Comments on: The fundamental problem of newspapers on the internet – The Krugman Paradox http://blog.metaprinter.com/2008/12/the-fundamental-problem-of-newspapers-on-the-internet-the-krugman-paradox/ Internet and Online Strategies Thu, 16 Dec 2010 13:06:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Michael Josefowicz http://blog.metaprinter.com/2008/12/the-fundamental-problem-of-newspapers-on-the-internet-the-krugman-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-1732 Michael Josefowicz Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:36:04 +0000 http://metaprinter.com/?p=1075#comment-1732 You sparked a couple of thoughts. 1." what about that greatest of american past-times: convincing people to buy things they don’t really need? For that, I predict we’ll always need good old fashioned advertising." But what happens in a global economy if consumers move from spend to save? There's a growing body of evidence that we may be at the front end of big shift. 2. The power of Google is the contextualized ad. While they are still finetuning the algrorithms, the idea is to present information at the time when the question is being asked. It's just the old saw about the right offer to the right person at the right time. If the Times had the ability to control which ad appeared next to Krugman's column, it might help resolve the Krugman paradox. Sort of "people who read this, read that." Then develop[ the analytics to make some good guesses about what what people who read this and that might be interested in buying. For Krugman, I'm thinking it's probably books. Or maybe the NYTimes guide to the economic crisis over the last four months. 3. The other power of Google is the ability to make the ad buy very easy. By doing that they have brought millions of new, smaller advertisers into the game. My bet is that as the software work with local advertising matures, newspapers will be surprised to find that the market for advertising at the bottom of the pyramid and in Print and web, will make at least some of the revenue problems go away. 4. The web buy is a great add on to the Print buy. Small advertisers understand the value of the Print piece that sits on their counter. If , for X dollars they also get a place on the web, nice. Of course this works the other way. I'll sell you the web ad, and give you the Print ad. You sparked a couple of thoughts.

1.” what about that greatest of american past-times: convincing people to buy things they don’t really need? For that, I predict we’ll always need good old fashioned advertising.” But what happens in a global economy if consumers move from spend to save? There’s a growing body of evidence that we may be at the front end of big shift.

2. The power of Google is the contextualized ad. While they are still finetuning the algrorithms, the idea is to present information at the time when the question is being asked. It’s just the old saw about the right offer to the right person at the right time. If the Times had the ability to control which ad appeared next to Krugman’s column, it might help resolve the Krugman paradox. Sort of “people who read this, read that.” Then develop[ the analytics to make some good guesses about what what people who read this and that might be interested in buying. For Krugman, I’m thinking it’s probably books. Or maybe the NYTimes guide to the economic crisis over the last four months.

3. The other power of Google is the ability to make the ad buy very easy. By doing that they have brought millions of new, smaller advertisers into the game. My bet is that as the software work with local advertising matures, newspapers will be surprised to find that the market for advertising at the bottom of the pyramid and in Print and web, will make at least some of the revenue problems go away.

4. The web buy is a great add on to the Print buy. Small advertisers understand the value of the Print piece that sits on their counter. If , for X dollars they also get a place on the web, nice. Of course this works the other way. I’ll sell you the web ad, and give you the Print ad.

]]> By: Robert Ivan http://blog.metaprinter.com/2008/12/the-fundamental-problem-of-newspapers-on-the-internet-the-krugman-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-1673 Robert Ivan Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:11:24 +0000 http://metaprinter.com/?p=1075#comment-1673 Salon had $1.98 million in revenue in its quarter ending Sept. 30 (that revenue wasn't enough to offset expenses, though, and Salon reported a $1.28 million loss to the SEC). http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=133541 Salon had $1.98 million in revenue in its quarter ending Sept. 30 (that revenue wasn’t enough to offset expenses, though, and Salon reported a $1.28 million loss to the SEC).

