Folio Blogs

Digitally-Altered W Cover of Demi Moore Draws Fire

Vanessa Voltolina — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:59:13 -0500

The number of outrageously poor digital alterations on magazine covers just grew by one.

The latest: Demi Moore on W’s December cover. As Boing Boing reported earlier this week, Moore's left hip was cropped in order to make it appear thinner, which had potential to be a deft move had the bottom half of her leg not remained the original size. Moore’s one thin hip makes the rest of her leg bulge below the sarong.

But it appears to go beyond the hip snafu. Look at Moore on the cover [pictured]. She looks like a starving actress—like she hasn’t eaten in weeks.

As if Moore wasn’t thin enough, naturally.

Anthony Citrano, the L.A.-based photographer who took the original photo of Moore, told Boing Boing: “When I look at it I can't appreciate it because I feel like there's a piece of dirt stuck in my eyeball. A neon arrow pointing at the screw up. When I see images like this I:

1. feel bad for the photographer;
2. feel bad for the subject;
3. feel like someone, somewhere, is a dumbass.

Doesn't anyone look at these pictures before they go to press?”

This is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to “Photoshopping” guffaws in magazines over the last several months. The most egregious, in my opinion, was a city travel guide published by Toronto, Canada for which the face of an African-Canadian man was digitally imposed onto the face of the man in the original photo. (See a comparison here.) Other bright spots include missing appendages on cover models on recent covers of Marie Claire and OK!.

Mistakes happen, but why are goofs this bad still happening—especially at such big name titles? Maybe as an early New Year’s resolution, magazine staffs should try to get at least one more pair of eyes on the final cover before it goes to print.

Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

Editorial ROI: Going from Good to Great

Jason Fell — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:18:13 -0500

[EDITOR’S NOTE: You can read the complete version of this post on Blanks’s blog here.]

I have been swimming in the Web metrics for several of RBI’s brands recently, and am constantly amazed at the insights that pop up. The question I am given again and again is: "How can we increase performance?"

Sometimes this question is with regards to an entire editorial strategy, other times it is focusing on just one content channel such as blogs, or it gets into focusing on one particular blog, newsletter, video series or Twitter account.

When looking for improvements, you try for the straightforward solutions first - tried and true tactics for online content:
■ SEO training
■ Structure content so that it is scannable
■ Use images to engage readers
■ Use links to connect great content
■ Focus a lot of effort on headlines
■ Etc., etc., etc.
Most media brands are no longer amateurs in online media. They have been doing this for years, and have long ago realized that this it’s not a choice of print vs. Web, but of serving readers wherever they are.

What this means is that the answers to the question "How can we increase performance" are no longer simple. Why?
■ Because it's not easy to serve experts, what b-to-b markets consist of;
■ Because audience behavior is changing quickly;
■ Because there is more competition nowadays;
■ Because revenue models have shifted;
■ Because search has changed the media landscape;
■ Because media brands are expanding their product lines to include a variety of revenue models;
■ Because while tactics can be quick, strategy takes time to analyze, implement, measure, and iterate.
In my recent diggings to answer the question about increasing performance, I find that every answer leads to another question, and then every question leads me to a better understanding of the needs and behaviors of the audience and product I am focusing on.

I have become mildly obsessed with a four part interview with Ira Glass, host of NPR’s "This American Life" radio series. (Here, here, here and here.) When Ira discusses the challenge for him and his team, he talks about how hard it is to find a great story, and how valuable it is to not be afraid to throw out "good" ideas, "good" stories, and considerable effort. Ira says they end up ditching half of the ideas that they actually moved forward with, meaning that they are willingly throwing good stuff in the trash.

His reasoning is that, when you throw something "good" out, it gives the chance for something GREAT to be born.

For b-to-b media, what this means is moving beyond simple answers, beyond adding on one more tactic to an existing strategy. It means focusing on two things:
■ Understanding and serving the needs of the markets that one is focused on, and always willing to rethink what those needs are and how audience behavior evolves and changes.
■ Constantly refining the products & solutions that you are offering.
In the media world, some are making a big play in the "content" space by churning out a huge number of articles.
■ Demand Media paying $15 per article from freelancers.
■ AOL is ramping up its low-cost content strategy in a similar way.
Will such a strategy work for b-to-b markets—those filled with highly experienced experts who need advanced solutions to move their business forward? Will "good" be good enough for these markets? Will "good" put smiles on the faces of those deep in the trenches? Will "good" grow media revenue models?

