Addressing the 'print-only' problem

Advertisement

Is the glass half full or half empty? In its latest American Magazine Study, media research firm Affinity cites a “dramatic shift” in consumer magazine readership toward cross-platform content consumption. But I see the numbers differently.

The study examines the “total magazine brand footprint” for 12 consumer publishers across print, Web, mobile and social platforms. (The website data comes from comScore’s Media Metrix.) Time Inc. has the largest total audience, comprising 114 million readers across 18 brands, as well as the largest digital audience, with 52 million.

The volume of digital readers is impressive – until you compare them to print-only readers. The study finds that more than half of each publisher’s total audience consists of print-only readers – meaning that the majority of the audience says they don’t access any content on the magazines’ websites, social media pages or mobile apps.

The leader in this auspicious category is Bauer Publishing, whose entertainment and celebrity titles, including In Touch Weekly and Twist, have a collective 87% print-only readership. The other brands fare somewhat better, but the print-only majority rules for each:

I’m not surprised that digital-only readership remains low, but I am concerned that there’s not a greater blend of print and digital readership. As an added twist, Affinity previously noted that more than half of all consumers (54%) polled in the American Magazine Study access some type of magazine content and advertising in digital form. Comparing the two sets of numbers, this means there’s a certain percentage of consumers who subscribe to a publisher’s print title but access digital content from a different publisher.  That’s a bad sign.

The issue here is not about convincing readers to abandon print for digital. But publishers’ inability to convince a majority of print readers to cross over to any of their digital content is a troubling sign. Clearly, publishers must find better ways to extend the loyalty they’ve developed with their print subscribers into the digital space. As print ad revenues continue to decline across the industry, publishers need to redouble their efforts to improve digital cross-over.

Or maybe they should focus on capturing the attention of the broader Internet audience that is simply wasting their time on the Web. In a new Pew Internet survey, 58% of adults say they sometimes go online for no particular reason – just to have fun or pass the time. Among young adults (18-29), the percentage balloons to 81%.  Think there’s an opportunity there?

  

Sponsored Resources


Join the discussion

Anonymous on December 31, 1969
Bottom line for print publishers is they've likely lost money since launching their websites. I'm a big fan of digital media, but frankly some publications are simply not staffed for the digital transition and they don't want to be. Launching a bad web presence without thinking through the economics of the decision is a recipe for disaster. If they're making money in print, there's nothing wrong with requiring people to read their product on paper. They get into trouble when they try to do both and end up with two understaffed, under-skilled, substandard products. If newspapers got together 20 years ago and all agreed to stay off the Internet entirely, many of them would be a lot better off now. That said, a lot of print publications would be better off simply launching an entirely separate product online.
Mitch Speers on December 31, 1969
It's tempting to point to the usual suspects when diagnosing this problem. Certainly, InTouch Weekly's website is a living case study of how shovelware does not attract or engage readers, a shame given the web-friendly nature of their brand and content. Reader's Digest, however, seems to be doing nearly everything right on their website, but their numbers are as dismal as InTouch. I wonder if, in this case, Reader's Digest problem is that the brand has little appeal to anyone under 70.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Don't SPAM our Comments!

Any commercial link will be deleted and reported to Mollom as SPAM. As such, we highly recommend against including commercial links in comments. Even comments with a reasonable amount of relevancy to the subject will be deleted and reported as SPAM.