Poynter Forums

Robert's posting might appear to be valid because he mentions "why are
you choosing to limit yourself" to one publication vehicle, but you'll notice that limiting focus to just the Web is what his posting says.

My point is, and long has been, that publications must end their fanatical focus on just the Web. Every publications should publish a Web site, but it shouldn't be the main thrust of their online efforts, which is unfortunately the case now. All the surveys (NIelsen//Netratings, PC Meter, Media Metrix, etc.) ever taken about Internet use show that the fundamental retrieval nature of the Web hobbles its daily usage. It doesn't deliver. For that reason, savvy online publications, like the NY Times, have begun widespread efforts to deliver content online: E-mail, PDAs, WAP/PCS, eBook, Digital Editions, etc.

Revisit that NYTImes.com URL I mentioned. It cites 10.4 million readers per month, the average of whom visits 4 times per month. That's 41.6 million visits during 31-day month of May, an average of 1.34 million per day. Now look at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo/email_circulation.html , which shows that 3.5 milion users get NYTimes content by e-mail daily. More people use it by e-mail than by Web.

Every periodical should publish a Web site but not use just that vehicle. But the periodical's main online efforts should be with the vehicle that its readers most prefer, not just with the Web.

Years ago, periodical publishers and editors became enamored with the World Wide Web -- perhaps because they mistook their tasks as their purposes. Their daily tasks had always been to place stories onto pages, sell advertising on pages, and publish pages. Now,this electronic medium allowed them to place stories on Web 'pages', sell ads on Web 'pages', and publish Web 'pages'. The Web seduced them with its similarities to their traditional tasks, so they ignored the fact that a Web site delivers nothing. Like a newspaper vending box, its contents await retrieval.

Although the basic principles of marketing say to use the medium that your desired audience most frequently use, these periodical publishing executives instead used the Web -- which is neither the most popular nor most heavily nor frequently used online medium (e-mail is). These editors and publishers instead boxed themselves into the Web.

The results have been that they've years been publishing daily changing content into a retrieval mechanism that their average readers bother to visit not even weekly. (For a good example, scroll down to the 'May 2002 Avg. Days Per Visitor Per Month' chart on this page ). Moreover, because Web ads generate billable revenues only when actually exposed (unlike print edition ads, which are billable for the entire press-run circulation and not according to how many readers actually do see them), these Web periodicals generate revenues only as infrequently as their average readers bother to visit. Which is infrequently.

So, Robert, it's wonderful that publishers can keep a Web site constantly updated. And it's excellent that you use personalized Web pages to retrieve your news. But the facts are that the periodicals' Web sites aren't visit frequently enough to make the editors and publishers' efforts really worthwhile or lucrative.

As for e-mail, all surveys ever taken of Internet usages say that it is the only online medium used daily. More specifically, as an example, more people nowadays receive the New York Times's online news daily by e-mail than visit it daily on the Web. "E-mail is how people surf today," to quote a Pew Internet & American Life survey released last week.

The best thinking outside the Web box for periodical publishers is to use the in-box. It's what their desired audience uses daily.