FOLIO: Section Blogs by Editorial

SOPA and Magazine Media

sbotelho — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 15:59:41 -0500

In an attempt to protect copyrighted material, the U.S. Congress has been mulling a proposal to curb access to websites, search engine results and domain names, among other things, something that has seemingly outraged many in the digital community.

The bill, entitled the Stop Online Piracy Act [H.R. 3261], has so infuriated Wikipedia that it blacked out its site today. Google has also promoted the bill’s destruction, with its clever logo on its homepage blacked out for the remainder of the day and linked to a petition and fact sheet (pictured).

“The U.S. government could order the blocking of sites using methods similar to those employed by China,” writes the search engine on one of its pages. “Among other things, search engines could be forced to delete entire websites from their search results.”

So far, AOL, eBay, Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn, among others, have already come out against the bill’s proposal, which is known in the Senate as the Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) [S.968].

What would all this mean for our industry, though? When reached by this reporter, the MPA declined to comment. It seems that some type of measure would be supported by the organization, however, which recognizes “the significant impact and harm piracy has on copyright dependent industries like magazines, movies, music and clothing,” a statement from the MPA says.

Where SOPA and PIPA may really hurt our industry is with our advertisers—they could lose millions of dollars by intentionally or unintentionally providing services to “rogue sites.” While many news outlets provide original reporting that would be protected from this law, our advertisers have a stake in different kinds of online properties and may have long court battles ahead of them under the proposal, which could complicate relationships with other existing clients like magazines.

A rogue site is defined as any website that facilitates copyright infringement; one of the reasons Google and Wikipedia are so concerned. Since rogue is so broadly defined, several different digital properties could be at risk for violating the would-be laws--the language could sweep up inocent sites that are merely repurposing content.

“[PIPA] authorizes the Attorney General to direct U.S. based third-parties, including Internet Service Providers, payment processers, online advertising network providers and search engines to take appropriate action to either prevent access to [a ‘rogue’] site, or cease doing business with it,” the statement from the MPA says. “While providing immunity to websites that sold a product that turned out to be counterfeit, PIPA would allow a copyright or trademark holder to ask a judge to compel Internet advertising agencies and financial firms (i.e. MasterCard) to discontinue processing payments or providing services to the rogue sites.”

In addition to possibly harming advertisers, some magazines are spending large sums to create web-exclusive shows with YouTube, which could be harmed in this case and possibly cause other hardships for brand extensions since sharing a video or other content on Facebook could fall under copyright infringement.

"Fighting online piracy is extremely important," writes David Drummond, Google's senior vice president of corporate development and chief legal officer. "We are investing a lot of
time and money in that fight. Last year alone we acted on copyright takedown notices for more than 5 million webpages and invested more than $60 million in the fight against ads appearing on bad sites. And we think there is more that can be done here—like targeted and focused steps to cut off the money supply to foreign pirate sites. If you cut off the money flow, you cut the incentive to steal."

So while Google, Wikipedia and others go black today, the world will wait and so will the magazine industry. The White House has already issued a statement saying it will not sign such legislation if it is passed, which is not easing any woes as of yet.

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

Daily Deal Predictions for 2012

sbotelho — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 15:40:33 -0500

From delayed IPOs, to buyouts, burnouts, layoffs and more, 2011 proved to be a volatile year for the daily deal industry. The business model for profitable group buying remains out of reach for many, and the industry is racing to figure out where to place their bets for growth. Publishers, merchants and business owners want to know what’s next in the social commerce space.

After the phenomenal maturation of the daily deal industry seen in 2011, a new paradigm will usher in programs that merge content with a seamless deal delivery experience. The industry focus will evolve from deal sites and daily emails to other messaging formats, providing relevant deals where, when and how consumers want them. The year 2011 was just Phase One of group buying. Phase Two begins in 2012. Here are some predictions for what portends to be another technologically eventful year in group buying, and reasons why publisher may stand to gain the most.

200 “Groupon Clones” Will Bite The Dust As Consolidation Mode Takes Off

With more than 600 companies currently operating in the group buying space, industry consolidation is going to become a very real threat to many daily deal sites. According to Yipit.com, over 170 deal sites failed in 2011. Next year the trend will continue as large companies purchase smaller rivals and other generic deal brands go belly up. Over 200 of the ‘me-too’ deal sites may close their doors within the first six months of the New Year. Meanwhile, publishers and niche sites that have found a way to integrate daily deals into their existing content, rather than just photocopying Groupon’s model, will not only survive but thrive.

2012 Is The Year of the White Label

White-label providers will reign supreme in 2012. According to Yipit research, this year white labels exhibited a transaction volume of 5-10 percent, but next year it may double as much as 20 percent. Media companies, niche bloggers and digital content creators have credible brands, local sales forces and engaged audiences–critical components that large horizontal sites spend hundreds of millions to grow. The only piece these companies are missing is the technology on which to build a deal site. In the year ahead, white label technologies will allow publishers to prevail after the Groupons of the world have exhausted their resources acquiring new customers and finding new merchants.

