal speculates that the economy might be hurting Google, others are already pointing to across-the-board cuts in advertising and public relations. Even some advertising messages have changed, skewing toward sales and savings, as an admission that times are tough.

“Advertising and the economy seem to go hand in hand,” Bob Liodice, president of the Association of National Advertisers, told Reuters. “Really, the fact that the economy is weakening is going to have an impact on the industry in the short term.”

There is some truth to that. Companies frequently find that advertising budgets are the first to be cut amidst worries of an economic downturn. The reason, which was also attributed to the 9.3 percent drop in Google ad clicks, is because people are more likely to window shop and less likely to buy.

But does that really mean companies need to cut corners on communication? It depends on the company, but not always if one recalls the wisdom of Bruce Barton, co-founder of BDO, which later merged with Batten Co. to become BBDO.

“In good times, people want to advertise; in bad times, they have to,” he said.

This might be especially true when some economic reports remain mixed. But even if the reports weren’t mixed, cutting communication budgets isn’t always the most prudent choice.

Hundreds of companies and products have been successfully launched during recessions, most notably Trader Joe’s, MTV, and the iPod. (Copywrite, Ink. is also a recession-born company, 1991.)

In almost every case, these companies increased their presence in the marketplace while everyone else cut back. Doing so increases market share, especially against larger competitors, strengthening the company’s position when the economy turns around. They also did not resort to distress advertising, sweeping discounts, or “I feel your pain” advertising, recognizing short-term messages sometimes erode long-term brands.

Of course, that is not to say that most communication and advertising plans don’t need some refinement (most do, whether there is a recession or not). And I don’t necessarily think such refinement means jumping on the rally cry of social media. Social media is better used as an augmentation tool rather than a replacement tool as some suggest.

Keep that in mind when reading those who suggest social media is the most viable solution during a downturn, a concept that seems to be largely based on the logic of Forrester Research a few months ago.

Silicon Ally Insider Henry Blodget provides a better balance. Social media remains mixed because it requires more nurturing than traditional communication.

As I mentioned in March, there are two kinds of people who have a higher propensity to get into car accidents: those who never think they will and those who always think they will. The idea is to hit the middle.