Click here to read the rest of Blank's post.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

Sarah Palin: ‘I Absorb News Via Many Sources’

Jason Fell — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 10:36:57 -0500

It’s been more than a year since former Alaska governor and ex-Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin did her first in a series of on-camera interviews with CBS’ Katie Couric. In case you’ve somehow forgotten, it was during that interview in October 2008 that Couric asked Palin what newspapers and magazines she read to inform her worldview. A visibly annoyed Palin said she reads “most of them,” “all of ‘em,” “any of ‘em,” but wouldn’t (or couldn’t) name even one specific news source.

Now, after so many months, America finally got an answer to the question Wednesday night when Palin told Fox News’ Sean Hannity: “I read, I read Newsmax, and the Frontiersman, and the Wall Street Journal, and everything online. I absorb the news via many, many sources.” (See a clip of the Hannity interview below.)

The Frontiersman is the local paper serving Wasilla, Alaska. Newsmax, of course, is a politically conservative print magazine and Web site.

Palin also talked about the apparent controversy concerning the recent Newsweek cover [pictured above] featuring Palin and the cover line: “How Do You Solve a Problem Like Sarah?” “It was just—just another little shot,” she told Hannity. “I think that the American people, they're tiring of the tabloidization of some people, like me. And they want to get to the issues.”

Palin recommended we all steer clear of tabloidization in general, and the “haters” out there in media-dom, in order to form a better judgment of the real Sarah Palin. “They need to start by reading my book and not believing the tabloidization or the mainstream media that wants to portray me as something that I am not.”

Ah, that's right, the book. That’s why she’s making the media circuit now, after all.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

Buyout Window Closes, Layoffs Loom at Time Inc.

Jason Fell — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:34:13 -0500

Wednesday was the deadline for representatives of the Newspaper Guild to notify Time Inc. brass about how many staffers accepted buyout offers as the company looks to eliminate as many as 500 from its overall workforce.

Time Inc. is expected to begin slashing jobs as early as next week. The number of cuts will depend on how many volunteers stepped up for the buyout packages. I was told today by a company spokesperson, not unexpectedly, that Time Inc. won’t be disclosing the number of employees who accepted the buyouts.

The New York Post’s Keith Kelly has a relatively detailed outline of how the layoffs might play out: The publisher’s biggest magazines (Time, People, Sports Illustrated, Fortune and Money) could eliminate 90 editorial positions—as many as 40 possibly coming from Fortune.

During a recent earnings call, Jeff Bewkes, CEO of Time Inc. parent Time Warner, said the company will incur a $100 million charge during the fourth quarter as it begins a restructuring of Time Inc., primarily in respect to its news group. He said the restructuring will be “more targeted” in comparison to the massive changes that were made this time last year, resulting in around 600 layoffs.

And about those layoffs last year: They were made department-by-department, instead of happening all at once as part of a collective announcement. News of more and more and more layoffs were unveiled in slow motion.

We saw the same thing happen this fall at Condé Nast. Following the closure of Gourmet, Cookie, Elegant Bride and Modern Bride, hundreds of layoffs happened, but were announced at a painfully slow pace, over several weeks. It must have been a killer for employee morale. (In fact, morale hit such an “all-time low” the company reportedly hired a crisis intervention expert.)

As Time Inc. gears up for its latest wave of job cuts, I hope, for the sake of its staffers, that the axe falls swiftly and that workers aren’t paralyzed, waiting for days and weeks for the final word about whether they will remain employed.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

Report: No Digital Platform Reigns Supreme

Vanessa Voltolina — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:18:09 -0500