Big Branded Sites’ Futures Lies In Instant Contextualized Deals

2012 will be the year big brand sites, which source hundreds of deals to large audiences with diverse interests, establish a profitable business model. But profits will only follow the ability to tailor content, matching the right customer with the right merchant. Simply put, the daily space will be dominated by the players who understand how to effectively merge content and commerce into a seamless experience, allowing consumers access to relevant deals anywhere and at any time. In 2012, Groupon and LivingSocial will make massive investments in their mobile capabilities, while Google, Facebook and other major audience aggregators will extend their commitment to the integration of location, advertorial, mobile and contextual commerce.

The future group buying landscape will be marked by consolidation, significant developments in offer targeting and the introduction of new deal delivery technology. This year’s success sets the stage for other daily deal players to be taken seriously and carve out a niche of the market for their own. 2011 is not the ending for daily deal industry; rather, it’s merely the beginning.

Martin Tobias is founder and CEO of Tippr, a premier provider of group buying solutions and the flagship PoweredByTippr , a white- label platform that enables publishers to create successful group buying services. A Seattle entrepreneur and venture capitalist, Tobias has 25 years combined experience in the venture capital and technology industries, sits on several boards and is involved in numerous charities through the Martin Tobias Foundation. His Twitter handle is @MartinGTobias .

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

Utne Reader To Shut Down Editorial Offices, Relocate to Ogden Headquarters

sbotelho — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 12:14:40 -0500

For the magazine industry, the holiday season thus far has been mixed. The first full week of December brings two pieces of sad news (not including the holiday party budget reductions reported earlier this week—the horror, the horror).

Get Married Media is closing down within upcoming weeks, and Utne Reader is relocating to publisher Ogden Publications’ headquarters in Topeka, Kansas from Minneapolis, Minnesota. The physical move may not be so bad (I hear the Kansas landscape is beautiful), but it is the staff changes and budget reduction that makes this tough news to report.

According to reports from the StarTribune, Ogden Publications is bringing bi-monthly Utne Reader under its headquarters’ roof “so the 30 Ogden employees who work on other magazines can share space and workload”. Other titles include Mother Earth News, Motorcycle Classics, Grit and Capper’s. The seven staffers currently running Utne have elected to not make the Kansas transition, Utne Reader EIC David Schimke tells FOLIO:. Two more issues will be released before the Minnesota’s office closure ensues in March.

Schimke says Ogden Publications may be planning to cut the literary digest’s budget in half, down from $500,000 to $250,000. He tells FOLIO:, "I don't think it was an editorial quality decision, it was about the affordability. Having a satellite office in this day and age is hard."

Earlier this year, Utne was ready to embrace the medium founder Eric Utne now claims to be the print magazine’s poison. Its Alt Wire service, a socially curated digital magazine built on Sociative Inc.’s R88R Platform, launched in July to a generous amount of buzz from the public. Alt Wire was designed to pick up news a handpicked group of “influencers” shared through Twitter. At the time of launch, web editor David Doody told FOLIO: the majority of content shared through the Alt Wire will be from the alternative press sector, categorized by sites like Mother Jones and The Nation.

The only upshot of this news: Utne Reader is not folding…yet. Schimke says, "There will be a smaller core staff, and will be getting support in editorial operations from other Ogden staff." Unfortunately, a new, thinner staff will most likely not lead to a higher quality of product...and a lower quality product will do nothing to improve sales.

Ogden acquired Utne Reader in June 2006. At time of purchase, Utne had a paid circ of 225,000. The magazine debuted in 1984, and now has a single copy price of $6.99.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

For the Unbeatable Price of Free...

sbotelho — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 13:26:07 -0500

Free samples, whether from a grocery store, makeup counter or a newsstand, are largely welcomed by consumers. Give people a chance to sample great products without putting down a dollar and watch the line of waiting customers curve around the block. Aside from the free good itself, consumers will often experience a warm feeling for the manufacturer supplying it, “They really do care!” Companies (retailers, publishers, etc.) know this, and maintain the freebie as an act of goodwill, opposed to what it really is: a bite to inspire consumers to buy the entire package.

Today, The Wall Street Journal opens the gates of its paid wall, allowing viewers to access every article on its site without agreeing to a subscription. The key icons, which normally accompany original or more provocative WSJ content, have disappeared. The free access is sponsored by Citbank; a click-through ad for its Thank You Reward Cards is nestled against WSJ’s “The Wall Street Journal Online is Free Today” banner cresting the top of the home page.

No doubt Wall Street Journal’s page views will spike throughout the day, as word about the free content spreads in the Venn diagram of the social sphere. No doubt these page views will be integrated into overall numbers for the month of November and later used in pitches for advertising partners. But the bigger question, the question that will likely remain unanswered in hard numbers from WSJ, is whether or not this free access will sell subscriptions.

As publishers begin to total up digital sales, free downloads are often included in the tallies. This certainly makes the digital scape appear more appealing, with promise of larger revenue and greater audience engagement. But after the giveaways are over, the numbers often recede (as we all know, just because someone downloads a free issue doesn’t mean they open their wallets to purchase a subscription).

In a recent CircMatters Special Report, Jack Hanrahan takes a close look at the state of digital circulation. Hanrahan cites 32 magazines reporting a digital circ of over 15,000 to ABC for first half 2011. He then analyzes those magazines with a “true paid” circulation, compared to those who include partnership subs, sponsored subs and verified individual use copies in their total numbers.

After this parsing, 8 out of the top 10 magazines originally claiming the highest downloads weren’t included in the new top ten who could claim 100 percent “true paid” numbers. In fact, only 10 of the original 32 titles were able to make this claim at all.

