March 2006 was the tipping point for Online PR. PR' role is not as comfortable as some may believe. According to The Editor's Weblog The latest figures from the UK Audit Bureau of Circulation show that every British regional paper, both morning and evening, lost paying readers in the second half of 2005.
Reports that the The Newspaper Society, sees some light in the dark numbers and claims that "websites, niche magazines and broadcast platforms, ‘Lite’ editions for commuters, podcasts, mobile phones and e-editions are all allowing people to access news and entertainment on the move, and are proving increasingly popular for regional press consumers.
We saw this month that people in the UK spend more time on-line than watching television.
This tells us that the tipping point is here and now.
The content manager at Northcliffe Electronic Publishing, Robert Hardie, said, "Readers who were previously disenfranchised for geographical or logistical reasons from buying their local paper can now access it online, and both the age and social demographics are different for the online audience than they are for the traditional newspaper-buying one.”
Communications director of the Society, Lynne Anderson feels that "Measuring circulation alone clearly no longer gives an accurate picture of a regional centre’s reach . The challenge is to develop a national method of multi-media audience measurement which provides more meaningful figures for advertisers and agencies." This suggests that PR media planners and the PR Evaluationsist have a problem. Apparently evaluation reach numbers are now suspect! Circulation is not king. The engaged readers is more powerful and more committed. An engaged reader not going to believe a BuzzAgent? The person who is intruding and getting in the way of what 'I' want to find out'. In the networked community, this is a receipt for market oblivion.
The Big Gorilla announcement that News International is working hard at developing its on-line presence is really important. It says that on-line is now top priority for PR. According to The Economist, Murdock's News Corporation spent more than a billion dollars buying barely profitable internet companies. He did not do this for nothing.
“The debate is one of the side-effects of the digital revolution in which the dinosaurs must adapt or die. As one of the biggest beasts, ITV has already swallowed up a new competitor, the Friends Reunited website,” commented Jennifer Cunningham in the Herald noted this week.
The BBC which is no slouch when it comes to bridging the gap between traditional and on-line media, has signed up Dan Gillmore to explain the development of citizen media.
Georgina Harvey, managing director of Trinity Mirror's regional titles, said: "Trinity Mirror is rapidly becoming a multi-platform publisher.
This on-line presence must now open up new PR jobs to assist in influencing the changing face of PR with all these new communications channels opening up so fast. Press relations is no longer enough.
The future of Public Relations is no longer in print. In fact, it is no longer about narrow definitions of stakeholders or publics, such approaches need robust methodologies to succeed and PR has to work at a more profound level.
This new world is much more to do with social frames and understanding the nature of organisations. It needs these tools to help us use the language, content in context and appropriate communication channels. The 'long conversation (durring which the organisation may sell something) is now critical to relationship creation, building and management. The power curve militates against artificial WOM. People just don't believe plugs, spin, advertising and all the rest of the mantra you hear from the marketing and advertising industry based on OTS.
This brave new cultural world is a different form of PR. It includes the traditional techniques but to make them work needs not just and overlay of digital icing. PR practice now needs digital PR in the DNA of practice.
Hurry up! Hurry up! We don't have all minute.
Picture: Classic pics and art
Hi David,
ReplyDeleteGreat observations on good facts. What puzzles me about this transition is how many traditional media and advertisers behave. Audiences leave in droves, yet media tend to thrive doing what they always did.
On my blog I cited what I observe locally: our newspaper,The St. Petersburg Times , which is a good newspaper, has essentially ported its print addition to the web and gets its income from banner ads. These are the least effective on the web as I understand it (prove me wrong). Yet advertisers support them with blind zeal. They pay by views rather than click-throughs. How can this go on?
This confuses me because I assume that people who continually invest their money do it because they are getting results.
If you are correct that the tipping point has been reached, at least in the UK, then we should soon see exponential changes in how content is paid for. Less money should go to old media strategies like banner ads and more to new media opportunities like contextual advertising on blogs.
I'm still a big fan of following the money.
Harry, I agree, it does seem intractable on the surface and I liked your comments which are insightful.
ReplyDeleteWe have seen how some publications have used their online presence to make money. An example is the Telegraph which offers news headlines that are included in a crossword puzzle offering. The crossword enthusiasts pay for the crosswords but get the benefit of news as well. This cross selling capability helps pay for the online offering.
Because advertising responses are dwindling, the knee jerk reaction of the marketing industry has been to create more expensive and more raucous advertising which is providing bigger revenues for newspapers despite their falling circulation. In addition, the publishing industry has added ever more niche advertising led market segmented publications that are relatively inexpensive because print and production costs are lower and because they use (once full time but now laid off) freelance journalists.
For a number of years I have worked on automated manipulations of texts and I was the founder of Media Measurement 20 years ago. With this background It is reasonably easy to see how a combination of RSS and meta data management, it is possible to have well informed commentators who provide the basic content which can then be mashed into a wide range of subject material available through a wide range of communications channels which have a range of value propositions from subscription services to advertising. One of the benefits of machine manipulated content is that it is very low cost. The cost per item to create 10 different versions/summaries of a well written and comprehensive article is tiny (it is possible to get the machinery to produce copy from a range of perspectives by adding concept bias.
This means that there are divergent approaches for publishers going forward.
It does mean that the PR industry has to come to terms with this approach and has to learn about the new forms of communication. Shel Holtz (in show 121) noted how some of this was going and I did have a stab at the wide range of communications channels we will need to be able to affect as we see convergence in the near future.
The need for some very serious in-service training, to get to grips with this sea change has never been more important for the PR sector than now.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply, David.
ReplyDeleteThink of a water system.
"Well informed commentators" accumulating news and information on a topic and creating a presentation that is then reformatted for different publications are at the point in the system where the water is distributed to citizens. But water flows downhill. You, the PR professional, need to be higher in the mountains, engaging in the conversation, making the organization you represent an active contributor to the community. You're probably blogging. This activity is going to flow to the commentator, who will notice this presence and give your organization more consideration for coverage.
At the risk of seeming old fashion, I'd highly recommend your having some sort of personal contact with the commentator.
Chances are you might not be the blogger. Better that job go to someone employed in the organization. But you can coach. You can find conversation where the organization blogger can make an impact. You can monitor the buzz in the topic. After all, you will have all the tools that the expert commentator has. In a few moments you can set up a feed to bring you instantly all the latest news and conversation on any subject. What a world! Do you remember when a news wire was precious and expensive asset?
On another note, The Boston Globe is rumored to have tipping point troubles. Could passing the tipping point mean exponential drops in business for old media?