BPA Takes Next Step in Non-Requested Electronic Circ Debate
Auditing firm seeks feedback on two compromise positions.
After receiving a range of responses from members to a Feb. 2 blog post,
BPA president and CEO Glenn Hansen is asking publishers to consider two
different “compromise positions” in the debate over the inclusion of non-request
electronic circulation in BPA audits.
The two positions, Hansen wrote in a March 9 post, are crafted from feedback that publishers gave
both for and against including non-request electronic circ in audits.
BPA’s current rules prohibit the inclusion of non-request electronic
circulation anywhere on a BPA statement, but Hansen wrote in the Feb. 2
blog posting that the organization would consider amending it because
“with low circulation and production/distribution costs, the use of
non-request electronic circulation is becoming a very attractive option
to this increasingly critical [economic] situation.”
According to Hansen, BPA will begin reviewing the issue with
“various committees and advisory boards around the globe beginning this
week through May 21st when the matter will go before the corporate
board for a final decision.”
Compromise position #1 is as follows:
Should BPA count all e-mail alerts containing a hyperlink (or actual
PDF) to an electronic edition sent to individuals who did not request
the magazine in its digital format as “non qualified” copies served?
Further, if the individual clicks on the link to view the electronic
edition, should BPA consider such action as a request and, provided the
individual conforms to the stated qualification criteria as outlined in
the Field Served and Definition of Recipient Qualification, allow such
an individual to be reported as qualified circulation (as a requested
The resulting action of clicking on the link should be a message
from the publication informing the individual that future issues will
be delivered in this manner unless they opt out of receiving via e-mail.
Compromise position #2 is as follows:
Notwithstanding Position #1, should BPA allow publishers to
determine whether a printed or digitized version of a publication may
be sent to qualified individuals who have requested the magazine?
Accepting this proposition would empower the publisher to elicit a
request for the brand but decide on an issue-by-issue basis whether the
brand is sent in printed or electronic format.