Connect with FOLIO:


FOLIO: Personalities -- The Blog People Page

Henry Donahue

New Year’s Resolution: Start Diet, Fitness Site

Henry Donahue emedia and Technology - 01/02/2008-09:30 AM

The current conventional wisdom states that people won't pay for content on-line. Even the Wall Street Journal, once cited as the model for premium content, appears poised to trade subscriber revenue for more advertising impressions.

The conventional wisdom is wrong, though, when it comes to online diet and fitness programs.

Look at Carmichael Training (promoted via Chris Carmichael's columns in Outside), Rodale's magazine-related fitness plans (including the Men's Health Personal Trainer and Prevention's Flat Belly Diet) and Waterfront Media's stable of branded sites (including South Beach Diet, Andrew Weil and Dr. Laura Berman).

What do these sites have in common?

  • Consumers pay $5-40 per month to interact with mostly automated online calendars and e-mails, "personalized" via a series of Web-based questionnaires.
  • The plans promise a direct personal benefit within 3-6 months (e.g. lose 20 pounds, cycle your first "century," get Dave Zinczenko's abs).
  • The program comes from a trusted magazine or celebrity brand.
  • The brand association tells the consumer that the plan is somehow unique and/or better than similar free information elsewhere on the Web.

The last point is the key to getting people to pay, linking the online models to the personal trainers, health newsletters, self-help books, and diet programs that generate billions of dollars offline.

On the flip side, the danger is that the content is increasingly generic or commoditized, dragging these models down to the same place that online magazine and newspaper content is today-free.

The New Year, though, is a time for optimism. So put down that donut, pull on your running shoes, and offer your online customers a branded program that they will want to pay for.

Henry Donahue

Google’s March to World Domination

Henry Donahue emedia and Technology - 12/21/2007-10:05 AM

Google's announcement last week of their new Knol product sparked speculation about which online publishing models were marked for death. Post-bubble comeback kid Henry Blodget mused on Silicon Valley Insider:

"Google continues to take a page from the early Microsoft play-book: Take someone else's cool idea, do it better, and steamroll the competition. Next up: a human-generated Wikipedia and (NYT) killer."

Google is taking aim here at two sites that combine enormous traffic (mostly driven by search-engines) with user-generated content that ranges from marginally helpful to totally false.

You can picture Larry and Sergey as they circle the globe in their private jet:

Larry: "Why do we send millions of our users to these jokers every month?"

Sergey: "You're right! We could do the same thing they do, and keep all the page views and advertising revenue to ourselves."

[Cue evil chuckling and rubbing of hands.]

For publishers, the news highlights the vulnerabilities of two cornerstones of many online strategies: user-generated content and search engine optimization. The content is cheap but easily commoditized. The traffic comes from someone who is also an ad sales competitor.

If Google succeeds in dominating this space, it will reinforce the premium on site content that is high-quality and hard to duplicate, whether it comes from editors or readers.

Henry Donahue

The Magazine Leaders and Laggards of Online Video

Henry Donahue emedia and Technology - 12/12/2007-12:24 PM

I was recently wading through the innards of Times business section when I came across this item:

"Video sites need to draw a minimum of 50,000 views a month before getting serious interest from advertisers, Dina Kaplan, a founder of the video-sharing site, told Daisy Whitney of TVWeek."

Inspired, I took a brief, unscientific survey of magazine Web sites and YouTube channels to try to figure out which monthly magazines are gaining online video traction.

Here are some leaders:

  • Maxim: Never mind the whole site, the average individual Maxim video probably gets more than 50,000 page views. And most videos on their proprietary player start with a 30-second pre-roll from an advertiser like Zune or Sony Playstation.
  • Men's Health: Men's Health is a good example of fitting a broad content offering into a standard (Brightcove) technology platform. They also have short, unobtrusive pre-roll advertising, in this case from Acura.
  • Seventeen:'s "Seventeen TV - Style Stars" is an effective use of video from their photo shoots presented via Hearst's Maven-based video player. Like the two sites above, they also appeared to have successfully sold video pre-roll ads.
  • Vogue/ The Conde Nast fashion site, powered by Feed Room, makes great use of fashion show video that complements and amplifies the content from the magazines, with 15 and 30 second video pre-roll to go with it.