Giving out free content is undoubtedly a decision that should be made by individual publishers; unfortunately, when one publisher does it, others are forced to follow. At the FOLIO: Show, Peter Moore, editor of Rodale’s Men’s Health, made no secret of his disappointment in major players like Conde Nast choosing to bundle digital editions with their print subs. By doing so, audiences become accustomed to receiving products for free – setting up a precedent other publishers may not have chosen for themselves, but one that audiences now expect.

So while free may sell, and free may boost numbers, it remains important for publishers (and advertisers, and consumers) to weigh the price of free. After doing so, the publishing world may find itself agreeing with Moore when he said, “Free sucks. We should get rid of free.”
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

Sid Evans on What Southern Magazines Can Teach the World About Media

sbotelho — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:25:06 -0400

What’s the difference between Garden & Gun and Portfolio, two award-winning magazines that were both launched in 2007?

Other than the obvious response—Portfolio is out of business while Garden & Gun thrives—for Sid Evans, the difference comes down to one word: Soul.

Evans, the group editor of Time Inc.’s Lifestyle Division and founding editor of Garden & Gun, says being “soulful” makes all the difference between magazine success and failure, and it’s something Southern magazines can teach the world.

Evans was a keynote speaker at the ACT2 Conference in Oxford, Mississippi, and in his presentation, he offered seven key ingredients for success of Southern magazines, ingredients that all magazine brands can emulate. “Our first cover had Pat Conroy standing in a fountain,” Evans said. “It was not a choice a focus group would have made. But to me it made sense!”

In music, art, literature, architecture, food and more, there is “an abundant, rich life” in the South, and that’s what people want, Evans said. “We were a general-interest magazine about Southern culture, and it struck a nerve immediately,” he said. “And somehow, that translates beyond the South.”

Here are Evans’ 7 ingredients of successful Southern magazines.

1. Make people proud of where they’re from. Think about what was going on in the South in 1966, when Southern Living was launched, he said. It wasn’t great. “But Southern Living was about a civilized, gracious place.”

2. Make food the center of everything. “Food is what binds people together,” Evans said. “It’s what they talk about. And it’s not just the recipes, it’s the stories—the barbeque joint that’s been around since the 1950s. The term ‘American food’ doesn’t really mean anything—but Southern food, that means something.”

3. Never underestimate the power of a great story. “A lot of the media world has lost sight of that fact,” Evans said, recounting a story in Southern Living of how people survived the devastating tornados in Alabama earlier this year, and how it touched people all over the world.

4. Never underestimate the power of nostalgia. “Even as you do Facebook and develop a Twitter presence, remember nostalgia,” Evans said. “At Garden & Gun, we got a letter from a reader in New Jersey who said we made her nostalgic for a place she’s never been. We did story on Facebook about Southern sodas, regional sodas that people grew up with. It was like someone dropped a bomb on our Facebook page!”

5. Have a drink. Southern Living has had a “tortured relationship” with alcohol over the years, Evans said, but now, alcohol is a regular part of the magazine, as it should be. “When you do a story about a mint julep, you’re doing something about more than a drink,” he said. “When you think about most kinds of alcohol, they come from somewhere else. But bourbon is ours. It is uniquely Southern.”

6. Pick the right heroes. “One of the things that makes Southern magazines unusual is that readers treat celebrities as members of an extended family,” Evans said. “When you’re writing about celebrities, you need to be careful. If they don’t seem real, if they don’t represent the South well, then you lose credibility with readers.”

7. Make your readers the star. “Elevate them,” Evans says. “Recipe sharing is a huge part of the culture—a kind of cultural secret weapon.”

And in the end, Evans repeated, a magazine should “be soulful. It’s not a business strategy, but it is a business philosophy.”

The ACT2 conference is organized by Samir Husni, director of the Magazine Innovation Center at University of Mississippi the journalism school, and widely known as “Mr. Magazine.” The two-day event, in its second year, has doubled in size from 2010, Husni said.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

Why Do Consumer Stars So Often Fail To Shine In B-to-B?

Matt Kinsman — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 15:05:05 -0400

Let's face it: b-to-b publishing is considered the weak sister to consumer publishing by many in the industry. So why do so many consumer side vets struggle when they make a go at b-to-b?
Richard Beckman brought a lot of attitude as CEO of Prometheus Global Media, promising to revamp the media/entertainment brands (including Adweek and The Hollywood Reporter) that the company had purchased from Nielsen Business Media with a consumer-mag edge.

That attitude was shared by Beckman's big name editorial hires Janice Min ("I guess it shakes the system out here that a so-called trade would dare to break news that wasn't spoon fed. Well, people had better get used to it," Min told The New York Times last year) and Newser founder and Vanity Fair columnist Michael Wolff (who told FOLIO: of the revamped Adweek, "All we're doing is going to the marketplace and saying, ‘You were OK with a crappy product, now how can you not be even more enthusiastic about an obviously better product?')

Now Beckman has been relieved of day-to-day duties and Wolff is out at Adweek amid reports of clashes with Prometheus Global Media chairman Jim Finkelstein. (For a former Adweek editor's brutal take on Wolff making a habit of "failing upward," click here. One publisher said to us, "It couldn't happen to a nicer guy.")