It seems like each digital platform has had its moment in the sun as the next new savior of print magazines—Web sites, PDFs, mobile, digital editions and e-readers. But based on a 2009 Forrester Research study released last week, called “Publishers Need Multichannel Subscription Models,” which surveyed 4,711 U.S. consumers during the third quarter (and is part of their “Media Meltdown” series), no one delivery method reigns supreme among consumers.
When asked, “If the publications you read were no longer available in print, how would you prefer to access that content,” responses showed that no single channel dominates. Thirty-seven percent of consumers said they’d prefer to access content on a Web site, while smaller groups said they’d prefer content via mobile phones (14 percent), and laptops and netbooks (11 percent). And despite the e-reader hype, the skeptics may be right: only 3 percent of respondents said they’d read their print content on a device like the Amazon Kindle. Although considered a rudimentary method of delivery, 10 percent of those surveyed say they’d prefer the anachronistic solution of PDF by e-mail. A whopping 44 percent of respondents identified “None of these” as a replacement for print.
Who Will Pay?
The study also confirmed that while the industry may be on board, the majority of consumers (80 percent) won’t pay to access magazine content online. For those few that said they would pay, they prefer subscriptions over single-article micropayments.
There was no clear trend between consumer demographics (like gender and marital status) as factors for who was more willing to pony up for Web content. However, the report found that those more likely to pay are slightly younger—43 years versus 47—and were 24 percent more likely to be technology optimists. Income didn’t play in to consumers’ willingness to pay for magazines online. A majority of consumers—67 percent—feel that magazines and newspapers are “priced about right,” while a small contingent (one in five, or 19 percent) thinks they are getting more value than they’re paying for, especially when it comes to magazines.
I for one think it's important for publishers to take baby steps when it comes to offering content behind a pay wall—particularly with four out of five consumers reporting a blatant refusal to buy into the model. Like the Economist's “experiment” annouced earlier this month, publishers should expect that determining the amount of paid content be a true trial and error process. Move your content from free to everything-behind-a-wall the next day and you may be faced with a slew of angry, embittered readers. This aversion to paying for online content may also stem from the fact that for many consumers—as the report indicates—are still unsure as to what, exactly, is their next platform move beyond print.

Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

Is Playboy’s Print Future in Jeopardy?

Jason Fell — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:25:06 -0500

Ever since taking over as Playboy Enterprises CEO in June, Scott Flanders has been adamant that he is not only “absolutely committed” to keeping Playboy in print, but that he’s a big believer in print and that he’s certain “the magazine will come back” to profitability.

More recently, during an earnings call last week, Flanders said that while “bolder steps are required” to get the print edition in the black again, three things are sure. Among them is that he is working on a joint venture in the development of a new business model for the company.

Now comes news that Playboy is in separate talks with brand management firm Iconix Brand Group and another group led by Playboy’s former entertainment group president Jim Griffiths to acquire the company and take it private. The pricetag might be more than $300 million, reports say. The company’s stock price shot up from about $2.90 a share to more than $4 yesterday on news of the sale talks.

So, is this the “joint venture” Flanders was referring to? I would have asked Flanders himself but the company issued a public statement Thursday, in response to inquiries related to a potential sale, saying that as a policy it doesn't comment on rumors.

The first thing that jumped out to me was what a sale of Playboy Enterprises could mean for the future of the print magazine. Despite all of Flanders’ assurances that the magazine would remain in print, it could go out the window if new owners take over, right?

I asked DeSilva + Phillips managing partner Reed Phillips about what he thinks might happen. He said a buyer would most likely keep the magazine in print, at least for a while, but is “very unlikely to commit to keeping the magazine in print as part of the deal.”

Phillips also called Iconix’s interest in Playboy strange. “In my experience, whenever a strategic buyer who is not in media or publishing acquires a magazine company, it is for reasons that have little to do with growing the media business and more to do with how that business might help grow the buyer's primary business," he said. "In this case, I suspect Iconix sees value in exploiting the Playboy brand beyond media. My guess is that if they acquire Playboy, they'll continue to publish the print magazine for a while, but the emphasis will shift to managing Playboy as a brand without much allegiance to whether it remains in print for the long term."

In the end, however, it all boils down to what company founder and aging ladies man Hugh Hefner wants to do, as he continues to hold roughly 70 percent of the company’s voting stock. As the Los Angeles Times pointed out, a buyer would have to persuade Hefner to not only sell the company but also to stay involved with it, “given his importance to the brand.”

