Subscribe: Comments on LeverWealth: Counting the online readers of B2B media
http://leverwealth.blogspot.com/feeds/115210923330853845/comments/default
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade C rated
Language: English
Tags:
click  content  cyberalert  digital editions  digital  editions  media  monitoring  much  online  print  publications  publishers  web 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on LeverWealth: Counting the online readers of B2B media

Comments on LeverWealth: Counting the online readers of B2B media





Updated: 2013-04-05T16:18:43.234+00:00

 



There are a number of points here.The first is tha...

2006-07-05T17:00:00.000+00:00

There are a number of points here.

The first is that on-line circulation is now a critical part of PR planning. Up to now there was no pressure. Now there is and so content has to be on-line optimised. Marketing managers will have reason for being more savy about the online audience. My basic premiss is that PR has to move online like never before to survive.

As for online press monitoring, CyberAlert monitors the web content of over 4000 UK publications (plus selected web sites etc).

It does not go into PW protected or robot blocked sites so it gets a big % of the coverage but by no means all - but it is 'clean monitoring' as far as Copyright is concerned and is always presented to allow (encourage) click through.

The advertising revenue downturn after the World Cup is going to be interesting to watch – how much advertising spend will flee to online?

For the publications, not having content readily available online is a problem because it limits the click through advantage (Media online like the WSJ who use Texterity get very little Google Juice compared to comparable online media).

As more ad revenue begins to flow through to online content, the offline ad advantage will be much reduced and the publishers will seek every opportunity to get click through. The publishers have not quite 'got it' but will follow the money as social media gives them value ad opportunities (just like Usenet did for the FT's Profile service in the '90's - probably saved the FT in the US at the time because people went out and bought the paper).

What I have noticed is the drop off in referrals for PW protected sites suggesting that it is too much of a chore to go through the log on process (even a few seconds of automated process - but research 5 years ago was telling us this was starting to be an issue).

The B2B pubs have an uphill battle to maintain print circulation and ad revenues so I guess there will be more B2B blogs and the like. All will need monitoring and the 'long tail' will be quite critical for verticals (another plus for CyberAlert blog monitoring). Right now, B2B monitoring (for content as opposed to a pile of clips) is much more valuable in terms of knowing what is going on and client digitla footprint. Frankly, digital footprint is probably more important and Altex have a methodology in development.

Meanwhile PR agency have to monitor both print and online anyway (because they can be different). Which makes CyberAlert very competitive (£250 per month flat fee).

Just to make like even more interesting, I am not so sure that we are chasing the right tiger even if our hold on its tail is tenuous. If you really want to see how different the consumer is, go to a nightclub or a school and see what they do and what we could not even imagine. Shel Holtz daughter really gave the game away when she talked about how many IM windows she has going when doing homework.



David, FWIW, at the moment, digital editions make ...

2006-07-05T15:37:00.000+00:00

David,

FWIW, at the moment, digital editions make monitoring nearly impossible and potentially unaffordable.

If publications simply uploaded stories to their websites then monitoring firms like CyberAlert could track them.

But Publishers don't want to do that because then they can't charge advertisers the full subscriber print ad rates if they lose "print readers" to the web. And no one wants to sell low priced web banners.

And unlike the B2B websites, most digital editions are being created with 3rd party software (NXT, Texterity, etc) that keep the content off-line, for subscribers only. This is also what allows them to track reader activities such as clicks, time spent, pass along and such. And if you haven't noticed, circulation managers are getting very good at keeping out non-qualified readers from digital editions so that the response numbers look good and the ad rates can climb.

While this approach is fine for the publication (and SW firm) it is not at all helpful for multiple publication monitoring or analysis. The tools we've all just invested in don't work!

Worse, the publications (and SW firms) plan to sell additional insight back to advertisers which may mean you'll need to buy and compile the data yourself... this is not a good model for company-oriented research or measurement, but the publications don't care.

Publishers are chasing ad dollars and these digital editions will provide research instruments that once again illustrate why "my publications is best for you".