Adweek remained an aggressive news breaker under Wolff and walked the line between hard news and vanity publishing (Top 10 Technologists, Top 10 Digital Media Buyers) but Adweek in some ways didn't distinguish itself from the coverage in consumer publications. "Michael created some interesting content at Adweek, and I loved his coverage of Rupert Murdoch," MediaPost's Joe Mandese told The New York Times. "But I could read that in New York or Vanity Fair."

Attempts at "consumerizing" b-to-b brands aren't anything new. Years ago, FOLIO: went through its own failed "New York media scene" repositioning. In 2007, Doubledown Media--headed by journalist and entrepreneur Randall Lane and Jim Dunning, former owner of the Ziff Davis magazine group (who said, "We don't view ourselves as a trade magazine")--took the financial markets by storm with titles like Dealmaker and Trader Monthly that boasted fat books, killer events (such as the Wall Street Boxing Charity Championship, in which traders got to square off in the ring) and legendary parties ("Have you ever been to one of their parties?" a senior publishing executive at a competitive company told FOLIO: at the time. "If you get invited to one, get an invite for me.")

Two years later the market turned and so did Doubledown, which ran out of money and folded in February 2009.

When Beckman first announced his plans to "consumerize" Adweek and The Hollywood Reporter, I thought "Uh oh" but over the last few months I had to admire what he tried to do (and the investment he was willing to make). It was a welcome change from the razor thin margins and assembly line content forced on so many b-to-b titles.

The b-to-b world has plenty to learn from the consumer side in all facets of the game and there is no reason a b-to-b magazine shouldn't be a polished, entertaining read. But you can't escape the fact that the trade magazine exists to help business leaders make business decisions. Useful trumps sexy.

If the b-to-b world can combine the attitude, polish and investment of the consumer side without forgetting its ultimate mission, look out.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

At AMC, Magazines Scolded on Social Media Efforts

sbotelho — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 14:28:21 -0400

As several hundred magazine executives gathered at MPA’s 2011 American Magazine Conference in New York to hear speakers dissect social media, tablets and e-commerce, Scott Galloway, New York University Professor of marketing and founder of L2 Digital Think Tank—authors of the Digital IQ Index—struck a nerve with his frank dressing down of publishers’ social media strategies.

“About 19 percent of our budgets are now going to digital,” he said to the audience. “But 40 percent of media consumption for those under 40 is digital based.”

Galloway took a stark tone with the crowd and at times took on a scolding demeanor when asserting that the magazine industry is doing itself a disservice by not aggressively tapping into the benefits of the digital space and in particular Facebook.

“The reason you’re having trouble making money is because you’re not relevant—profits are an indicator of relevance,” he said, adding, “Not a brand in here is managing capital allocation correctly in relation to Facebook.”

The professor said that Facebook is the number one medium in every market and that magazine professionals need to view the social media platform as a market place, citing statistics that reveal that 50 percent of people on Facebook make at least $50,000 a year and that 38 percent of all online referral traffic now originates from Facebook.

“The new young affluent—we’re no longer the target market—the new kids on the block want innovation from brands,” he said. “Right now, social media is the least expensive way to do that.”

Galloway turned to fashion company Burberry to make his point. The British based clothing company has over 8.6 million “likes” on Facebook, while the internationally recognized women’s magazine Cosmopolitan has only 1.1 million.

“How did a trench coat company get so far out ahead of you there?” he asked. “It’s somewhat ironic that brands are ahead of media companies. Burberry has spent millions of dollars on Facebook before it was cool and by our estimates 13 to 15 million people over the next few years will raise their hands and say I want a direct relationship with your brand. Once they get there, somewhere between one third and two thirds of people that subscribe to Vogue will already have a relationship with Burberry. Will they spend more,less or the same to advertise? The response around Facebook is fairly uninspired in this industry.”

Galloway added that the number one source of upstream traffic to Burberry is its Facebook page, meaning they can reduce their spending on Google Ad Words because they have a lower source of cost of traffic from Facebook.

“That’s where the money is in Internet media,” he said. “This is a seminal moment, go all in on new technology, it’s going to pay off.”
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

In 2011, Magazine Launches Outpace Closures

sbotelho — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 15:41:03 -0400

In its quarterly survey, Mediafinder.com reports 200 magazines launched in the first nine months of 2011. This number is an upshot from the same period in 2010, in which 176 magazines debuted.

Leading the launch list is the food category (with 25 new titles) and regional interest (which introduced 18 titles); new regional pubs include Bitayavon, O. Henry Magazine and Brooklyn Magazine. 944 Media (which shuttered its luxe magazine offerings in June) debuts a new regional offering with Vegas/Rated, under parent company Sandow Media’s partnership with WENDOH Media.

The b-to-b media sector saw a prolific first nine months in 2011, with 56 new titles.

During the same period of 2011, 128 magazines shuttered. Unfortunately, this doesn’t demonstrate much of an improvement over January-September 2010, when 127 titles closed. The bridal sector (which lost the regional editions of Brides) had the biggest body count with 18 title closures, along with the regional sector, which also lost 18 titles.

34 b-to-b magazines shut their doors in January-June 2011, including Penton’s American Printer and PFFC (Paper, Film & Foil Converter).
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

The New “I” In Journalism

sbotelho — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 13:52:34 -0400

Just like the magazine industry itself, reporting styles are evolving. Aggregated and link journalism is plentiful; yellow journalism will most likely never go away; long-form journalism holds a nostalgic power, despite increasingly Tweet-ified attention spans; and now, the era of “me” journalism appears to be here for the long haul.

