This is the fourth installment in a five-part series in which I pose questions about the state of B2B media. You can read the earlier pieces here, here and here.
My friend Doug Fisher, a journalism professor at the University of South Carolina, recently wrote about disagreements in the newspaper industry involving Caspio, a system that is designed to make it easier for journalists to publish database-driven information to the Web.
In brief, some of the best minds in journalism fear that when newspapers use Caspio they are missing an opportunity to develop database-programmer journalists of their own.
My first reaction to Doug's piece was this: I wish we had this problem in B2B.
Unlike the newspaper world, B2B media has long seen the value of providing data to customers. A good portion of B2B companies publish databases, directories, buyers guides, etc. But unlike the newspaper world, B2B publishing companies have not yet seen the value of having journalists interact with the data.
Or, to put it another way, B2B media hasn't fallen in love with the work of Adrian Holovaty.
If you're not familiar with Adrian's work, then you just haven't been paying attention. In just a few, short years he has been instrumental in three massive shifts in media -- ultra-local reporting, the creation of Django development software, and database-driven journalism (including his award-winning mash-up, ChicagoCrime.org.) He's gone from the Lawrence Journal-World in Kansas to the Washington Post. And he recently won a $1 million grant from the Knight News Challenge.
He is perhaps the most important person working in journalism today, although he's not yet 30-years old.
And most B2B editors have never heard of him.
Nearly everyone who writes about media has written about Adrian. But if you're new to the subject, I'd suggest you start by reading this profile in American Journalism Review. Then visit Adrian's site and read some of the pieces he's written himself.
What you'll find (and please forgive my simplistic explanation) is that Adrian urges newspaper reporters to recognize that the information they collect can be viewed as "structured data" that can be stored in databases and repurposed into new forms of journalism.
And increasingly, the smartest newspaper reporters and editors in the world have begun to follow his lead.
Although we B2B journalists are further behind our newspaper brothers in learning to see story elements (earnings, dates, names, events) as data, we do have a distinct advantage in mastering database-driven reporting: We are already awash in data. For many of us, there is an entire department of people down the hall who collect, store and sell data to our readers.
But many B2B reporters never even look at the stuff.
A year and a half ago I wrote a post about two very different experiences I've had with data at publishing companies. At one publisher, the very idea that a reporter like me wanted access to the data so that I could mine it for stories was seen as silly. But at another company, reporters were required to mine the data for stories.
You can read the details here. I don't think you'll be surprised to learn that the first company is now a shell of its former self; while the second company is arguably the most successful electronic publisher in history.
Over in Philadelphia, my friend Russell Perkins runs a group called InfoCommerce. It's a consulting and research firm for data providers. And each year Russell offers something he calls his "Models of Excellence Awards."
Take a look at this year's winners here. Then check out earlier winners here. What you'll find is that while some award winners are from B2B publishing companies, most of the best stuff comes from standalone data and search providers.
I cannot help but wonder if one way to improve B2B publishers' data products -- many of which are already quite wonderful -- would be to allow B2B journalists to experiment, mash-up, drill down and write about what they find in the databases. I have no doubt whatsoever -- because I have seen it in my own reporting -- that opening up the databases to journalists will lead to new, previously unimagined stories and graphics.
Which leads to today's question:
How can we create an environment at our companies where smart people in editorial and data can learn to build stories, products, databases and ideas together?
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Five important questions for B2B media: Part Three
This is the third in a five-part series in which I pose important questions for B2B media. You can see Part One by clicking here. Check out Part Two by clicking here.
If you're reading this, odds are you're white.
Since I started my consulting business a few years ago, I've had the chance to visit dozens of B2B publications. I've also had the chance to speak at tradeshows run by Folio magazine, the American Society of Business Publication Editors and American Business Media.
And everywhere I've gone I've looked out upon audiences made up almost entirely of white people.
It's really begun to drive me nuts.
Sure, every once in awhile I'll see a few Asian folks. That's particularly true in New York and California. And sometimes I'll meet someone with a Spanish surname.