http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=133541

]]> By: Denise Lockwood http://blog.metaprinter.com/2008/12/the-fundamental-problem-of-newspapers-on-the-internet-the-krugman-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-1636 Denise Lockwood Tue, 23 Dec 2008 05:34:19 +0000 http://metaprinter.com/?p=1075#comment-1636 Robert, Your comments about newspaper advertising are well taken. While I claim no expertise in the economics of our industry, I am still saddened by the discussion that we're only discussing a newspaper's declining ad revenue as if it is the only asset. The discussion surrounding newspapers needs to move beyond academia and industry circles because if it does not move into a community discussion, there are some very real consequences as those sources of knowledge disappear. What price do we pay when no one is covering local issues? As I've said in previous posts, I wonder how many other journalists have ever been the only one at the school board meeting, the plan commission meeting, the city council or the county board meeting besides the elected officials. What price will our businesses and our community member pay if we don't demand strong journalism? Words mean something. They enlighten, define, and connect. I believe words should linger and be tampered with and corrected when needed. They should serve us and help us comfort one another. Just because advertising revenue is declining does not make the information less valuable. I wish communities really knew what they were not getting when they don't spend the time to search out credible sources of information whether its via a blog or a media source. I really don't care who is doing the reporting as long as its fair, accurate and credible information. I'm waiting for the rest of the 27,000 journalists who have been laid off in the last 18 months to come to get angry about what is happening and wonder what we could do to bring this to the public because quite frankly I don't think people really get what we aren't doing anymore... whether it's on the Internet or not. Denise Robert,
Your comments about newspaper advertising are well taken. While I claim no expertise in the economics of our industry, I am still saddened by the discussion that we’re only discussing a newspaper’s declining ad revenue as if it is the only asset. The discussion surrounding newspapers needs to move beyond academia and industry circles because if it does not move into a community discussion, there are some very real consequences as those sources of knowledge disappear.

What price do we pay when no one is covering local issues? As I’ve said in previous posts, I wonder how many other journalists have ever been the only one at the school board meeting, the plan commission meeting, the city council or the county board meeting besides the elected officials. What price will our businesses and our community member pay if we don’t demand strong journalism?

Words mean something. They enlighten, define, and connect. I believe words should linger and be tampered with and corrected when needed. They should serve us and help us comfort one another. Just because advertising revenue is declining does not make the information less valuable. I wish communities really knew what they were not getting when they don’t spend the time to search out credible sources of information whether its via a blog or a media source. I really don’t care who is doing the reporting as long as its fair, accurate and credible information.

I’m waiting for the rest of the 27,000 journalists who have been laid off in the last 18 months to come to get angry about what is happening and wonder what we could do to bring this to the public because quite frankly I don’t think people really get what we aren’t doing anymore… whether it’s on the Internet or not.

Denise

]]> By: Robert Ivan http://blog.metaprinter.com/2008/12/the-fundamental-problem-of-newspapers-on-the-internet-the-krugman-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-1596 Robert Ivan Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:33:24 +0000 http://metaprinter.com/?p=1075#comment-1596 @Chris Using CPA and CPM display ads, supply of available ad slots on ever growing web pages will marginalize the the volume of quality advertisements to fill those spots. Data from Pubmatic shows display ad pricing falling ever since they began measuring the data. imagine a small town newspaper that serves up 50k pageviews a month and having 3 ad spots on every page. That's 150,000 ads per month. What could they possible charge without bankrupting their advertisers? Now what do they need to charge themselves without going bankrupt? @Dan I have seen nothing to indicate that "lost" newspaper advertising will translate to newspaper website advertising. The internet allows all manner of connecting businesses with potential customers. Company websites, free listings on Yahoo local, Google maps, networking sites like Linkedin and of course powerful search engines like Google which allow people to find businesses and services better than fumbling through a newspaper website. @Chris
Using CPA and CPM display ads, supply of available ad slots on ever growing web pages will marginalize the the volume of quality advertisements to fill those spots. Data from Pubmatic shows display ad pricing falling ever since they began measuring the data. imagine a small town newspaper that serves up 50k pageviews a month and having 3 ad spots on every page. That’s 150,000 ads per month. What could they possible charge without bankrupting their advertisers? Now what do they need to charge themselves without going bankrupt?

@Dan
I have seen nothing to indicate that “lost” newspaper advertising will translate to newspaper website advertising. The internet allows all manner of connecting businesses with potential customers. Company websites, free listings on Yahoo local, Google maps, networking sites like Linkedin and of course powerful search engines like Google which allow people to find businesses and services better than fumbling through a newspaper website.

]]> By: Dan http://blog.metaprinter.com/2008/12/the-fundamental-problem-of-newspapers-on-the-internet-the-krugman-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-1589 Dan Tue, 09 Dec 2008 14:21:21 +0000 http://metaprinter.com/?p=1075#comment-1589 As Christopher Mimms notes, you leave some factors fixed which would probably not be. If the online readership increased as you suggest, due to the elimination of the paper edition, the paper advertisers would need to move their advertising to the online version. Unless the mix / spread of online advertised is already a mirror of the paper edition this should result in increasing interest by advertisers. Competition for advert placement would drive up the pricing. With regards to "AdBlocker", I agree with Brett that our brains will perform the same function - but that still applies to the paper issue too, so there would be no net difference (what was the advert in the prime placement on the right-hand page the last time you looked at a paper - nope, I can't remember either) Another assumption which you need to consider is the split between visitors to the site viewing one article (typically referred from another website), compared to an analogue to the paper subscriber, who *reads the paper* - not necessarily cover-to-cover, but many pages per day. Is this reader more valuable to the paper and/or advertisers than a user interested in a single article? As Christopher Mimms notes, you leave some factors fixed which would probably not be.