Preceding this burgeoning journalism trend is the Me generation, a phrase that often refers to those born in the latter half of the 20th Century. Iconic journalist Tom Wolfe explored this phenomenon in an August 1976 New York Magazine article, “Reports on America’s New Great Awakening: The ‘Me’ Decade”, “By the 1960s the common man was also getting quite interested in this business of ‘realizing his potential as a human being.’ But once again he crossed everybody up! Once more he took his money and ran—determined to do-it-himself!”

And the “me” continues to spread. Traditional journalim did not include personal pronouns; to do so would taint the supposed unbiased view of a reporter’s research. Running parallel to news journalism are the schools of creative non-fiction and literary journalism, where factual stories are told through a first person point of view, often adding human connection and sensory detail to a series of events.

The three schools all serve different purposes, and one is not necessarily held at higher esteem than the others. But then, enter the blog (which rapidly spread in the early 2000’s), add in the constant “I” factor of social media (used to be Myspace; now it’s Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and more) and the “me “in recent reporting becomes problematic.

Some journalists integrate personal experience of a reporting assignment with measures of success; an educated opinion (like those seen in WIRED, with columns by Clive Thompson and Steven Levy serving up thoughtful commentary and insight) is often welcome, when paired with facts and research. However, it’s the ego preening by journalists I’ve observed over the past months that raises alarm.

In June 2011, Vanity Fair featured pop singer Katy Perry on its cover. In “Katy Perry’s Grand Tour”, journalist Lisa Robinson included that Perry asked her what the word “reticent” means. This statement was followed by an admission that the writer herself thought a “blue moon” was really blue; but it still left a bad taste it my mouth. To this reader, it felt as if Robinson was picking on Perry, as if she ready to judge her before she even began her assignment.

V Magazine included a profile on Marianne Faithful in its Fall Preview issue, penned by Alex Needham. In closing the article, Needham writes, “And with that I wrap up the interview, telling Faithful that I enjoyed it even if she didn’t. ‘I don’t mind if it’s with someone intelligent and cool,’ [Faithful] added flatteringly.” In a story that runs on two pages, with the majority of space taken up by a photo of Faithful, is it necessary to waste copy letting your audience know how in you are with your interviewee? Probably not.

So while I value the added dimension of a reporter’s experience to a story, I don’t necessarily need to read self-reinforcements of intellectual prowess or cool factor. After all, don’t we have enough personal profile options to share those on?
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

The Secret To Monetization Without Exploitation

sbotelho — Thu, 01 Sep 2011 14:57:21 -0400

Given the plethora of solutions available, publishers are seeking the best tools to help monetize their audience beyond display advertising. Yet, even as data becomes pervasive, it is also more highly scrutinized than ever before amid growing privacy concerns. The challenge for publishers is to find the right mix of monetization without risking audience exploitation.

In working to strike this balance, many publishers fall into traps that leave advertisers, audiences and themselves unsatisfied. It’s easy to see why: the market keeps exploding with new technologies and new opportunities. Just when you think you’ve got it all figured out, yet another evolution blows your model out of the water.

To help bring clarity to the constantly-churning sea of digital media, let’s examine—and dispel—some of the most common myths that, once shed, can help publishers achieve this critical balance without alienating audience or buyers.

MYTH: A publisher must choose between an ad-based model or a paywall and risk alienating a large part of the audience.

FACT: A hybrid model may be more effective than the all-or-nothing approach. For many publishers, a tiered system of content may satisfy the needs of both audiences and buyers. For example, offer a limited amount of content for free (ad-driven) with full (ad-free) access available on a subscription basis. Another alternative is to impose a 30-second or one minute commercial on site visitors in order to access free content. This ensures a captive audience for advertisers that can generate a healthy revenue stream to meet audiences’ demands for quality content.

MYTH: A publisher must manage its monetization efforts in-house and risk sacrificing good content in order to make money. With so many options available, from direct paid display placement to ad networks, exchanges and yield optimization technologies, it can easily become overwhelming and result in a piecemeal, fragmented approach.

FACT: Generating revenue and building a brand need not be mutually exclusive. It is entirely possible to create a smart monetization strategy by outsourcing the revenue generation in order to focus on the primary goal of creating great content in house. By partnering with reputable service providers that specialize in areas that best suit the established needs, publishers stand a much better chance of successfully monetizing content in a more cohesive, strategic manner. However, the partners must be willing to work together toward a common goal, so it’s important that this factor be part of the selection process. Once the partners are in place, the publisher must clearly communicate these goals in quantifiable, measurable terms.

MYTH: Audiences are very concerned about data collection, hence the need to reign in data companies’ use of audiences’ data.

FACT: Much of the privacy clamor is a self-fulfilling prophecy: Because the industry is making a fuss about the issue, some members of the public believe they have reason to be concerned. Certainly, there are good reasons to reign in data collection and usage before it gets out of hand. However, the biggest part of the problem is that consumers don’t understand what kinds of data are being collected, why and how it’s being used. We as an industry must educate audiences that web-based data collection is completely anonymous and actually benefits them by ensuring the delivery of more relevant, valuable content. In addition, there are increasingly widespread opt-out practices available to your users currently at the discretion of the brands and/or ad networks.

