A Point In Time – How Can Magazines Turn The Online Tide?
It was Kelly Slater who first informed me of the giant swell that was about to hit the Fijian island of Tavarua. By Twitter (his handle is @kellyslater), in fact, when he announced that instead of travelling to South Africa to compete in the Billabong Pro in Jeffries Bay, he was going to chase a mega swell in Fiji.
He wasn’t alone. A collection of the world’s best big wave surfers were also heading there, as word spread that this could be an iconic session. Turns out they were right. By the next day photos and vids were pouring through online, showing perfect 20 foot waves, clear skies and some of the biggest, meanest and cleanest paddle-in waves ever recorded.
Within 48 hours other edited clips were also online, documenting a potentially historic session – including this Billabong effort showcasing their team’s entire wave-chasing mission.
So within two days I’d seen the videos, salivated over the photos and heard directly via Twitter from the main protagonists. Now coincidently, it was around the same time that a few of the world’s leading surf magazines asked me to pitch them a few new ideas. In the old days (say, two whole years ago), this swell would have taken up a good 20 pages. But the online world now has that so completely covered now that magazines simply can’t compete with this type of sexy, high definition breaking news
So what can magazines do, suddenly starved as they are of one of their main content lifelines? The simple answer is that they’ll have to adapt or die. They have to concentrate on their strengths that the new media can’t provide. Humour, for example, is often a missing ingredient as websites scramble to upload the best images the quickest.
Then there is analysis over longer time frames. Research still counts and creative ideas that need time and effort can inspire readership. Ironically, time is now the magazines’ biggest weapon against the online tide. They don’t have to compete with breaking stories, but instead can create and cultivate their own, in their own time. It’s a challenge, but an exciting one. The alternative? Well, the alternative is extinction.
Photos look better in print (no matter how strong your LCD backlight is) and are easier to stick on your wall in print-form.
I fear, however, that free stickers may well be the last bastion of (niche market) magazine print
Another excellent blog post Matt and IMO you’re right that its all about differentiation between online and printed matter.
When I first started reading snowboarding magazines about 15 years ago, I was confused that all the events covered had happened a full year ago. The articles read like these things had just happened and now magazines are covering events from the current season. With the immediacy of online news, magazines have to come up with something else, but how to differentiate?
Maybe observations are important, highlighting trends, linking events to provide insight, getting behind the scenes, giving the reader something they can’t get online. No barriers to online only mags doing the same thing though, so maybe this strategy doesn’t have legs either!
Personally, I think printed magazines are on life support, in much the same way as most of our printed media in the UK. Maybe @nathanGallagher had it nailed on twitter earlier – free stickers…
The turning tide of the media landscape is a fast shifting surface, pushed and pulled with technology developments and learning’s that manipulate and evolve it’s metamorphosis almost at an hourly rate. This is all fairly harmless and straightforward in social circumstances and the fantastic benefit to the likes of news distribution and healthy debate through easily shared content. However when the conversation arises around IP (intellectual property) it can often enter a vast mud-melange of confused ideas around ownership, value and the treatment of this commodity.
The music industry has faced this very problem with the illegal sharing of music through the likes of Napster, the film industry is battling with the very same problem. And in both of these circumstances, resolution has been found through the clever use of technology and the improvement of user interfaces to make a better user experience: Benefiting sales for the likes of iTunes.
Now I do believe that this has only somewhat resolved the issue, and in the case of this conversation, the media owners are failing to adjust to the media landscape.
This ‘rich media’ is at the forefront of the sports in question, driven by the visual in realising the action in all its glory. So therefore it has never been more important for the media owners / commissioners to answer the queries of supplier, advertiser and market as a whole.
So in answer to this question posed by this article…
What can magazines do, suddenly starved as they are of one of their main content lifelines?
