jbofen

Marketers: Old Media Is Losing the Advertising Budget Battle

print,tv,radio deliver the best results. (This next from a 24-7 Wall. article - "Marketeers fooling around with MySpace, Facebook - so far with little success. They'll turn to Twitter, but how does a marketeer reach people who do nothing but type 140 character messages and send them into cyberspace? Trying to put a square peg into Twitter won't work, but alot of capital will be wasted proving that Twitter will be a bad fit for advertising. ... neither has a reason to recommend Youtube/Twitter as a way to reach people to sell product or services. The roadside billboard is about to make a comeback."

Marketers: Old Media Is Losing the Advertising Budget Battle

print, tv and radio are the one's that deliver the best results for advertisers. (This next from a 24/7 Wall. article - "Marketeers fooling around with Myspace & Facebook - so far with little success. They'll turn to twitter because growth rate will hit 100%. But how does a marketeer reach people who do nothing but type 140 character messages and send them into cyberspace? Trying to put a square peg into twitter won't work, but alot of capital will be wasted proving that. Twitter will be a bad fit for advertising. No reason to recommend it as a way to reach people to sell product or services. The roadside billboard is about to make a comeback."

The Unraveling of Newspaper Economics

too much talk here - Just give me my local newspaper, I want all parts/sections of it, too. Keeps me informed of things I may not even have realized I needed to know until I've read it (time and time again)- To me, I will always want the entire paper, and I do enjoy the ads, they are very worthwhile to me.

How to Save Newspapers: Outlaw Linking

the first thing I do is go directly to my newspaper site, not using links anyway. Once I'm on there, I get everything I need.

GM Gives Hope to the Ad Industry

if they really want the best results with their ad $, newspapers and local tv are the way to go. Internet is fine, but the ads really do catch my eye when I read the paper, or am watching tv.

The New York Times Is Selling a Losing Product

Newspapers are content PROVIDERS, (not aggregators). It costs $$ to produce that content that we all are used to relying on, and have been hugely taking for granted, and just because it's been 'free', doesn't mean it should remain that way. Our current times are demanding change in the industry. Only newspapers have the necessary resources to produce what we demand in QUALITY, RESPONSIBLE news reporting. Times are changing, and the 'free' on-line content from quality newspaper establishments will not remain free forever. Those days will be coming to an end, ( A change to the antiquated anti-trust and other laws will help that along.) - You'll be 'getting what you pay for' - ( If you want free, time-consuming unreliable blogs, or choose right- to- the- source, reliable, one-stop news shops that you can count on for accountable reporting). Also coming, other laws that will change the way aggregators (such as Google) use that stolen content.

Newspapers vs. Bloggers: The New News Process

My local paper is one of the best around, it has the awards to prove it. Nothing out there matches its reporting. Like I said, I will not be without it. I can' t begin to tell you the many ways that paper has kept me informed of things I would never even have known to be concerned about....its quality IS SUPERIOR.

Newspapers vs. Bloggers: The New News Process

as already stated, NO amount of effort from bloggers will EVER match the DEPTH and BREADTH of newspaper-produced content I read. My Newspaper is a reliable and trusted source. It is HELD ACCOUNTABLE for what it produces. CAN'T say that for blogs. I haven't got time to waste reading questionable blogs, I want the REAL thing, and I will get that every day from my newspaper, local, by the way. I wouldn't be without it.

Decency Is the New Advertising

gossmark , I disagree that a restaurant shouldn't advertise. People buy/eat where they get the best food/ value for their dollar. Advertising a restaurants" meal deals", offering coupons, etc. will ALWAYS bring in more business. Remember, restaurants have ALOT of competition. I sure would'nt want to be the one NOT advertising.


On Jun 07 04:07 PM gossmark wrote:

> Newspapers can be part of the marketing mix, jbofen, but you can't
> convince me that a restaurant should advertise in one. Their money
> is better spent putting food into people's mouths, supporting local
> HS bands and drama clubs, sponsoring youth soccer and baseball, etc.
>
>
> People buy from people they know and trust. The sidelines of a soccer
> field, PTA meetings, and mom's day out groups are the new mass media.

Saving Newspapers: Put Humpty Dumpty Back Together

my comment appears above Richard Wakefield's June 5 post.

Saving Newspapers: Put Humpty Dumpty Back Together

readership reality - Here are some facts - did you realize that: More than 104 million adults read a print newspaper every day, more than 115 million on Sundays. That's more people than watch the SuperBowl (94 million), American Idol(23 million) or that typically watch the late local news (65 million). And, that: 61% of 18-24 yr. olds and 25-34 yr. olds read a newspaper in an average week and 65% of them read a newspaper or visited a newspaper website in the past week. And that: Average weekday newspaper readership declined a mere 1.8% between 2007 and 2008, and about 7 % since its peak in 2002. Compare that to the 10% decline seen in the prime Tv audience inn 2007 alone. Meanwhile, newspapers Web Audience has grown nearly 75% since 2004, to 73 million unique visitors a month.' Print and digital newspaper media remain strong and will emerge from the current environment an EVEN STRONGER multi-platformFORCE'. - from "The Reality About Newspapers"


On Jun 05 10:03 PM Richard Wakefield wrote:

> A long time ago, in the 70's, I was taught by the newspaper elders
> that the local newspaper is the community marketplace for news, ideas,
> opinions and marketing. That is why newspapers have value to readers.
> Enter the internet -- perhaps starting with sites like the Drudgereport
> and search engines. The "marketplace" concept began to break down.
> Readership was now in play!
>
> The fundamental problem for newspapers now, and has been for many
> years, is loss of readership. You can track declining readership
> into declining circulation. Inevitably, the shrinking franchise shrinks
> advertising revenue.
>
> In the 90's the youth began to shun newspapers. Now, those non-reading
> youth are middle-aged -- and they did not change their readership
> patterns.
>
> With the readership trends, one can only expect to see the traditional
> printed newspaper lose franchise.

High Operating Leverage Pressuring Newspaper Companies

Reality check - "Newspapers, as individual businesses, by and large remain profitable enterprises - with operating margins that Wall Street analysts estimate will generally average in the low to mid teens during 2009. While that may be down from historical highs, such margins would be the ENVY of many other industries today. As consultant J.Morton said in a recent American Journalism Review article, "Overall, the beleaguered newspaper industry's financial health has been weakened but remains healthy by most measures. In this environment, that is an achievement."

Decency Is the New Advertising

Here's one OF THE MANY realities that Jarvis DOESN'T bring up: 'Google's own research shows that 56% of consumers researched or purchased products they saw in a newspaper. Google also says that newspaper advertising reinforces online ads: 52% are MORE LIKELY to buy products IF THEY SEE IT IN THE PAPER.' Also, I don't care how "decent" a business is. A good business with "good morals" and "great customer service " should NEVER think they don't need to advertise! Is Jarvis for real??!!!!

Saving Newspapers: Put Humpty Dumpty Back Together

correction: should read: Google doesn't " share the profits"


On Jun 04 04:16 PM jbofen wrote:

> why NOT point the finger at Google, etc., - it's using copyrighted
> information that costs OTHERS to produce, and doesn't share in the
> profit from using that information. Doesn't something sound a
> bit off? Laws need changing here, the sooner the better.

Saving Newspapers: Put Humpty Dumpty Back Together

why NOT point the finger at Google, etc., - it's using copyrighted information that costs OTHERS to produce, and doesn't share in the profit from using that information. Doesn't something sound a bit off? Laws need changing here, the sooner the better.