Alysson Wesner is director of publisher development at TRAFFIQ.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

Dangers of When a Brand is Defined By Its Figurehead

sbotelho — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 13:31:35 -0400

Software giant Apple is losing its figurehead, as Steve Jobs (pictured) announced his resignation as CEO yesterday. And as the company loses the man who serves as both its leader and a major part of its brand, people are starting to wonder what is fated for Apple, its software and its policies.

In a letter to Apple employees released Wednesday, Jobs tapped Tim Cook, current COO of Apple, as his successor. Jobs will act as board chairman and director at the company.

Jobs himself is followed by an almost cultish group dubbed “fanboys” in the media; supposedly, chants of “We love you, Steve!” are often heard at Apple events. His name inspires equal numbers of eye rolling, with the publishing industry largely at ends with Apple’s subscription terms revealed in February.

Most infamously, stipulations include publishers must share 30 percent of revenue from each digital purchase, and cannot encourage readers in-app to buy organically by providing a link to their own site. User demographics are also held by Apple, unless the user chooses to share info with the publisher by physically agreeing to do so.

According to several blogs featuring overly sentimental postings about Jobs’ departure, this change is not a surprise: Jobs has been on medical leave (believed to be caused by pancreatic cancer) for months, and has appeared at very few Apple events as of late.

After the announcement, Reuters reported Apple’s stock value fell seven percent. Here, we see while a company relying heavily on its leader to maintain the face of a brand works when things are going well, it can also prove to be problematic when they’re not.

Tina Brown’s arrival at Newsweek has led to severe criticism from the media, circling around its publicized redesign and recent covers. While both may have been criticized regardless, since the famed Brown leads the pub, judgment seems to be even harsher. According to ABC, paid subs are down 7 percent from first half 2010’s 1.52 million subs to first half 2011’s 1.41 million subs.

The state of Wenner Media, publisher of Rolling Stone, US Weekly and Men’s Journal, comes under rabid speculation every time rumors of owner Jann Wenner’s estranged wife Jane threatening divorce circulate. While this would internally affect the business side of Wenner Media (as Jann borrowed money from Jane’s father to start Rolling Stone), it shouldn’t concern those who buy the magazines.

It will be interesting to see what happens as Apple moves forward with Cook as CEO. Though Jobs is still present, the iconic status he occupied as Apple leader is no longer. While publishers may hope this will mean some more lenience in policies, the most likely side effect is that Apple might lose some of its sway among cultish users. This may then lead to users giving products (including tablets) outside of Apple’s offerings a chance; which will ultimately give publishers back that 30 percent sub cut.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

How Scandal Became This Summer’s Meal Ticket

sbotelho — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 16:08:52 -0400

Since the news initially broke that British newspaper News of the World staff had continuously hacked into phone systems to scoop stories, the media is still rolling in controversy/pious/Twitter-ready tidbit glory. Legions of reporters and bloggers continue to offer up comment on the scandal; all the while sanctimoniously shaking their heads, “Who could ever do such a thing?”

While I believe the majority of my peers in the media industry stick to their journalistic guns (and I have to; if not, my own morality would be questionable by reporting on the industry), it’s hard to ignore some of the bigger implications of this media circus.

Last week, Vanity Fair announced the release of an e-book, Rupert Murdoch, The Master Mogul of Fleet Street, priced at $3.99 for the NOOK and the Kindle. The Guardian, a U.K. news source, is launching an e-singles line called “Guardian Shorts”, selling for $2.99 per book. The first title in the group? Phone Hacking: How The Guardian Broke the Story. The series is available on the Kindle, and is to hit iTunes soon.

And in comes the dollars, alongside SEO opportunities. The Twitter hashtag #notw (annotating shuttered News of the World) reigned as a “Trending Topic” for a substantial period of time on the social site. Subjects like shaving cream pie (thrown at Murdoch during his hearing at The House of Commons in London, resulting in Murdoch’s wife trying to sucker punch the shaving cream assailant); Wendi Deng (aforementioned sucker punching wife); and News Corp. all took turns sharing space in the Twitter sun. [Vanity Fair even produced a faux New York Post cover depicting the incident, pictured]

Many bloggers reposted and reshuffled the news, with some writers taking creative liberties on the subject matter. At Playboy’s “safe for work” website The Smoking Jacket, a recent blog post written by contributor Adam Tod Brown, “I’d Hack That: The Six Sexiest News Corp Hacking Scandal Victims”, was posted on July 25. Currently, the post has 81 likes via Facebook and 114 “Diggs”.

There is also the more disturbing Twitter trend of using demographics of the phone hacking victims to encourage click-throughs. In a case deemed deplorable due to the exploitation of victims’ privacy, using the most shocking details of the case to drive traffic to a web property feels a bit like exploitation as well. It is undoubtedly important to report the developments of a case such as this; but it may be unnecessary to tweet “Murdered 13-year-old girl’s voicemail hacked” to gain unique users.