And what about his sentiment for the print product (assuming he has any)? While holding onto poorly performing products because they matter to you personally isn’t exactly the smartest business practice, Playboy’s print edition is the bedrock on which the entire brand was built. It’d be a shame to see it go.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

How To Promote Online Events

Jason Fell — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 12:18:16 -0500

Online events, such as Webinars, are a cost-effective ways to build your business. Unfortunately, too many are promoted poorly because they’re not promoted enough. This approach leaves money on the table and hinders the growth of your customer file.

However, you can capture those lost dollars by developing a strategic online campaign—a series of coordinated messages fired off during a specific timeframe. Each message or “contact” builds on the previous efforts, giving the series momentum and intensity.

A campaign gives you added advantages: Multiple opportunities to reach prospects, an ongoing conversation rather than a single hit-or-miss contact, the chance to bond with your audience and build a mutually beneficial long-term relationship.

Campaigns can be roughly divided into three stages: Before the event, concurrent with the event, and following the event. Here’s a recent case study to illustrate each phase. Weiss Publishing has become a master at selling with campaigns. Their Weiss Global Forum, a video conference scheduled for August 13, was free, but was nonetheless promoted relentlessly, creating exceptional value in the minds of readers. In addition to emails, it was also promoted in the company’s free daily e-zine.

The campaign began in earnest nine days earlier with a dedicated email sent on August 4. Prospects received a new email almost every day thereafter. Each message employed a different hook: Tying the video to timely news items, emphasizing the historic significance of the topic, trumpeting the credentials of the speakers and so on. The emails also counted down the hours until registration closed.

The second stage began the day after the video aired. Weiss sent an email with an invitation to view it for those who missed it or wanted to see it again. To keep interest high, they issued daily emails and framed their messages with a variety of classic direct-response techniques: Teasing prospects with highlights from the video as a way to sample it, asking registrants for their feedback to forge a stronger connection with their audience, and then sharing that feedback in yet another email and gaining social endorsements at the same time.

Of course, each contact was an effort to get new people to register, but these messages went a step further: They also contained genuinely valuable information—a key element for building long-term customer loyalty and distinguishing them from mere “sales” efforts.

The third and final part of the campaign began on August 17 with an announcement that the video would go offline on a specific date. Besides spurring action with a deadline, the messages also relied on time-tested psychological tactics to get a response. Whereas the first stage of the campaign pushed the greed button (secrets for prosperity to be revealed in the video), these emails stoked the prospects’ fear of missing out on something momentous (the risk to their well-being by not registering, guilt-tripping them for failing to respond to previous invitations).

In this final round of messages, another kind of countdown clock was used.

By all accounts, the campaign was a success. More than 18 separate contacts were used, excluding e-zine ads. The loyalty of existing Weiss customers deepened and the goodwill of future subscribers was established. In short, rapport was created that will likely lead to more sales whenever Weiss promotes a paid event.

But even if you don’t have the resources to mount an extensive campaign, you can still reap significant benefits. For example, KCI Communications enacted a more modest campaign for their paid Webinar; yet they were able to sell 133 slots and picked up a few additional sales after the event.

This brings us to the question of whether you should archive your events.

Many marketers keep them available indefinitely. Since they’re great lead-generating products, their long-tail viability can be exploited. Others maintain a one-time only policy. If you don’t archive your productions, then make them more exclusive by emphasizing the scarcity principle in your messages: Prospects more sharply crave the things they can’t have. Use that to your advantage.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

Could Time Name Twitter ‘Person of the Year’?

Jason Fell — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 23:42:37 -0500

After a more than hour-long debate, six panelists were split between two candidates they thought should be named Time magazine’s 2009 Person of the Year. Neither, for the record, were actually human beings.

Three panelists voted for Twitter. Three voted for the economy.

“Twitter affects a lot of people, but not as many as the economy,” said former New York City mayor and debate panelist Rudy Giuliani. “From the wealthy to the poor who are out of jobs, the economy affects us all.” Other panelists included Barbara Walters; cardiac surgeon and newly-named television show host Dr. Mehmet Oz; O the Oprah Magazine editor-at-large Gayle King; restaurant founder and Top Chef judge Tom Colicchio; and Luke Ravensthal, the 29-year-old mayor of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

A number of highly deserving, and living people also were talked about Thursday night on the eighth floor of Manhattan’s Time/Life Building. Here’s a quick look at who made the conversation:

Nancy Pelosi, in relation to Obama’s proposed healthcare bill (suggested by Walters); “patient zero,” the first person who contracted the H1N1 virus (Dr. Oz); U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke (Colocchio); recently-named associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court Sonia Sotomayor (King); General David Patraeus and Chesley “Sully” Sulenberger, the US Airways pilot who successfully carried out an emergency landing of an airplane in New York’s Hudson River in January (Giuliani). Giuliani, of course, also couldn’t help but nominate longtime New York Yankees shortstop Derek Jeter.