But of the roughly 1,000 U.S.-based B2B journalists I've met, no more than a dozen or so were black, Arabic or South Asian.
It's been nearly two years since I first wrote about this issue. Back then, after a visiting a series of white-dominated businesses, I said "it has become positively creepy to visit your newsrooms." And I assure you that the creepiness factor has only increased.
In addition to the whiteness factor, here are some other things I have noted:
1. An absence of black folks in the newsroom does not reflect the numbers of blacks in a community. Even in cities such as New York, San Francisco, Chicago and Kansas City -- all of which have substantial numbers of black residents -- B2B news staffers are overwhelmingly white.
2. The lack of black folks in a newsroom does not correspond to a lack of black folks at the company. When I wander outside even the whitest of the white newsrooms, I tend to run into substantial numbers of black people in support jobs -- payroll, circulation, reception, etc.
3. When I ask executives about the lack of minority journalists at their publications, the answer I'm most likely to receive is some variation of "we just don't get many minority candidates."
4. When I ask executives what, if any, recruiting they do that is aimed at minority candidates, the answer is almost always "none."
5. When I visit college campuses, or speak to groups of college students at journalism conferences, it is clear that part of the problem begins at the universities. The numbers of minority students at most schools is dissapointingly small.
6. It's also clear that few if any schools consider trade publishing a suitable destination for their graduates. So even schools that have large numbers of minority students tend not to funnel those kids toward us.
7. B2B's shortcomings involve race and ethnic background, not gender. I am not aware of a single B2B publication that has a problem recruiting women for entry-level jobs. Journalism schools tend to attract a good number of female students. And although it is possible to argue that management remains a male-dominated realm, the number of women in management jobs at most B2B publishers dwarfs the number of minority employees at any level in editorial.
It's worse for us
It is clear that this problem -- although present to lesser degrees across all media -- is massive in B2B. Newspapers don't have a problem this big. Television, particularly among on-air personalities, both national and local, doesn't have a problem this big. Radio is considerably more diverse. Online-only consumer news is far more diverse. B2C publishing doesn't have a problem like we do. I've worked in all those fields. And it's only in B2B where the lack of diversity is so glaring, so obvious and so overwhelming that it makes my skin crawl.
In a global economy, there are compelling reasons to diversify a workforce.
But I don't want to talk about those today. Because the more I think about this issue, the more it becomes clear to me that the problem here isn't about motivation. It's about effort.
Far too few B2B executives and senior editorial staffers put enough effort into recruiting minority journalists. Far too few of us visit historically black colleges. Far too few of us post our jobs on sites that cater to minority journalists (examples are here, here and here.) We don't do enough. That is clear to me.
What is unclear is the reason. Is B2B more racist? Is there something about this industry that attracts and rewards prejudiced people? Or is it some other character flaw? Are we lazier? Less concerned with social issues? Are we more easily defeated? Prone to giving in more readily in the face of difficult tasks?
And so this is today's question:
What is it about B2B in general, and your company in particular, that causes our race problem?
(Disclosure: I am a member of the most common demographic in B2B publishing -- I am a middle-aged, white, male.)
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
If you're reading this, odds are you're white.
Since I started my consulting business a few years ago, I've had the chance to visit dozens of B2B publications. I've also had the chance to speak at tradeshows run by Folio magazine, the American Society of Business Publication Editors and American Business Media.
And everywhere I've gone I've looked out upon audiences made up almost entirely of white people.
It's really begun to drive me nuts.
Sure, every once in awhile I'll see a few Asian folks. That's particularly true in New York and California. And sometimes I'll meet someone with a Spanish surname.
But of the roughly 1,000 U.S.-based B2B journalists I've met, no more than a dozen or so were black, Arabic or South Asian.
It's been nearly two years since I first wrote about this issue. Back then, after a visiting a series of white-dominated businesses, I said "it has become positively creepy to visit your newsrooms." And I assure you that the creepiness factor has only increased.
In addition to the whiteness factor, here are some other things I have noted:
1. An absence of black folks in the newsroom does not reflect the numbers of blacks in a community. Even in cities such as New York, San Francisco, Chicago and Kansas City -- all of which have substantial numbers of black residents -- B2B news staffers are overwhelmingly white.