In a messy scandal about messy reporting practices, if there is a lesson to be learned, it’s not only for Murdoch & co. to understand. As PR reps become more overbearing and candid comments are harder to dig up, reporters shouldn’t lose track of what this business is (supposedly) about: delivering news as cleanly, honestly and void of sensationalism as we can. By educating and not convincing, we as journalists allow readers to form their own opinion about unfolding events; perhaps the most valuable service a publication can provide.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

The 10 Dumbest Things I've Heard All Year

Matt Kinsman — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 09:55:07 -0400

When you deal with a lot of people in a lot of places and have a lot of conversations, along with the brilliant stuff comes very dumb stuff as well.
Inexperienced voices should be forgiven but when the big and powerful make appalling statements you have to ask yourself how they ever got their jobs in the first place.

Here are some of the ones that have left me most incredulous.

10. CRYPTIC HEADLINES DRIVE SALES.
This very respected intellectual quarterly just couldn't manage more sales in bookstores and it was clear that using a single vague cover line consisting of either one word or two (including the usual gerund) was the culprit. The editor was presented with a re-worked cover consisting of a longer main headline (with a verb) accompanied by a deck and six other cover lines that represented the best things in the next issue.

His response: "I don't want to give away the content of the magazine on the cover. You don't get it: people will be fascinated by the cryptic headline and buy the magazine to see what's inside."

Of course, the magazine is still tanking and, curiously enough, the guy still has his job.

9. THE COVER IMAGE DOES NOT HAVE TO CONNECT TO ANYTHING INSIDE THE MAGAZINE.
Referring to a photograph of two large cement balls as a cover image to illustrate a story about Alzheimer disease, a former publisher of Discover actually made this statement.

The staff still talks (and laughs) about it. However, he may have been half-right because the issue in question sold rather well in the end.

8. READERS WANT TO SEE THEMSELVES.
Everybody knows that buffed models sell health and fitness magazines. However, following a series of useless, confusing and expensive focus groups, this editor concluded that, "it's clear to me that 45 year-olds want to look at people their own age, not at dumb models." I haven't seen the magazine in months.

7. IMPROVEMENT CONFUSES READERS.
Take this Midwest trade magazine, which looks like it was last redesigned in 1970 by the cast of Happy Days. The publisher has finally agreed to a revamp. His anxiety: " I don't want to see too many improvements because I think that a lot of readers will be confused and not know what they're looking at." OK, I'll do a lousy job.

6. COOL DESIGN MEANS ILLEGIBLE TYPE.
This is the conclusion that a very well respected editor of several history magazines came up with. He's forgiven because he was looking at Wired without his usual very thick glasses.

5. MAKE THEM WORK.
The editor of a jewelry magazine actually said that when the issue of a clear contents page and flawless navigation came up. She was overruled.

4. FOOL THEM INTO READING DULL STUFF.
Confronted with a deadly article with no redeeming qualities, the managing editor of a legendary publishing trade magazine, seriously suggested that a headline be written that mentioned Lindsay Lohan despite the fact that she was not mentioned in the article. "This way we'll have them fooled and they'll start reading the article." True story.

3. LOOKING DIFFERENT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN LOOKING GOOD.
The art director of a big-time health and fitness title in California made an appalling presentation where every rule of good design was violated with weird picture crops, too many color tints and outdated fonts.

Her response to people's agonizing howls: "don't you want to look different?" Their answer: maybe. But we first want to look good.

2. MY READERS ARE NOT DUMB AND THEY DON'T NEED CAPTIONS.
This is an exact quote and its author was the editor of a slick West Coast gossip magazine, which has since folded.

1. THE WEB IS A NUISANCE.
The 55+ editor of a city magazine refused to improve the magazine's web site. He said that he was afraid that people would go to the web and stop reading the magazine.

Never mind that the web presents the best opportunity to attract a new, younger audience. And who said that you could stop progress anyway?
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

Are Marketing Services a Golden Opportunity for Editors?

Matt Kinsman — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 11:12:43 -0400

"Content is king" once again, at least when it comes to marketing services (original content for many dedicated publishing brands is largely giving way to more cost-effective options such as aggregation and curation).
"What's interesting is [clients] want our expertise as content producers, not our audience," says Dave Newcorn, vice president of digital and custom media at Summit Media, which earlier this year launched its own dedicated custom media group.

But if marketing services are where the investment is going, does that necessarily mean there is an opportunity for "traditional" editors, many of which have endured stagnant salaries (if not actual salary cuts) and lay-offs, to make a switch to something with a little more growth potential?

Maybe not, according to some experts. "Somebody who's been editing a magazine for 20 years can't do it," says the head of marketing services at a major b-to-b publisher. "The mindset is different."

Smart publishers draw a firm line between the authors of content marketing and authors of dedicated market-focused editorial. And many are simply applying the same bottom-dollar approach they take with freelance to marketing services.

However, there may be an opportunity for editors to morph into a new type of "content marketing specialist." I spoke with Jonah Bloom, the former Advertising Age editor who became executive director of content strategy with MDC Partners Agency Kirshenbaum Bond Senecal & Partners (KBS&P).

Granted, as editor of Ad Age, Bloom [pictured] came to his new position with an insider's understanding of marketer life. But he also says that the skill sets for traditional editors and content marketing specialists really aren't that different. As he previously told Ad Age, he, "started to see that all the skills required to be an editor today - the ability to synthesize, filter, make sense of data, quickly create multi-platform content that people will interact with, market that content - might be useful to brands."

FOLIO: Jonah, please discuss the major differences between your role now and your previous roles as a more traditional editor. What does your current position entail?