OK, the Yanks won the World Series, but he hardly qualifies as the most significant global influencer of the year.

But between Twitter and the economy, which has the better shot at unseating president Barack Obama as Time’s Person of the Year (he was named last December)? Both arguably are relevant and have had significant global influence this year.

But is there a clear winner? I don't think so. And how much stock does Time actually put into these annual debates?

But if not for the social implication, I for one enjoyed another of Barbara Walters’ suggestions for the business aspect: despised Ponzie schemer-turned-jailbird Bernie Madoff. “If you want to sell some magazines, you name someone like Madoff,” Walter said. “People would pick up those issues and say, ‘How dare you?’”
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

Late to Augmented Reality Party, Esquire Delivers Solid 3-D Package

Jason Fell — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:04:56 -0500

In terms of innovation in the print medium, Hearst’s Esquire magazine has been a pioneer on a number of fronts in recent months. Last year, it partnered with Cambridge, Massachusetts-based E Ink to produce an electronic “paper” display for the magazine’s 75th anniversary October issue. Then in February, Esquire produced a cover “window” that opened to a mini table of contents and featured an advertisement on the back flap. Its May “How to Be a Man” issue featured perforated covers that act like a flip book, allowing readers to make 27 combinations of the facial features of Barack Obama, George Clooney and Justin Timberlake.

Now, the magazine is tapping augmented reality technology to take innovation into the digital realm. Throughout the December issue (which hits newsstands November 17) are coded markers that, when readers/users hold up to their computer’s Webcam, trigger interactive video “experiences” to appear on their screens. Four articles and the cover are equipped with the AR functionality.

For example, when a user holds the cover to their Webcam, cover feature/actor Robert Downey Jr. appears on their screen, talks about the issue, sings and shows a clip of his upcoming film, Sherlock Holmes. Car maker Lexus is the issue’s exclusive advertiser for the AR technology, with an ad that's AR-enabled.

But while Esquire was first (or near first) with its other “innovations,” it’s late in delivering augmented reality in magazines. In June, Bonnier’s Popular Science utilized augmented reality firm Metaio’s Web application software to create an interactive image (provided by General Electric) featuring wind turbines when readers held up the cover of its July issue to their computer cameras. Time Inc.’s InStyle magazine used augmented reality to make some advertisements in its December holiday gift guide issue three dimensional. Last month, publisher Future US also utilized the technology for the December issues of Official Xbox Magazine and Playstation: The Official Magazine featured an advertising campaign that generated an interactive 3-D war scene.

Instead of kicking open the AR door for magazines, Esquire has simply contributed to a “rising trend.” Or has it? To be fair, I haven’t seen the magazine in my hands yet, but it looks like Esquire has in fact delivered a superior AR experience, compared to those we’ve already seen. Check out editor-in-chief David Granger’s video introduction to the issue below.

Aside from who’s first and who’s not, perhaps the better question is whether utilizing AR is true “innovation” or all gimmick. What’s the real value for print magazines?
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

I’m Not Giving an Inch

Jason Fell — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:32:02 -0500

Did you ever read “Sometimes a Great Notion” by Ken Kesey? Yes, the Ken Kesey with the psychedelic bus. Before the Merry Pranksters and after his successful “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” Kesey penned this novel, one of the great works of American fiction, a sprawling tale of the struggles of a northwest logging family, the conflict between brothers, the small independent logging company the family owns and their fights against larger timber interests.

The most recurring metaphor in the book is fighting progress, alluded to in the form of the Stamper family home, which is built on a bend of a great river that is constantly eroding away the property. Over the years the Stampers built a crude series of barriers, wired posts and piers to prevent this from happening, but the river is relentless, as rivers will be. Some of the most vivid passages in the book portray the father and older brothers’ attempts to keep the river from destroying the property, typically out in the night in vicious storms, lashing the piers back together, fighting the river of progress, the river of change. The book was made into a film starring Henry Fonda and Paul Newman, with the tagline embodying the philosophy of Henry Stamper, “Never Give an Inch.”