2. The lack of black folks in a newsroom does not correspond to a lack of black folks at the company. When I wander outside even the whitest of the white newsrooms, I tend to run into substantial numbers of black people in support jobs -- payroll, circulation, reception, etc.
3. When I ask executives about the lack of minority journalists at their publications, the answer I'm most likely to receive is some variation of "we just don't get many minority candidates."
4. When I ask executives what, if any, recruiting they do that is aimed at minority candidates, the answer is almost always "none."
5. When I visit college campuses, or speak to groups of college students at journalism conferences, it is clear that part of the problem begins at the universities. The numbers of minority students at most schools is dissapointingly small.
6. It's also clear that few if any schools consider trade publishing a suitable destination for their graduates. So even schools that have large numbers of minority students tend not to funnel those kids toward us.
7. B2B's shortcomings involve race and ethnic background, not gender. I am not aware of a single B2B publication that has a problem recruiting women for entry-level jobs. Journalism schools tend to attract a good number of female students. And although it is possible to argue that management remains a male-dominated realm, the number of women in management jobs at most B2B publishers dwarfs the number of minority employees at any level in editorial.
It's worse for us
It is clear that this problem -- although present to lesser degrees across all media -- is massive in B2B. Newspapers don't have a problem this big. Television, particularly among on-air personalities, both national and local, doesn't have a problem this big. Radio is considerably more diverse. Online-only consumer news is far more diverse. B2C publishing doesn't have a problem like we do. I've worked in all those fields. And it's only in B2B where the lack of diversity is so glaring, so obvious and so overwhelming that it makes my skin crawl.
In a global economy, there are compelling reasons to diversify a workforce.
But I don't want to talk about those today. Because the more I think about this issue, the more it becomes clear to me that the problem here isn't about motivation. It's about effort.
Far too few B2B executives and senior editorial staffers put enough effort into recruiting minority journalists. Far too few of us visit historically black colleges. Far too few of us post our jobs on sites that cater to minority journalists (examples are here, here and here.) We don't do enough. That is clear to me.
What is unclear is the reason. Is B2B more racist? Is there something about this industry that attracts and rewards prejudiced people? Or is it some other character flaw? Are we lazier? Less concerned with social issues? Are we more easily defeated? Prone to giving in more readily in the face of difficult tasks?
And so this is today's question:
What is it about B2B in general, and your company in particular, that causes our race problem?
(Disclosure: I am a member of the most common demographic in B2B publishing -- I am a middle-aged, white, male.)
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Five important questions for B2B media: Part Two
Yesterday I posted the first in a five-part series of questions that folks in B2B media should be asking themselves. Here is the second post in that series.
Last week Steve Ballmer, the chief executive officer of Microsoft, was the keynote speaker at the annual Association of National Advertisers convention. And it was there -- before the group that pays the bills for all of us in media -- that he predicted the death of print publishing within 10 years. "Anything we think of as media today, whether it is print, TV or the Internet, will in fact be delivered over IP (Internet protocol) and will all be digital. Everything will be delivered digitally."
For the record, I am not one of those people who claims that print is dead. Rather, as I have said numerous times in this blog, I believe that "some of print is dead. Some of it isn't...yet. And some of it will live forever."
And I'll match Ballmer's prediction with one of my own: within 10 years, hundreds and hundreds of publications will still be printed on paper. Here are just a few of the periodicals on my desk that have a future in ink: Backpacker, Guideposts, Baseball Digest, Dwell, Giant Robot and Berkshire Living. And although I can add to that list easily, I must admit that there is not a single B2B magazine that I am convinced will be published on paper in 2017.
Tipping Points
Earlier this year, a blog post by my friend Colin Crawford at IDG caught the attention of the B2B media world. (Disclosure: IDG is a client of mine.) Colin wrote that "the absolute dollar growth of (IDG's) online revenues now exceeds the decline in our print revenues." That turning point became a tipping point for IDG. Within weeks, IDG closed the print edition of InfoWorld.
