- All topics
- Industry Insights
- Industry trends
- Knowledge Base
- New release
- Piano news
- Press releases
A shift at Prevention comes at a time of cost-cutting and reorganization for Rodale.
The health and wellness magazine will debut a completely ad-free print edition starting with the July issue, publisher Rodale Inc. announced today. The move will coincide with a strategic shift in Prevention’s editorial focus to address what chairman and CEO Maria Rodale calls an “increasingly complex healthcare landscape,” while still maintaining the health and wellness advice that has been the brand’s focus for decades.
Both the cover price and annual subscription prices will be rising. Continue reading…
We continue to repost articles from Piano’s Lead Data Scientist Roman Gavuliak that were written last year and are being re-posted here for the edification of our faithful readers.
Lessons in Paid Content II: The size of your audience
Lessons in Paid Content III: Don’t just slap a meter on it
To read all of Roman’s articles please click here.
I have recently (2014) had the opportunity to give a “Lessons in paid content” talk for Piano. The point of the presentation was to show publishers how they might think about paid content models based on our experience illustrated by graphs and numbers. This blogpost series will explain different points from the presentation. We hope it will make you think about the content on your site in a different way.
Let me first give a little background on where these lessons come from. Piano has implemented 80+ paywall and the number of analyses we have done has climbed to almost 120. This unique learning experience has allowed us to create benchmarks tailored specifically for paid content. Each analysis uses three main sources of data and information:
– Access to Google Analytics or its equivalents (such as SiteCatalyst)
– Our own data collection through a tool called Piano Bar
– Interviews with the staff responsible for online content
The first two sources allow for a quantitative perspective, yet we believe that not every notion is always reflected by the data and a qualitative aspect is necessary as well, so we have been asking a lot of questions. Naturally the publishers do too. Here are their three most common questions:
– Is there someone like me?
– I have 2M uniques, how much money can I make?
– Will users pay for my content?
The core components of every online title are people and content and their interactions. While this may seem like the most obvious thing, it is always worth mentioning, since the online publishing seems to have a dependence on advertising and the industry has become overly focused on pageviews. So here’s something else to think about:
“What do I need to know about my users and content in order to monetize effectively?”
We hope that by the end of this blog post series, these questions will be answered, but perhaps more will arise.
LET’S TALK CONTENT
No site is made up of homogeneous content, they all contain different kinds of different content categorized in different ways. Think about it as sections for instance, sports, news, business, entertainment. Another way to segment the site might be based upon content format – video, audio, slideshow or simple articles.The most obvious way to compare the different content categories is through traffic volumes. By looking only at this though, a lot of other relevant dimensions get missed including perhaps, the most crucial, user loyalty. Illustrated through numbers the graph below represents a sample of 50 sections from a German daily newspaper. They are ordered by their traffic (blue line, primary y-axis), on the left are the sections with the highest traffic, to the right, lowest traffic. The red line represents the volume of loyal users in these sections (ranked by a secondary Y-axis).
While there is a relationship between the number of unique users and the size of the loyal audience, there is certainly a great variation in this relationship. When looking at the two highlighted sections, the first section has twice the volume of unique visitors but almost four times fewer loyal visitors. Section 2 is a more niche than Section 1 and subsequently may not be a good choice for locking. Section 1 is similar to an article that was shared on Facebook and attracted a lot of one-time visitors over a longer time period.
By Kevin Anderson, The Media Briefing
Recently, journalist-entrepreneur Steve Brill laid down a beautiful rant in an interview with Poynter, the journalism education foundation in Florida. He was like-a-sledgehammer-to-the-face blunt, arguing that his efforts to save the industry from itself with a metered content service, Press Plus, were thwarted by small minded, third- and fourth-generation owners who were too “paralyzed” to deal with the competition from digital advertising and had failed to invest in quality content that people would actually pay for.
Most publishers are now comfortable making their content available on distributed platforms. Some, like the Washington Post, put all their content on Facebook’s Instant Articles while others are more selective and parcel out their content more slowly. Does distributed content drive greater loyalty and by extension, greater revenue? And are the problems, poor metrics and poor monetization, inhibiting publishers from using these platforms? A number of articles look at these issues this week in an effort to gain a greater understanding of where publishers stand with regards to distributed content platforms.
Read more about what publishers are discovering in this week’s Industry Insights, available now!
Well, maybe the old subscription model has more legs than is given credit. In the UK, both the Times and the Sunday Times opted to put up an opaque paywall in 2012 while the Guardian went with the advertising model. Pundits were siding with the Guardian as it piled on page views and offered quality journalism for free. After three years though, there were grumblings from users about invasive ads and tracking software that has given rise to the ad block phenomenon that has dominated industry news since June, 2015.
The upshot? The Guardian lost £100M in 2015 while the News Corp. publications appear to be profitable. What was once inconceivable in the Guardian’s HQs, a paywall, is now being discussed. Meanwhile the Times is adding for-profit digital subscribers and new low-priced apps to further drive revenue.