So, what does all this have to do with magazine publishing? Out west last week, I was pitching print (along with our online properties) to marketers who thought I had landed there from another planet. To one, print was so alien that he took a genuine interest in it. It was a novelty. More and more marketers start conversations by letting you know that they’re not doing print as a matter of fact. Many of my competitors and fellow high-tech publishers have given up, letting the river flow, and you can see the results in the steadily eroding group of high-tech titles still in print. I can’t quite explain why, but like Henry Stamper, I refuse to yield. I refuse to bend to the times, to just accept the advertiser’s misguided notions that print is dead and not even worth talking about. While I’m happy to sell a few white papers at the end of the call, most of the time I’m taking them out to the woodshed to disabuse them of their anti-print bias—whether they buy it today or not.

It’s up to those of us in the industry to stand up passionately for what we believe in and what we know to be true. The easy days of print as an accepted medium are over. Washed well downstream. But we know people are still reading our publications, and becoming aware of and interested in companies through the print ads. It’s up to us to lash together the arguments and fight.

We’re deep into contract season and I’m getting on planes to visit customers. And I'm not giving an inch.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

Despite a Brutal Year, The Number of Shelter Magazines Grows

Vanessa Voltolina — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:05:52 -0500

Hachette Filipacchi announced Monday that Metropolitan Home will shut down after its December issue, adding to the already-substantial list of ceased shelter pubs this year. But despite a tough '09 for the sector, recent data reports that home magazines have still seen top growth over the past five years, meaning the number of individual titles has actually grown.
According to the 2010 National Directory of Magazines, which tracks data for 17,020 North American pubs that accept advertising, home titles have seen top growth in titles of 167 percent. Since 2004, that’s an increase from 105 to 280 titles in the category. Real estate publications have also nearly doubled during this period.
The initial reaction, of course, is surprise, considering today’s news and the number of shelter titles that bit the dust earlier this year, including Domino, Western Interiors Design, Remodeled Chicagoland, and Florida Designers Review. PIB numbers confirm that the category is suffering on par with other sinking sectors (ad dollars decreased by 9.3 percent and 22.6 percent in Q3 since the same period last year).
Even home and interior design category leaders like Dwell and Hearst’s House Beautiful have been hit hard. Dwell saw ad dollars plummet 43.4 percent and ad pages decrease 46.4 percent in the first half of '09 versus the same period last year. House Beautiful didn't fare much better in the first half: ad dollars declined 21.8 percent and ad pages experienced a 26.1 percent loss from first half 2008, according to PIB figures.
Ugly numbers aside, the category has also seen its share of launches this year, including a stable of Reader’s Digest “Family Handyman” titles, Cottages & Cabins, Modern, DG Commercial, Great Kitchen and Bath Ideas, Designer’s Choice, Today’s Home Improvement, SOHODESIGN and Lonny Magazine.
Back in January, Kate Kelly Smith, vice president and publisher of House Beautiful told FOLIO: that shelter magazines weren’t going away any time soon, but “category leaders” and those with a “diversified” business would better weather the storm. Almost a year later, Kelly Smith’s prediction is correct, according to the data. As home titles fold, others quickly pop up to take their places.
With the barrier of entry to launching new magazines still fairly low, it’s probably not that surprising so many new titles came into the shelter category. Who will remain five years from now is the bigger question.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

The Media Company of Tomorrow: One Executive’s Take

Jason Fell — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:37:43 -0500

One of our keynote presentations at the virtual FOLIO: Show Virtual last week included a panel of leading executives in the industry, including F+W Media CEO David Nussbaum.

Nussbaum gave one of the most provocative responses during the hour-long discussion, essentially saying that print advertising is an irrevocably declining source of revenue, and that companies that don’t recognize that do so at their own risk.

As it turns out, Nussbaum jotted down some notes to the questions I asked the panelists to consider in advance. Here are Nussbaum’s notes, with the questions that prompted his thoughts.