If the online readership increased as you suggest, due to the elimination of the paper edition, the paper advertisers would need to move their advertising to the online version. Unless the mix / spread of online advertised is already a mirror of the paper edition this should result in increasing interest by advertisers. Competition for advert placement would drive up the pricing.

With regards to “AdBlocker”, I agree with Brett that our brains will perform the same function – but that still applies to the paper issue too, so there would be no net difference (what was the advert in the prime placement on the right-hand page the last time you looked at a paper – nope, I can’t remember either)

Another assumption which you need to consider is the split between visitors to the site viewing one article (typically referred from another website), compared to an analogue to the paper subscriber, who *reads the paper* – not necessarily cover-to-cover, but many pages per day. Is this reader more valuable to the paper and/or advertisers than a user interested in a single article?

]]> By: Brett http://blog.metaprinter.com/2008/12/the-fundamental-problem-of-newspapers-on-the-internet-the-krugman-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-1587 Brett Tue, 09 Dec 2008 08:28:31 +0000 http://metaprinter.com/?p=1075#comment-1587 There's a Firefox plug-in called AdBlocker - it strips out all the ads on a page. Quite popular. My brain does the same thing - focuses only on content, ignores the ads completely. Really, the current advertising model is ineffectual, inaccurate and in need of a rethink. It relies on a shotgun approach. Don't waste my time or your money trying to sell me something I don't need. Figure out what I may be interested in and provide me a way to access your products when I need it. Call it advertising if you will - I call it easily accessible products. There’s a Firefox plug-in called AdBlocker – it strips out all the ads on a page. Quite popular. My brain does the same thing – focuses only on content, ignores the ads completely. Really, the current advertising model is ineffectual, inaccurate and in need of a rethink. It relies on a shotgun approach.
Don’t waste my time or your money trying to sell me something I don’t need. Figure out what I may be interested in and provide me a way to access your products when I need it. Call it advertising if you will – I call it easily accessible products.

]]> By: Christopher Mims http://blog.metaprinter.com/2008/12/the-fundamental-problem-of-newspapers-on-the-internet-the-krugman-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-1586 Christopher Mims Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:01:06 +0000 http://metaprinter.com/?p=1075#comment-1586 Interesting analysis, but perhaps you are assuming that some things will remain static will not: for instance, if enough competing news outlets die off, there may actually be *increased* competition for premium online ad space. (Hopefully more advertisers will also realize that the large buys they make of crap inventory on crap sites aren't doing them any favors, either.) See more here, "Why The Media Will Be Fine" http://slipr.com/2008/12/03/why-the-media-will-be-fine/ Another thing that will (hopefully) not remain static: the types of advertising appearing on websites. The Times already moved to larger right-column ad positions that have higher clickthroughs, and they've been using full-page takeovers for a while (I think). Nor do you consider the (admittedly still somewhat unproven) possibility that add targeting will get better and clickthrough rates improve. If advertising were so terrible, advertisers would have abandoned it long ago. Text link ads on Google are a fair analog for what you describe -- the desire of advertisers to reach buyers at a decision point -- but what about that greatest of american past-times: convincing people to buy things they don't really need? For that, I predict we'll always need good old fashioned advertising. Interesting analysis, but perhaps you are assuming that some things will remain static will not: for instance, if enough competing news outlets die off, there may actually be *increased* competition for premium online ad space. (Hopefully more advertisers will also realize that the large buys they make of crap inventory on crap sites aren’t doing them any favors, either.)

See more here, “Why The Media Will Be Fine”
http://slipr.com/2008/12/03/why-the-media-will-be-fine/

Another thing that will (hopefully) not remain static: the types of advertising appearing on websites. The Times already moved to larger right-column ad positions that have higher clickthroughs, and they’ve been using full-page takeovers for a while (I think).

Nor do you consider the (admittedly still somewhat unproven) possibility that add targeting will get better and clickthrough rates improve.

If advertising were so terrible, advertisers would have abandoned it long ago. Text link ads on Google are a fair analog for what you describe — the desire of advertisers to reach buyers at a decision point — but what about that greatest of american past-times: convincing people to buy things they don’t really need? For that, I predict we’ll always need good old fashioned advertising.

]]>