Paywalls go up but answers elusive

Mention "paywall" to newspaper executives and you'll get a bit of everything: optimism, frustration, reluctance and perhaps fear.

John Paton, a major player in the US newspaper market, probably thinks frustration given his announcement that online readers will have to start paying to read his 75 newspapers.

Paton says: "Let's be clear, paid digital subscriptions are not a long-term strategy. They don't transform anything; they tweak. At best, they are a short-term tactic".

They're strong words from Paton and they have received a mixed reaction from industry experts.

But there is one thing that Paton has right: no one knows the long-term effect of digital subscriptions. The circulation of printed papers, the major revenue driver for newspaper companies, is falling by at least 10 per cent a year in Australia so digital subscriptions make sense for now.

News Corp's strategy head has made some frank admissions that touch on the paywall woes. 

There is no guarantee that paywalls will support the massive cost base of newsrooms in years to come. And that's when the test would come for readers - would they pay more for less?

What's the mainstream media chasing?

As the hectares of copy are rolled out for the 50th anniversary of John F Kennedy's assassination, one provocative piece has raised an uncomfortable question for many media executives: does the mainstream media really know which audience it is targeting?

Nick Gillespie indirectly frames the question in his scathing piece on how the JFK anniversary saturation is mainstream media pandering to the baby boomer generation. Gillespie accuses the boomer generation of seeking to "preserve its stultifying cultural hegemony even as it slowly—finally!—begins to exit the stage of American life on a fleet of taxpayer-funded Rascal Scooters". And he suggests that mainstream US media is still riding with them.

They're strong words and they can be forcefully debated. It's not clear whether Gillespie believes media is deliberately targeting that audience or if it's a subconscious move by the decision-makers. But the underlying tenet of Gillespie's argument is the question over the audiences sought by mainstream media.

The situation in Australia may be different but no clearer. Take newspapers as an example. Their marketing bosses would be convinced that they know their target audience, pitching their glossy visions to much-needed major advertisers. They're needed more than ever according to the latest newspapers circulation figures. But there is almost always a disconnect between the desires of the marketing minds and those making decisions at the editorial coalface.

And is that disconnect growing as newspapers react to plunging circulation and tumbling revenues?

The mainstream media remains a powerful force - one that can bring a huge reach, plenty of authority and brilliant journalism. But the rise of other media options has equipped business with new opportunities to engage audiences. It's an intriguing time for those looking forward, even if they do pause to consider all of those unanswered questions about JFK.

Billionaires bring hope to newspapers

The arrival of new billionaires into the newspaper publishing world is bringing a much-needed confidence boost according to some seasoned watchers.

That's in the US, where the likes of Jeff Bezos and John Henry have joined Warren Buffett as newspaper owners.

It can be difficult to compare the US and Australian newspaper markets. Some US papers were punished years ago for not investing in their product when the good times were rolling. When revenues turned south, readers wanted to know why they had to pay more for some papers that were becoming thinner and were still printed largely in black and white.

Australian newspaper companies have a better record for investing in their products. But they have also faced the challenge of asking readers to pay more for work coming out of newsrooms with fewer journalists and photographers.

Australian newspaper executives will know that the US digital newspaper trends are ahead of this country. And the US trends have shown no quick fix for the revenue plunge.

The New York Times noted the challenges of a fragmenting digital advertising market in its latest results released overnight.

Confidence may be back in the US newspaper market but one question remains - will improved confidence lead to improved revenues? Australian newspaper executives will be watching.

Aussie skipper gets back to Twitter

Michael Clarke has become active on Twitter in the last two weeks, coinciding with the release of extracts from Ricky Ponting's memoir.

It would have been awkward reading for the Australian cricket captain. The popular Ponting raised criticisms of Clarke's time as vice-captain.

The story drew plenty of discussion from sports followers. From experience, few things pique interest levels like insights into the Australian cricket camp.

Since those extracts came out, Clarke has tweeted 17 times. Doesn't sound like much? Compare it to what came before that - a collection of retweets and bland messages supporting sponsors. 

Importantly, Clarke hasn't once referred to Ponting's thoughts. It's not his style and he would have to think carefully before using a 140-character tweet to respond to a book nudging 700 pages.

But Clarke has clearly made a decision to better engage with his 572,000 Twitter followers. That's a big, captive audience, without counting the many more people reached by retweets.

It's important for Clarke to engage with such a large audience - and he can control the platform. Which he likes, going on past stories involving the likeable batsman.

As a cricket writer, I covered Clarke's first Australian tour to the Caribbean in 2002-03 and interviewed him at the team hotel in London the night he learned he would make his Test debut in India. At all times, Clarke was a pleasure to interview or to share a beer with. He was always ultra polite, inquisitive, used humour well and spoke with respect for his outstanding teammates.

When his ghostwriters presented his newspaper column for approval, Clarke would take enormous care when reading over the words. He would change some seemingly harmless lines because he wasn't 100 per cent happy. With the exception of the longhand expert Steve Waugh, there may not have been an Australian cricketer who has laboured over his words as much as Clarke.

But mystery still surrounds the real Michael Clarke. Yet he has a good message to sell. Clarke can reveal more of himself in a controlled way on Twitter. He would be wise to continue using it.

Speaking truths in a changing media world

When Amazon guru Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post in August, he admitted to staff that he was joining them on a journey to who-knows-where. "There is no map" in the new media world, Bezos told Post staff.