In that same post, Colin also disclosed that online revenue at IDG accounted for 35% of total U.S. publishing revenue. At some key brands, Colin said, online already generated the majority of revenue. And the company expected online revenue would reach approximately 50% of total revenue across the company by 2009.
Then, in June, CMP announced that non-print revenue had surpassed print revenue at the company for the first time. Chief Executive Officer Steve Weitzner told Folio that the "trend is continuing and the gap is actually growing." Armed with this "tipping point" data, CMP promptly closed some print publications, reduced the frequency of some others, and laid off 200 people.
And just a few weeks ago, Cygnus executives said that a decline in print advertising"has accelerated and is significantly larger than we projected during our business reviews, held less than three months ago." At that same time, Cygnus said that online ad sales had risen year-over-year by more than 50 percent. Apparently surprised by the arrival of such a tipping point, and worried about what it meant for the business, Cygnus slashed salaries across the company by 7.5 percent.
The Nature of Business
Business is nothing more -- and nothing less -- than resource management. A company controls things of value: raw materials, a workforce, etc. Management uses those things to create new things that it sells for a profit. But business is fluid. So as sales of Thing 1 rise, sales of Thing 2 sometimes fall. As the costs of creating Thing 3 increase; the costs of producing Thing 4 decline.
Thus every so often a business is forced to reconsider the things that it makes. Every so often a business is forced to ask itself: what business are we in?
In B2B media, we are in the business of connecting people with information and with each other. And it should be clear to everyone that the ways in which we do that must change. The core of what we have done for years and years -- produce print magazines -- is simply not as profitable as it once was. Print revenue is declining. Print productions costs are rising.
But other things we do are growing more profitable. Tradeshows and online publishing are generating more revenue than in the past. And, at least in online publishing, some costs are dropping. So it is inevitable -- inevitable -- that the business equation across all of B2B will shift. We will be closing more print magazines. Heck, within 10 years we may close them all. We will be shifting resources -- firing some workers, hiring new ones, changing incentive plans for ad sales, increasing investment in tradeshows and online while cutting the budgets of print operations.
This will happen. It is happening already and it will continue to happen.
You can't stop it. It's not about you. It's about business. It's about risks and rewards, profits and loss.
The only thing that is open for discussion is the rate of the change. And that is something that each of us must consider individually. Just as the profit potential of print products is declining, the career potential of the people tied to those products is slipping. Just as each company in B2B must decide when to shift resources away from underperforming units, each worker in B2B must decide when to back away from a losing proposition.
So this is today's question:
What is the tipping point for you and your publication? What metric will you use to determine when you'll pull resources from print and at what level? And more importantly, when will you decide that it doesn't make good career sense for you to continue to work on a print product?
(Update: For breaking news out of InfoWorld, check out this article from Folio.)
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Last week Steve Ballmer, the chief executive officer of Microsoft, was the keynote speaker at the annual Association of National Advertisers convention. And it was there -- before the group that pays the bills for all of us in media -- that he predicted the death of print publishing within 10 years. "Anything we think of as media today, whether it is print, TV or the Internet, will in fact be delivered over IP (Internet protocol) and will all be digital. Everything will be delivered digitally."
For the record, I am not one of those people who claims that print is dead. Rather, as I have said numerous times in this blog, I believe that "some of print is dead. Some of it isn't...yet. And some of it will live forever."
And I'll match Ballmer's prediction with one of my own: within 10 years, hundreds and hundreds of publications will still be printed on paper. Here are just a few of the periodicals on my desk that have a future in ink: Backpacker, Guideposts, Baseball Digest, Dwell, Giant Robot and Berkshire Living. And although I can add to that list easily, I must admit that there is not a single B2B magazine that I am convinced will be published on paper in 2017.
Tipping Points
Earlier this year, a blog post by my friend Colin Crawford at IDG caught the attention of the B2B media world. (Disclosure: IDG is a client of mine.) Colin wrote that "the absolute dollar growth of (IDG's) online revenues now exceeds the decline in our print revenues." That turning point became a tipping point for IDG. Within weeks, IDG closed the print edition of InfoWorld.