Q: When will the industry see some recovery?
A: This is totally unclear, but there is a sense that we have found the bottom of the market. However, with consumers still under siege (credit difficulties, high unemployment, no or low salary increases), it is hard to see what the impetus will be for growth.

Q: What will the recovery look like?
A: I don’t think it will be ad driven. But rather, we’ll see an expansion of marketing budgets looking for “non-traditional ways to reach buyers.” That will mean everything from custom content solutions, to one-to-one marketing, and expanding our portfolio around our core brands to create new, profitable products and subscription services, like Webinars, which are a growing part of our business.

Q: Will we see the robust industry health of 2005 to 2006 again?
A: I really don’t know.

Q: How will the business be different going forward?
A: In a few ways.
1. Print advertising will continue to be a no growth-to-declining business.
2. Events will rebound, but event producers will need to find a way to mitigate the high costs of exhibiting.
3. High quality and unique content, always at a premium, will be even more important as the Holy Grail of dollars for content will become even more intense.
4. Staff size will be kept lean, with those making it through the recession owning a wider variety of skill sets than those who came before. We need to be bringing new talent to the industry from outside our standard recruitment channels, and producing new ideas across e-commerce, retail, social media. There’s no limit to what we can learn.
5. Online advertising rates will continue to erode, but engagement will be at a premium.
6. Social networks, location-based marketing, custom content selection—these will all be critical for future media providers. And those who aren’t already building their communities may get left behind.
Q: Are media companies being disintermediated on the reader side through social media and blogs?
A: Yes and no. Yes in that there is much more competition for community building, for content presentation and for lead generation. No in that media companies are becoming strong participants in the blogosphere and in using social networks to both build community and drive traffic to sell stuff. F+W and other enthusiast media companies have a unique advantage in that our communities already exist, created around a common interest or goal. Being of and in the community, and respected and trusted though our own blogs, positions us well. Social media interactions are the key.

Q: What are the most important things media companies can do now? Adjust organizational structure? Change their approach to content creation? Layoffs? Debt reduction?
A: Media companies need to find a way to focus as vertically as possible, make community building the core of existence, ensure that staff is cross-trained, fleet of mind, and willing to adapt to radical change comfortably. Portfolio management is critical. Organize your resources around the core communities and properties with the most opportunity for success.

Q: What will the media company of 2012 look like?
A: Community focused, really good at demographic analysis, excellent at nurturing around verticals, diverse in terms of product offerings and delivery systems, Web centric, advertising will be considered gravy, customers pay for content and contribute to the creation of content.

Q: What is the most important lesson og the 2007-2009 recession?
A: The sheer desire of people to adapt and to participate in tomorrow. I have really been impressed with the willingness of people to learn and to change.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

UPDATE: Feeling the Pinch, Garden & Gun Skips an Issue

Jason Fell — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 17:20:21 -0500

It’s been a whirlwind year for high-end Southern lifestyle magazine Garden & Gun. In January, rumors swirled that it was on course to run out of money and go out of business. Less than two months later, the magazine was acquired by Indigo Acquisition LLC, a company co-created by publisher Rebecca Darwin—effectively tossing the title a lifeline saving it from going out of business.

So why haven’t readers received their October/November issue? It was due out in mid-October and—nada. In an e-mail sent to readers Thursday, Darwin explained what happened:
To help shore up our business for 2010 and beyond, we recently made the difficult decision to skip our October/November issue. This was a painful thing for the G&G team, and we hate to disappoint you, our loyal subscribers. However, please rest assured that you will receive the full number of copies you ordered when you subscribed or joined one of our club levels. (We will handle that for you, so no need to call our customer service.) And know this: We will never compromise on the quality of the writing, the photography, or the beautiful paper that Garden & Gun is printed on.
In these tough economic times, it’s not unheard of (or unreasonable, really) for publishers to combine or skip an issue to cut production/distribution costs. What I haven’t heard of, at least off the top of my head, is a magazine that announces the elimination of an issue after the fact.

The next issue subscribers should expect is December/January [pictured], which is set to ship in late November and hit newsstands December 8. That is, if the magazine scrapes up enough money to publish it. UPDATE: In an e-mail, Darwin told me the December/January issue has indeed gone to press.