Bloom: I think the number one difference is that as an editor you're trying to engage and serve the same audience day in, day out. As a content guy at an agency you're looking to engage and serve a whole variety of audiences depending on the client's market and potential market. In other words, one minute you might be trying to plan for and create content that engages hobbyist farmers and the next moment people who want help with, say, financial planning. The good news is that this keeps you on your toes, but it constant research into exactly what the brand stands for and what their potential audience needs and responds to.

FOLIO: On the sales side, publishers talk about how the lead times are so much longer on the sales side for marketing services. What's the biggest difference in creating content on the marketing side?

Bloom: Publishing typically moves faster than marketing in terms of content production, partly because the processes and protocols are established and then repeated at whatever frequency is required - it's a little more like customized manufacturing in some aspects, whereas some other marketing is more like a service business. In marketing, you're often creating new processes and protocols for each content platform or program; you're dealing with many more stakeholders; and you're dealing with people who are used to extremely long lead times and extremely high production values.

FOLIO: What are the different skillsets that are required for an editorial role in marketing services or content marketing? How can traditional editors successfully make that transition? (I've heard some publishers say traditional editors can't do it). What in your experience best prepared you for this new role?

Bloom: I don't think the skillsets are that different. To be either an editor or a content strategist you need to understand your audience and what content or utility they want or need so much that they'll give up their time to engage with it; you need to understand all the machinations in planning for and making that content; and you need to understand the best ways of delivering that in terms of media and technology. You probably also have a decent sense of design, because good content is frequently sunk by bad user experience.

What's most different is the organization or culture in which you're going to operate. While editorial may still have too many tiers of management in places, processes and hierarchies are still typically more linear and flatter than big brand marketing processes. Editorial operations are typically full of people who are focused on current affairs (as defined by the media) and their editorial competitors. Whereas marketing agencies are more interested in culture (as defined by customers and ad shops) and brands. They may not sound that different, but it's certainly worth experiencing the difference before you make the transition.

FOLIO: Just about every editor is tracking metrics today but how is this different in the context of marketing services? What does the editor really need to know and how do they apply metrics to marketing services?

Bloom: Editors are typically focused on audience volumes and engagement metrics. These are certainly useful proxies in marketing too, but at its best marketing metrics are about tangible business outcomes, changing consumer behavior in a measurable way. I certainly don't think it'd take any smart editor long to understand the metrics in marketing, but there are probably more of them.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.

If Print Isn’t Dead, Why is Publishing Still in Trouble?

sbotelho — Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:33:45 -0400

At the Yale Publishing Conference, taking place from July 10 to July 15 in New Haven, CT, big names in magazine publishing are in attendance, both as students and teachers.

Monday’s sessions began with Richard Foster, senior faculty fellow at Yale School of Management and managing partner with the Millbrook Management Group, LLC. He philosophized about the term “creative destruction”, focusing its various implications in correlation to the publishing world.

Subsequent sessions led by Michael Clinton, president and marketing/publishing director of Hearst; president of Dwell Media Michela O’Connor Abrams; and Glamour editor-in-chief Cynthia Leive ran the gamut of print, digital and staffing challenges.

But the biggest theme, prevalent in how speakers addressed the crowd and the audience pressed the presenters for immediate solutions to admittedly complex problems (the transition to digital, etc.), was not listed in the printed program.

It was fear.

And that current may be the largest issue the publishing industry is facing today: fear of the present, fear of the future, fear of the audience and, perhaps the most crippling, fear of change.

While not as easily palpable in the speakers (who each provided case study after case study of success within their companies), both lecturers and audience members rippled with it. Age jokes were dropped at a noticeable rate (O’Connor Abrams quipped she and only one other staffer are over 30) and tales of staff let go because of unwillingness to convert to the digital age (and assist in the bevy of products unrelated to actual print issues) were some of the most poignant of the day. The message was clear: get onboard or get out, because there are plenty of others to take your seat at the publishing table – many of them young enough to be crashing with Mom and Dad.

This, along with the residue of the receding economic downturn and ominous phrases like “Print is dead” and “The Web is dead,” seem to be the publishing world’s equivalent to The Rapture, an end-of-world event originally predicted for May 21, 2011.

Incidentally, I’m still here, along with a stack of glossy periodicals on my desk and Firefox open to Folio:’s website on my laptop.

As Yale fellow Foster pointed out, the corporate structure is steeped in the failure to let go, a step he labels “trading” – exchanging the old habits and products for new methods that may succeed. In the literary world, this act is deemed “killing your babies”.

So while this may seem the simplest of acts, the magazine publishing industry should begin the move forward by letting go of its fear. Print will most likely not die out, the whippersnappers crowded in the next cubicle are not going to overthrow the hierarchy (unless, of course, they need to, to which we should then all be grateful) and audiences have not outsmarted or outgrown the need for original, researched, well-delivered content. They know what they want, and now have the communication channels to express it.

For this, at least, the publishing world should be grateful – after all, checking out a Facebook page costs significantly less than outsourcing data collection to an analytics company.

Embracing these changes, instead of trying to define/isolate them while trading glory stories from the “Golden Age” of publishing, may be just what the industry needs to usher in the Platinum one.
Folio RSS: Feed sponsored exclusively by NXTbook Media - offering RSS feeds for Digital Editions Call 866-268-1219 for more information.