In that same post, Colin also disclosed that online revenue at IDG accounted for 35% of total U.S. publishing revenue. At some key brands, Colin said, online already generated the majority of revenue. And the company expected online revenue would reach approximately 50% of total revenue across the company by 2009.
Then, in June, CMP announced that non-print revenue had surpassed print revenue at the company for the first time. Chief Executive Officer Steve Weitzner told Folio that the "trend is continuing and the gap is actually growing." Armed with this "tipping point" data, CMP promptly closed some print publications, reduced the frequency of some others, and laid off 200 people.
And just a few weeks ago, Cygnus executives said that a decline in print advertising"has accelerated and is significantly larger than we projected during our business reviews, held less than three months ago." At that same time, Cygnus said that online ad sales had risen year-over-year by more than 50 percent. Apparently surprised by the arrival of such a tipping point, and worried about what it meant for the business, Cygnus slashed salaries across the company by 7.5 percent.
The Nature of Business
Business is nothing more -- and nothing less -- than resource management. A company controls things of value: raw materials, a workforce, etc. Management uses those things to create new things that it sells for a profit. But business is fluid. So as sales of Thing 1 rise, sales of Thing 2 sometimes fall. As the costs of creating Thing 3 increase; the costs of producing Thing 4 decline.
Thus every so often a business is forced to reconsider the things that it makes. Every so often a business is forced to ask itself: what business are we in?
In B2B media, we are in the business of connecting people with information and with each other. And it should be clear to everyone that the ways in which we do that must change. The core of what we have done for years and years -- produce print magazines -- is simply not as profitable as it once was. Print revenue is declining. Print productions costs are rising.
But other things we do are growing more profitable. Tradeshows and online publishing are generating more revenue than in the past. And, at least in online publishing, some costs are dropping. So it is inevitable -- inevitable -- that the business equation across all of B2B will shift. We will be closing more print magazines. Heck, within 10 years we may close them all. We will be shifting resources -- firing some workers, hiring new ones, changing incentive plans for ad sales, increasing investment in tradeshows and online while cutting the budgets of print operations.
This will happen. It is happening already and it will continue to happen.
You can't stop it. It's not about you. It's about business. It's about risks and rewards, profits and loss.
The only thing that is open for discussion is the rate of the change. And that is something that each of us must consider individually. Just as the profit potential of print products is declining, the career potential of the people tied to those products is slipping. Just as each company in B2B must decide when to shift resources away from underperforming units, each worker in B2B must decide when to back away from a losing proposition.
So this is today's question:
What is the tipping point for you and your publication? What metric will you use to determine when you'll pull resources from print and at what level? And more importantly, when will you decide that it doesn't make good career sense for you to continue to work on a print product?
(Update: For breaking news out of InfoWorld, check out this article from Folio.)
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Monday, October 15, 2007
Five days of questions for B2B media
I don't claim to have the answers.
But I do have questions. And this week I'm going to ask five very important ones. Every day from now through Friday I'll share with you the sorts of questions that buzz around in my head ... and that should be buzzing around in yours.
A few days ago BtoB magazine asked Tad Smith, chief executive officer of Reed Business Information, to discuss his investment plans for next year (Disclosure: Reed is a client of mine.)
You can see his responses here.
What was most interesting to me was Tad's statement that he planned to boost spending on online editorial, but that he would do so by spending money on non-editorial staffers: " If you ask someone in California how many people you need to start a Web site, the response is three engineers and one editorial person. If you ask the same question in New York, the response is three editorial people and one engineer. To me, a dollar today spent on site engineering is better than one spent on building editorial content. This may seem counterintuitive, but there's too much focus on content. What you need is content that is more easily found and, when found, more enjoyable to read. That is all about engineering. We want to have sites where people come to enjoy the great content we already have. "
No doubt that's the sort of statement that outrages a good number of journalists. But the truth -- ugly as it may be -- is that Tad is right. For most B2B publishers there is too much focus on the art of content creation and and not enough on the science of content distribution. Editors are creating tons of articles. But since few editors have the skills or interest to optimize their articles for search, much of their effort is wasted.
