Starting points, part two: the Value of information

Traditional media is struggling to survive for the most part for the simple reason that people think information should be free, and they work hard to make sure that it is free by using the internet to circumvent having to pay for content.  Sometimes searching for that free information can be difficult with all the paywalls and firewalls that publications put up to block it.  EE Times is famous for not allowing most of it's content to see the light of Google searches, to the point that it is often hard to find their content within their own search engine.  But at least they have the reader captured, right?


Not so much.  There are a lot of readers for EE Times... and for Electronic Products... and for all the publications that compete for eyeballs.  When the truth is told, pretty much everyone who reads one of those publications is reading the other.  They have to to be able to find what they are looking for because they really want information.  It's important and valuable, they just don't want to pay for it.


The question is, then: What is the value of information if not monetary?


Information is only valuable if it moves something forward and you don't know if the journey is worth the price until you get to the end.  You don't want to pay for a subscription if you aren't sure that you will be better for the experience.


At the same time, while you might know that one publication might have a lot of the answers your are looking for, you're pretty sure that they don't have everything.  That's pretty much what my virtual focus group of engineers said to me about B2B publications. So no matter how much a particular publication or website wants to monopolize a particular audience, it just ain't gonna happen.


You cannot, however, get a publisher or editor in chief to admit to that.  Just earlier today, the EiC of a start-up online publication was bragging to me about how they can compete "head to head" with a major publication.  When I asked him, "Why would you want to?" he didn't know what to say.


Every company would like to have customers that ONLY buy from them.  That's not going to happen.  So why do publications believe that it might be possible for them to control the readership in a certain demographic?  It's just as fruitless a desire.  But you cannot tell either the companies or the publications how fruitless it is.


But what if there were an organization that was dedicated to finding information for the readers?  What if this organization was not restricted to a particular information outlet? What if this organization was not constrained by circulation wars or advertising revenue?  What if it didn't compete with other media outlets but shared the content it developed willingly?


What if?

Comments

  1. Paul MillerAugust 23, 2011 at 7:34 AM

    Lou,

    Good post. At UBM Electronics (owners of EETimes, EDN, Design News, Test & Measurement World, Datasheets.com, Embedded Systems Conference, Design Lines, TechOnline and a whole host of other products) we certainly don't feel we have all the information an engineer or other reader needs but we have assembled a number of products that can "move things forward" - indeed, our approach is increasingly a dialog with the reader with the latter ofetn adding commentary that accelerates the discussion/information value. In turn, we are increasingly reaching out to others to link out to them and include in a network saving the reader time (a real value) in finding other outlets - we're far from perfect but have changed dramatically from traditional approaches

    ReplyDelete
  2. loucoveySeptember 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM

    No argument from me, Paul, on what UBM is doing to change the way things are done, but in the past decade it's become clear that there is no single source of information for everyone. It's not enough for UBM to add channels and encourage engagement within its own audience. And search engines just don't direct people to objective information.
    What has to change is the way we ALL look at information and how it to best share it with those that need it.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

I'm old and you are not. That's good thing.

Image
I turned 64 this year and have been on the receiving end of scams and offers related to social security, dementia and Medicare for weeks now. I'm also getting offered senior discounts without asking. None of that has bothered me as much as getting dismissed because I'm no longer in my 30s (which bothered me as much when I was in my 20s). Today, however I had a revelation and I'm feeling much better about my age. I was doing a session with the marketing team for a small business back by telephone and was in the process of breaking down their preconceived notions about communication when the youngest member of the team asked me, "How do you know this is what our customers are thinking?" "Because I've been doing this for 40 years," I replied. "Oh." She replied.  Then one of the business owners, well into his 70s asks, "Wait a minute. You said you've been doing this fo r 40 years. How old are you?" "I'm 64....
Read more

Speaking of ethics in sponsored content...

Image
An article today in Forbes on ethics in sponsored content  brought back memories of our recent discussions regarding UBM Tech's methodology changes and the larger discussion about whether corporations can be expected to deliver ethical content. The article points out that Edelman has posted their own set of ethics regarding sponsored content that remarkably mirrors Footwasher Media's position:  That it isn't PR or advertising.  It's something different from what most corporate advocates practice and it must be, by nature, ethical or it loses all value. Many people in the news business have taken ethical standards for granted.  They seem to believe that they are intertwined with the genesis of journalism itself.  It isn't true.  The news business, supported by advertising began in the 1700s with Benjamin Franklin's founding of the Pennsylvania Gazette , but the separation of advertising from editorial did not appear until th...
Read more

Why you don't (or do) like social media, Part Three

Image
When you boil down attitudes toward and execution of social media practices, it's all about leadership.  Real leadership, not the popular definition that rises from the horrific misinterpretation  of Geoffrey Moore's book, Crossing the Chasm .  Let me explain that reference a bit more in depth first. Moore stated fairly simply that for a technology company to be successful, it must attain the perception of leadership in a market niche.  The misinterpretation of that concept is what screws up the marketing for so many companies.  Moore's statement was an indicator of success and a strategy, not a tactic.  If you are the perceived market niche leader, Moore explains, THEN you know you successfully crossed the chasm.  Therefore your marketing strategy must revolve around developing the perception of leadership.  However, most companies believe that saying you are a leader in your marketing documents, even when you are clearl...
Read more