The Financial Times' editor Lionel Barber has joined Bezos in that world of reality with his email to staff outlining major changes. These should not come as a surprise to intelligent journalists. Barber writes that "the 1970s-style newspaper publishing process – making incremental changes to multiple editions through the night – is dead". He is right.

Barber should be praised for laying out the realities of the changing media environment. Hurriedly cramming minor changes to papers between editions makes little sense in these challenging times. At a basic level, it will be eight hours or so before readers get their copy. A lot can change in eight hours. And there is also the resultant impact on staff and the penalty wages for the cash-strapped papers.

Barber and Bezos are placing themselves at the forefront of the new media's reality seekers. It will be interesting to see how others react.

A poor tweet turns bad for Twitter boss

Did you know that Twitter's board had no women? Or that only one of its executives is a woman?

Plenty didn't know but they're across it now thanks to a social media carwreck by a man who should know better - Twitter boss Dick Costolo.

In response to a New York Times article that highlighted Twitter's all-male cast, Costolo took to the social media platform with a poor joke about an academic featured in the article. He then kept digging.

That initial comment was picked up by news sites, which then catapulted the concerns surrounding the Twitter board make-up to new audiences.

The end result? A topic that was restricted mainly to Times' readers - and on which Twitter had declined to officially comment - became a topic debated widely among a variety of audiences. And this just when Twitter is planning its IPO.

Costolo should have kept that joke for his old days as a stand-up comedian. Executives should be encouraged to show personality in their social media posts but, like everything in business, judgment is advisable at all times.

The fight for the web's town square

The fight for the internet's "town square" continues with the latest moves from Facebook and Twitter.

The finale to the Breaking Bad television series didn't generate as much social media chatter as expected earlier this week. But the second screen experience remains hotly contested. Facebook is now offering interaction data to US television networks.

New figures show that Twitter calls to action are more popular than Facebook references for US advertisers.

Australia's Twitter-Facebook balance is different to the US according to the latest figures. Australian media companies are more locked into Facebook because of sheer local audience size.

And, from experience, scanning Facebook for feedback is a little easier for media executives to stomach. It's far more pleasant than the sometimes ferocious 140-character arrows fired by unhappy tweeters.

The Wallabies, the ARU and fairy dust

It's tough to think there was a lower point for Australian rugby than the Wallabies' loss to the Springboks last weekend. But there it lurked - the Australian Rugby Union media release describing the game.

Here's how the always excellent Greg Growden described the 28-8 loss for ESPN: One of the worst Wallabies teams in 30 years.

And here's how the ARU saw it: Qantas Wallabies show spirit in Cape Town. 

It was brutal from Growden and he wasn't exaggerating - it was reportedly the first time the Wallabies have been beaten by at least 20 points in three consecutive meetings with an opponent. You can bet Growden's audience engagement was strong.

The ARU has a different audience - it has sponsors and employees to think about and must take a different approach. But it should ask what it wants to achieve when it tries to engage with its audience.

Wallaby fans care if their team wins or loses - it's why the team is so beloved. The ARU should at least acknowledge that level of care and desire when it writes about the team. It can be done in a positive way.

It helps fans to know that others are hurting as much as them. They need a cathartic experience - not to become more frazzled.

Why papers are less popular but more expensive

On the surface, it doesn't make sense: as newspapers become less popular, they become more expensive for readers.

Fairfax is the latest publisher to flag cover price increases for its Sydney Morning Herald and The Age: www.theaustralian.com.au/media/fairfax-plans-cover-price-increases/story.

One thing is certain - it won't help to sell more papers. Initial data from the UK shows a recent price increase there has affected circulation: www.theguardian.com/media/2013/sep/26/sun-on-sunday-sunday-mirror-sales-drops.

But newspaper companies are increasingly left with no choice as their classifed and display advertising revenues fall. The once mighty 80-20 model (80 per cent advertising revenue/20 per cent circulation revenue) is long gone. Newspaper companies still need revenue but they know that asking advertisers to pay more is a tough ask.

So it comes back to the reader and, when some newspaper companies sell millions of papers each week, a little increase can go a long way while the scramble for a more sustainable revenue model continues.

The key to handling the price rise is communication with readers. The worst backlash comes when publishers notify readers of the price rise on the day of the increase. But some smart publishers have got well ahead, even shipping out thousands of 10-cent coins to newsagents as a goodwill measure for readers who have not brought the extra money. 

But publishers know there are only so many times they can ask readers to pay more. It's not a long-term solution.

Horses, newspapers and the future of print

Amazon guru Jeff Bezos is the latest billionaire to buy a newspaper. Bezos's purchase of the Washington Post was a major surprise and, while he spoke with confidence, he was quick to admit he was unsure of the famous newspaper's future: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-09-03/lifestyle/41698103_1_washington-post-co-katharine-graham-jeffrey-bezos

This morning, Bezos again rattled the cages of traditional media with this comparison between newspapers and horses: www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/224350/bezos-printed-newspapers-may-be-a-luxury-item/

The analysis through social media was instant and interesting, including this piece from the Atlantic Wire: www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2013/09/jeff-bezos-thinks-newspapers-are-like-horses/69860/.

Whatever comes of the Washington Post, it will be fascinating to hear more from Bezos as he comes to grips with how his $250 million purchase remains a viable force. Bezos's style to think of the reader first may seem like common sense but, in some corners of the publishing world, it's a foreign concept.