It's comparable to producing a newspaper with a staff of hundreds of journalists but not a single printer.
Even more worrisome is the widespread problem in B2B publishing of misunderstanding how people consume content on the Web. Much of what we ask people to read online is just plain unreadable on a computer screen.
There is no excuse for producing a text-heavy monstrosity like this site from CMP. And why would anyone think the design of this Grand View Media site is acceptable? Or, for that matter, go back and take a look at the remarkably Web-unfriendly look of the interview with Tad. As I wrote nearly a year ago, BtoB Magazine seems unable to grasp the fundamentals of writing and designing for the Web.
In the past few weeks I've had conversations with a number of executives who made note of two interesting, disconcerting and possibly related facts.
First, after publishers have closed underperforming magazines, they've found that page views of the related Web sites have not suffered -- even if the sites are no longer being updated. In fact, once the editorial staff "was out of the way," as one exec said, a little search-engine optimization led to a boost in page views. Publishers have found that these sites -- full of evergreen, useful, "how-to" content -- could be profitable. The trick is to sell ads against search-engine friendly article pages, and not to "waste" money on staff to create new content.
Second, a much larger percentage of editorial staffers than anyone wanted to admit are proving absolutely incapable of functioning in the new media environment. The problems seem to be emotional and cultural, rather than intellectual. And they may be insurmountable. Or, as one senior editorial executive told me, "I just don't have the patience anymore for another conversation with another middle-aged white guy who thinks he's being mistreated by the world because I want him to know what a f**ing title tag is."
And so, this is today's question:
What is the correct ratio of art to science, creation to optimization, words to design, editor to engineer for each of us and our publications?
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
But I do have questions. And this week I'm going to ask five very important ones. Every day from now through Friday I'll share with you the sorts of questions that buzz around in my head ... and that should be buzzing around in yours.
A few days ago BtoB magazine asked Tad Smith, chief executive officer of Reed Business Information, to discuss his investment plans for next year (Disclosure: Reed is a client of mine.)
You can see his responses here.
What was most interesting to me was Tad's statement that he planned to boost spending on online editorial, but that he would do so by spending money on non-editorial staffers: " If you ask someone in California how many people you need to start a Web site, the response is three engineers and one editorial person. If you ask the same question in New York, the response is three editorial people and one engineer. To me, a dollar today spent on site engineering is better than one spent on building editorial content. This may seem counterintuitive, but there's too much focus on content. What you need is content that is more easily found and, when found, more enjoyable to read. That is all about engineering. We want to have sites where people come to enjoy the great content we already have. "
No doubt that's the sort of statement that outrages a good number of journalists. But the truth -- ugly as it may be -- is that Tad is right. For most B2B publishers there is too much focus on the art of content creation and and not enough on the science of content distribution. Editors are creating tons of articles. But since few editors have the skills or interest to optimize their articles for search, much of their effort is wasted.
It's comparable to producing a newspaper with a staff of hundreds of journalists but not a single printer.
Even more worrisome is the widespread problem in B2B publishing of misunderstanding how people consume content on the Web. Much of what we ask people to read online is just plain unreadable on a computer screen.
There is no excuse for producing a text-heavy monstrosity like this site from CMP. And why would anyone think the design of this Grand View Media site is acceptable? Or, for that matter, go back and take a look at the remarkably Web-unfriendly look of the interview with Tad. As I wrote nearly a year ago, BtoB Magazine seems unable to grasp the fundamentals of writing and designing for the Web.
In the past few weeks I've had conversations with a number of executives who made note of two interesting, disconcerting and possibly related facts.
First, after publishers have closed underperforming magazines, they've found that page views of the related Web sites have not suffered -- even if the sites are no longer being updated. In fact, once the editorial staff "was out of the way," as one exec said, a little search-engine optimization led to a boost in page views. Publishers have found that these sites -- full of evergreen, useful, "how-to" content -- could be profitable. The trick is to sell ads against search-engine friendly article pages, and not to "waste" money on staff to create new content.
