Last Updated: May 26, 1999
Printer-friendly version
A perspective on online news
Reader-driven marketing in the electronic era
Letting readers target news they’re interested in may
keep them coming to newspaper sites; journalist-driven content is seen
by many as elitist in nature
By David Demers
During a conference session I attended several years ago, a representative
of the cable television industry declared that "the age of newspapers is
over" and "they will become extinct in the 21st century."
His remarks barely raised an eyebrow in the room. Indeed, many broadcasting
types share such sentiments. They believe newspapers are a close cousin
to the telegraph — it’s just a matter of time before they, too, become
extinct.
There is no denying that newspapers face many challenges today. Inter-media
competition is stiff and becoming stiffer. Production costs are rising.
And household circulation continues to decline, a trend that can be traced
to the early 1950s.
But the notion that newspapers will die in the ever-growing electronic
information age, I argue, is a myth. In fact, newspapers will not only
survive the onslaught of online technologies — they will thrive.
How can I be so optimistic? Reader-driven marketing strategy. Basically,
this is the idea that the newspaper creates products and services to meet
the interests and needs of individual readers, as opposed to interests
of the organization.
Historically, journalists have seen their role as one in which they
select the news, with the reader being a relatively passive participant.
This journalist-driven approach worked fine when there were limited sources
of news (the pre-TV days) and when the needs of the reading public were
relatively homogeneous. Without choices, consumers are forced to purchase
what is available.
Today, however, it’s a different market. People may choose from a greater
variety of print and electronic media, and their needs for news and information
are much more diverse than they were 30 years ago.
What people want is quick and easy access to news and information that
is meaningful and helps them achieve their goals. The one-product-fits-all
approach doesn’t fit very well.
This is where electronic technology comes into play. Until now, it was
not economically feasible to cater to the individual needs of each reader.
The cost of printing many different editions is prohibitive. But with online
technology, readers will be able to create a "portfolio" of news and information
that meets their particular needs. And no other news medium will be able
to satisfy their needs better, because newspapers already offer the most
diverse package of news and information available.
Reader-driven marketing is not just pie-in-the-sky stuff. The Los Angeles
Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer and The San Jose (Calif.) Mercury News,
among others, currently offer readers customized news services via their
Web sites. Although these services are not generating huge profits, they
will become a major source of revenue some day. In fact, a recent national
survey of daily newspapers found that more than a third who have Web sites
are now turning a profit from them.
The "personal newspaper" is a win-win situation for readers, advertisers
and newspapers themselves, because all three save money and time. Readers
get access to information more quickly and efficiently. Production and
distribution costs for newspapers will decline substantially. And, more
importantly, advertisers will be able to target their markets more effectively.
This is the era of target marketing and market segmentation. Advertisers
want to reach people who are good prospects for their products and services.
They don’t want to waste resources on those who are not good customers.
The transition from hard copy to online will not happen overnight. People
resist change, and older generations will not adapt quickly to online technology.
Newspapers, too, resist change, especially those that have less capital
to invest.
Larger organizations with more resources will be the first to adapt.
But the transition will take place. Increasing social and economic differentiation
will force the industry to change. As the number and variety of institutions,
businesses, groups and roles grows, the demand for specialized information
increases dramatically.
This puts a strain on traditional media, which have attempted to serve
broad, diverse audiences. The best example of this occurred during the
1960s, when several large, general-circulation magazines, including Life
and The Saturday Evening Post, ceased publication.
As audiences become more and more diversified, so do products and services,
and advertisers increasingly seek to target specialized as opposed to general
audiences.
In the last decade or so, newspaper publishers and editors have tried
many different techniques to stem the tide of declining household circulation.
They have diversified content, converted from an evening to a morning publication
schedule, added full color and snappy graphics, and turned away from the
traditional hard-news lead in favor of narrative or feature leads and shorter
stories.
These changes have helped, to be sure. But they have not halted the
declines in household circulation. The problem is that people have many
more choices for news and information than they did in the past. And the
driving force behind those choices is increasing differentiation. People’s
needs for information are more specialized.
The newspaper industry cannot change the forces of differentiation.
As long as there are limited resources and the population grows, the social
system will continue to differentiate and the demand for specialized information
will increase. But newspapers will not die. If they continue to diversify
their content and offer reader-driven customized news services, they’ll
position themselves as leaders in information services for the 21st century.
In fact, it may be their most profitable time.
The growth of reader-driven marketing doesn’t mean the end of mass marketing.
Certain kinds of news and information, such as national politics, will
continue to have widespread appeal, even in a highly differentiated society.
But there is no mistaking the power of increasing differentiation — it
will force newspapers to change or die. And the pressure will be greatest
in larger markets, because they have the highest levels of inter-media
competition.
Not everyone will welcome the reader-driven approach. Many traditionalists
are already complaining, because it means journalists have less control
over the flow of news and information.
The assumption these critics make is that the journalist, not the reader,
is in a better position to determine what news and information is beneficial
to the reader and society as a whole.
But the journalist-driven approach is elitist and repugnant to people
who, like me, support efforts to empower average people. One consequence
of the reader-driven approach is that it holds the promise of decentralizing
some of the power that now exists in the system. And I, for one, look forward
to such changes.
Demers is an assistant professor of journalism at Washington State
University in Pullman, Wash.
E-mail him at ddemers@wsu.edu.