When we reported on its potential demise in January, and its subsequent saving in March, we received a number of comments praising the magazine (“the very best magazine I have ever had the pleasure of reading”). For its loyal readers, I hope Garden & Gun pulls through.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

At ABM Forum, Publishers Wonder If Marketers Have Lost Touch With Branding

Matt Kinsman — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:40:48 -0500

During the American Business Media Executive Forum in New York yesterday, BusinessWeek chief economist Michael Mandel gave long suffering publishers some hope by saying he believes there is a "media boom" coming in which marketers will reinvest in many of the traditional channels they've cut back.

The ABM Executive Forum was held in place of ABM's usual Chicago-based Top Management Meeting, and drew around 200 attendees.

Other speakers weren't so sure about Mandel's forecast. "I don't think print will ever come back, it will probably stay at the current level," said Anthea Stratigos, co-founder and CEO of Outsell Inc.

Stratigos also threw cold water on paid content. "Paid content could be more challenged in 2010 than 2009," she added. "Spending by the end-user is decreasing and there is no automatic leverage from ad-based assets to paid content. Media companies come in at the lowest price point."

However, one speaker wondered about the marketer backlash against branding. ‘I'm concerned that marketers have lost touch with branding," said Jeff DeBalko, president and CIO of Reed Business Information. "We can show them research where at least 30 percent of the audience wants to read print in favor of any other medium and marketers don't get it. Direct response used to be the gutter of marketing, now it's the nirvana."

That's not to say Reed is ignoring it. In recent years, lead generation has gone from zero to one-third of Reed's overall online revenue and is a component of 80 percent to 90 percent of Reed's online products, DeBalko added.

Still, DeBalko is worried about advertiser mindset. "We spoke with one agency guy who just talked about how he could cut the budget by 30 percent. A couple years ago advertisers would pay us $1 million for something with a lot of neat features. Now they'll pay one-third of that and everything has to be measured and provide leads. If we as an industry continue to offer the same thing but for 30 percent less, we're out of business."
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

What Went Wrong with Purpose Driven Connection?

Jason Fell — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 09:28:22 -0500

On Wednesday, Purpose Driven Connection—the quarterly published in partnership between Saddleback Church pastor Rick Warren and the Reader’s Digest Association—became the latest magazine casualty of 2009 as the groups decided to move the product online-only. Until September, RDA said the title, which launched in January, was still in “development stages.” After four issues it was never green-lighted for a full launch off the newsstand.

What gives? When RDA announced the launch late last year, it billed the agreement with Warren and Saddleback as one of the company's “most important and far-reaching ventures ever.” Yesterday, in a statement, Warren said “impressive reader feedback has prompted us to focus all our energies on our digital format so our content can be expanded, international and free.”

So, what about the print product? With a $9.99 cover price, was it a dud on stands? A RDA spokesperson called sales figures “encouraging,” especially at outlets like Wal-Mart, but said the company wasn’t releasing specific numbers. He told me the magazine failed to generate enough full membership buys—$29 for the quarterly magazine, DVDs with each issue, study guides and access to its Web site. Those packages were offered by the church to its immense membership base.

In other words, the lack of interest in the full package, and subsequent lack of expected revenue made Purpose Driven Connection an unattractive business for RDA going forward. They made the decision to kill the costly print magazine, and agreed to host its Web site at least through the first quarter next year.

I asked the spokesperson directly if RDA considers the Purpose Driven Connection venture a failure. Of course he said it wasn’t a failure. From an operational point of view, he said that shutting down an otherwise interesting product that doesn’t meet financial criteria “is every bit as important as green-lighting others to go forward.” He also said RDA gleaned “proof of concept” insights into serving a community like Warren’s that’s bound by faith or philosophy.

“We believe that we could take this forward with a community that had a somewhat different characteristic—larger, more open to purchasing memberships, more universal, global, etc.,” the spokesperson said.

More open to purchasing memberships. That might be key.

This shouldn’t suggest, though, that Saddleback hasn’t had any success from the venture. The church said subscribers to the Daily Hope devotions newsletter have grown to 400,000 since Purpose Driven Connection launched early this year.

If not for monetary reasons, I think the loss for RDA is substantial, despite the positive lessons it says it learned from giving it a shot. It has to be tough, especially for a company that’s now steering itself out of bankruptcy, to watch a product it called one of its most important ventures ever fail after only four issues.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.