Second, a much larger percentage of editorial staffers than anyone wanted to admit are proving absolutely incapable of functioning in the new media environment. The problems seem to be emotional and cultural, rather than intellectual. And they may be insurmountable. Or, as one senior editorial executive told me, "I just don't have the patience anymore for another conversation with another middle-aged white guy who thinks he's being mistreated by the world because I want him to know what a f**ing title tag is."
And so, this is today's question:
What is the correct ratio of art to science, creation to optimization, words to design, editor to engineer for each of us and our publications?
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Sunday, October 07, 2007
Reading the anger at Cygnus
A week ago today I wrote the first of two blog posts about the trouble at Cygnus. The reaction -- in the form of comments I published, comments I censored (because they contained anonymous personal attacks), and e-mails I received -- was both shocking and informative. I warned a week ago today that Cygnus' plan to cut wages was ill-advised and that it "isn't going to end well."
If anything, I was probably being too optimistic. It's beginning to look like this could end in disaster.
Take a moment to look at those earlier posts here and here. More importantly, read the comments. Because today I want to talk about those comments and what they mean.
How bad is it?
As you read through the comments you'll see a level of fury and distrust that is nothing short of overwhelming. The staff at Cygnus is furious. In addition to the sheer anger, there are a few other things worth noting in the comments.
Consider that:
1. The staff's outrage at actual events is so intense it may be leading to outrage at imagined events. One comment refers to a company-paid trip earlier this year to Hawaii for "publishers, sales people, and their spouses/significant others." But another comment says no such trip took place.
2. The atmosphere at the company is now so poisonous that even when management is making sense, the staff doesn't hear it. In one comment, a staff member is angry that the co-CEOs had earlier said that "We anticipate interactive budgets to EQUAL print budgets within 2 years."
The person posting the comments calls that projection "unrealistic" and "nonsense." But it's neither. I don't know if the co-CEOs were talking about their clients' advertising budgets or if they were taking about Cygnus' internal budgets. But either way, interactive budgets already exceed print budgets in much of B2B. But at this point it seems likely that the staff is unable to hear even when senior management is making sense.
3. As things were deteriorating at Cygnus, it appears that senior management continued to give editors new duties (making "on-site reader calls," whatever those are), and then misleading the staff -- suggesting that the new work could lead to pay raises.
4. There are no indications in the comments (or in the emails I've traded with Cygnus workers) to suggest that the company's human resources department has been briefed fully on the salary cuts. Workers say they can't get straight answers even to simple questions. (Note: a staff meeting has been scheduled for this week, and it's likely that many questions will be answered then.)
5. No senior or mid-management people have stepped forward to defend the company's actions. Not one person. Not a single one. That speaks volumes.
Irreconcilable differences?
At Cygnus, the employees and executives are not working together. Rather, they are separated by a monstrous divide of contempt and distrust.
As far as I have heard, no one among the workers or middle management believes that the salary cuts and related actions can work. No one, it seems, has any faith that senior management can pull this off. No one appears to believe that Cygnus will be OK.
Only the workers at Cygnus know for sure just how ugly things have become. Only they know how much less work is being done, how much less effort is being made.
The question is what, if anything, can be done to turn things around.
No doubt the co-CEOs and other top brass at Cygnus arrived at the decision to cut wages because they believed the environment demanded drastic action. Perhaps they were right. Perhaps not. Only those people who have seen the company's books and debt agreements know for sure.
But I have no doubt that as drastic as the situation might have been, it would have been a wiser move to take a different drastic action. Cutting wages for every worker in the company is not a recipe for saving a company. It's an invitation to low morale, sabotage and an exodus of your key players.
If Cygnus' senior management is reading this, allow me to suggest the following:
Now is the time for drastic action. You have to do something to win back your staff and you have to do it quickly.
Because when I read the comments and emails of this past week it is clear to me that Cygnus is slipping away.