For the media owners it is time to wake up like the retail sector had to do: Strip back, refine and realise that new channel outputs must be invested upon to grow consumer fan base, sales (advertising & merchandise) revenues and brand loyalty as a whole. This isn’t about keeping up; this is about innovation in an arena that can be owned by YOUR brand.
Firstly media channels should focus on what they set out to do in the first place, the promise that they made when they first hit the shelf: we will be X in bringing you Y. This is a vital part of realising what your consumers are relying upon, and the essence of any brand loyalty you may have and want to build upon.
From this evaluation, take on experts in the field to develop creative junctions for the content being supplied, whether from paid or trusted suppliers or UGC. And I don’t just mean bung up a YouTube style site, I mean enhance the experience to touch and feel the content in new ways, be part of its growth and distribution using whatever technology there is to hand. For instance my suggestion on Twitter (@hambourine) to create a paywall with an RSS subscription, providing a copy of the magazine, downloaded to your tablet / laptop at login. Give consumers the option: package it well; and they will take it.
In terms of the value versus exclusivity question, I believe loyalty to media channels is built on who is providing the best content first. More than ever when it comes to an app based interface on mobile or portable unit as the audience is already committed to some extent.
Now I know this is expensive and technology like this is still in its infancy, but there are opportunities out there for entrepreneurs to develop apps that can provide solutions, it just takes the concept to be developed and executed.
I spent a large majority of my career within the media sector of these very industries and one major failing that I was constantly faced with was the protectionism that restricted progressive growth of innovation. Don’t copy others in the field. Evaluate what you brand stands for and build on that with creative thinking and execution.
I’m not sure I fully understand everything you’re saying Ham, but there is a very famous example of a paywall introduction losing an established brand 90% of it’s trusted readership (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jul/20/times-paywall-readership). So I don’t believe subscription to be a viable revenue for online publications.
I think the reason for this is that the internet has a reputation for being a free and equal-access arena – trying to buck this trend (at least for the time being) will just result in your readership looking elsewhere. After all, what’s ‘exclusive’ these days? As soon as something is online it is no longer exclusive, so after a couple of searches you can find it copied somewhere to look at for free.
I see your reference to iTunes’ DRM solution to music tracks, but I think that solution is so strongly tied into hardware proliferation that it doesn’t really apply here, I would argue that people use iTunes for it’s ease of working with their iPod/iPhone – pretty much a unique device with a vast (or in the case of the iPhone, rapidly growing) majority market share.
People look at online publications through standard internet browsers – and why wouldn’t they, it’s the perfect product for the job. The internet browser is a ubiquitous product used for all sorts of different internet-based functions. So the publications content is sitting literally inches away from the ability to search for the same content elsewhere.
I don’t have much authority in this matter, this isn’t really my field – but from my casual observations I would say that building a social community which ‘resides’ on the site creating varied and interesting reactions and contributions to an article would be the better way to go than a paywall.
I think the argument against the NYT paywall was largely based on the investment needed to make it happen (£90m) and the subsequent time that it’ll take to pay back. Readership will return with more paywalls going up and attitudes adjusting to the new value of online content. It all depends on how you do it (@TheAtlantic new iPad app j.mp/q3Gl44).
I hear you on the internet being a free and equal-access arena but it is also a marketplace like any other – it’s free to walk down the street but you still pay the council tax for the pavement – tenuous maybe, but you get my drift.
Regarding iTunes, my argument on investment in innovation for the user interface and channel would match this. Other people do it, and for cheaper (e.g Amazon) but iTunes do it best for the consumer experience.
I completely agree, but the browser is just one portal of an expanding interaction with different interfaces that will grow as consumer habits become increasingly mobile. For instance browsers no longer being used on handhelds/tabelts as apps are more efficient for viewing etc.
I would also say that I don’t have much authority but speak as a consumer of media through various channels and enjoy the ever growing variety of interfaces and experiences that the internet is creating. The revenue from these channels is being tested at the very highest level of the media spectrum as we can see with News International. An interesting one to watch for developments indeed.