And some laggards:

  • Vanity Fair: Vanity Fair also uses mostly video shot at various photo shoots. There are also a few interviews that relate back to content from the monthly issues. The overall impression here though is that the magazine is king and the internet video an afterthought.
  • Reader's Digest: The video gallery (Brightcove here again) links to a user-generated funny video contest. I thought that the winners ("Sassy Too") were adorable, but apparently advertisers do not.
  • Better Homes & Gardens:'s Better.TV (yet another Brightcove implementation) has the editorial feel of your local new station's morning show. Video advertising is sparse.
  • Southern Living: I actually love this magazine (my mom is a subscriber), but I honestly don't think they have any video on their Web site.
Henry Donahue

Coveting Thy Neighbor’s Blogger

Henry Donahue emedia and Technology - 12/05/2007-11:15 AM

In my capacity as Discover magazine CEO, I had lunch last week with a leading environmental scientist and blogger. After a brief but stimulating chat about the climate crisis, I steered the conversation around to my more parochial concern: Can I dramatically increase my Web traffic by adding more blogs?

He was skeptical to say the least. Incumbents in this market have significant first mover advantages. My friend launched his environment blog in 2004, a year before the Huffington Post but a good five years after Boing Boing. Since then, if you believe Technorati, literally tens of millions of new blogs have been created. At the same time, blog users' bookmarks and RSS readers have been filling up (not to mention other blogs' blogrolls), leaving less real estate for new entrants.

A quick look back to early 2007, though, shows that a magazine site can launch a new blog using a time-honored tactic-poaching from its competitors. In January, Atlantic Monthly signed Andrew Sullivan's blog away from Time, and whatever they paid him was probably a bargain compared to the ad inventory he generates.

There's a lesson here for magazines looking to expand their blog platforms. Instead of coaxing your overworked editors to blog more, look around your competitive space for established but undermonetized blog sites who might see the benefit of hooking up with your brand.

If that doesn't work, you can always go with the LOLCats.

Henry Donahue

Amazon's Kindle: Magazine Killer?

Henry Donahue emedia and Technology - 11/29/2007-12:05 PM

First off, I have not seen the new Amazon Kindle in person. (Note to self: send nasty note to Discover tech editor after finishing this blog entry.) From the pictures, though, the thing looks like a fantastically expensive Speak & Spell.

The reviews from tech geeks, however, have been generally positive, and the first run sold out on Amazon in five days.

So what does this mean for ink and paper purveyors? The classic print magazine argument goes something like this:

Magazines provide the best venue for long-form journalism. Reading the magazine version of The New Yorker on the train tonight is going to be a lot more pleasurable than reading a bunch of articles printed out on copy paper.

Ink on paper also works better for beautiful photography. The collective weight of the fall fashion magazines shows that advertisers clearly agree.

Finally, magazines are more portable than even the lightest laptop. Anyone who has used a laptop on their actual lap can attest that it quickly gets uncomfortable.

The Kindle points out the shakiness of the first and third legs of the proverbial stool. The Kindle is lightweight, easy on the eyes and presumably doesn't burn your lap. The wireless connection provides access to scores of books or magazines, anywhere, at any time.

Sure it's $400, but you have to believe that a $99 version with color photos will be on Amazon by Christmas 2009. With the way ink and paper prices have been going, that might not be a bad thing.

Henry Donahue

Dead Cats and Digital Media Panels

Henry Donahue emedia and Technology - 11/20/2007-14:05 PM

You can't swing the proverbial dead cat without hitting an industry panel discussion about the death of print, the transition to digital or some variation thereof. This has been true now for the better part of a decade. The panels just come with different titles:

1997: "Avoid Becoming Roadkill on the Information Superhighway"
2007: "The Magabrand Revolution”

Cycling through a number of failed strategies—homegrown portal sites, blockbuster acquisitions, digital editions—most publishers still have a hard time getting over the fact that branded, high-quality content doesn't seem to have the same value on-line as it does off-line.

Intuitively, established magazine brands should have an advantage over competitors they perceive as underwear-clad, basement-dwelling overachievers. Magazines have loyal audiences. Their content is professionally reported, edited and fact-checked. Longstanding brands connote a certain level of quality.

But it doesn't work that way. Perez Hilton competes on the same field as People, Drudge with Newsweek, TVNewser with Mediaweek, and on and on. On top of that, advertisers pay a significantly lower CPM online than they do for print, hurting magazine publishers in the tradeoff.

At the risk of getting sucked into the same repetitively lame dialogue I just mocked, this is what I want to blog about. As someone who started in the online world ( circa 1999) and then transitioned to magazine management, I hope to bring a perspective that cuts through a lot of the doomsaying and navel-gazing.

I'm going to highlight what works from the print, integrated or exclusively on-line perspectives. And if I plug my own magazine (Discover) and online product ( along the way, so be it. At least you don't have to sit through another integrated media panel discussion.