(For another take on this, check out this post by Prescott Shibles, the smartest guy who ever worked for me. Prescott talks about how his morale was crushed years ago when the company we both worked for stared cutting wages for execs and freezing salaries for everyone else. That company -- or at least the unit we worked for -- survived and thrived. And Prescott has too. However, it's worth noting that new investors and a very different sort of CEO led the company back from the depths.)
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
If anything, I was probably being too optimistic. It's beginning to look like this could end in disaster.
Take a moment to look at those earlier posts here and here. More importantly, read the comments. Because today I want to talk about those comments and what they mean.
How bad is it?
As you read through the comments you'll see a level of fury and distrust that is nothing short of overwhelming. The staff at Cygnus is furious. In addition to the sheer anger, there are a few other things worth noting in the comments.
Consider that:
1. The staff's outrage at actual events is so intense it may be leading to outrage at imagined events. One comment refers to a company-paid trip earlier this year to Hawaii for "publishers, sales people, and their spouses/significant others." But another comment says no such trip took place.
2. The atmosphere at the company is now so poisonous that even when management is making sense, the staff doesn't hear it. In one comment, a staff member is angry that the co-CEOs had earlier said that "We anticipate interactive budgets to EQUAL print budgets within 2 years."
The person posting the comments calls that projection "unrealistic" and "nonsense." But it's neither. I don't know if the co-CEOs were talking about their clients' advertising budgets or if they were taking about Cygnus' internal budgets. But either way, interactive budgets already exceed print budgets in much of B2B. But at this point it seems likely that the staff is unable to hear even when senior management is making sense.
3. As things were deteriorating at Cygnus, it appears that senior management continued to give editors new duties (making "on-site reader calls," whatever those are), and then misleading the staff -- suggesting that the new work could lead to pay raises.
4. There are no indications in the comments (or in the emails I've traded with Cygnus workers) to suggest that the company's human resources department has been briefed fully on the salary cuts. Workers say they can't get straight answers even to simple questions. (Note: a staff meeting has been scheduled for this week, and it's likely that many questions will be answered then.)
5. No senior or mid-management people have stepped forward to defend the company's actions. Not one person. Not a single one. That speaks volumes.
Irreconcilable differences?
At Cygnus, the employees and executives are not working together. Rather, they are separated by a monstrous divide of contempt and distrust.
As far as I have heard, no one among the workers or middle management believes that the salary cuts and related actions can work. No one, it seems, has any faith that senior management can pull this off. No one appears to believe that Cygnus will be OK.
Only the workers at Cygnus know for sure just how ugly things have become. Only they know how much less work is being done, how much less effort is being made.
The question is what, if anything, can be done to turn things around.
No doubt the co-CEOs and other top brass at Cygnus arrived at the decision to cut wages because they believed the environment demanded drastic action. Perhaps they were right. Perhaps not. Only those people who have seen the company's books and debt agreements know for sure.
But I have no doubt that as drastic as the situation might have been, it would have been a wiser move to take a different drastic action. Cutting wages for every worker in the company is not a recipe for saving a company. It's an invitation to low morale, sabotage and an exodus of your key players.
If Cygnus' senior management is reading this, allow me to suggest the following:
Now is the time for drastic action. You have to do something to win back your staff and you have to do it quickly.
Because when I read the comments and emails of this past week it is clear to me that Cygnus is slipping away.
(For another take on this, check out this post by Prescott Shibles, the smartest guy who ever worked for me. Prescott talks about how his morale was crushed years ago when the company we both worked for stared cutting wages for execs and freezing salaries for everyone else. That company -- or at least the unit we worked for -- survived and thrived. And Prescott has too. However, it's worth noting that new investors and a very different sort of CEO led the company back from the depths.)
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Things get really ugly, really fast at Cygnus
On Sunday, I posted something to this blog about the troubles at Cygnus. I suggested that upper management's decision to cut wages would lead to morale problems, and warned that the plan to cut salaries "isn't going to end well."
It now appears that I underestimated just how angry folks were.
In the past few days I have rejected 12 comments to this blog because they violate the one rule I have about comments -- no anonymous personal attacks (There is one exception -- I generally allow anonymous personal attacks on me.)
That's a record. Nothing I've ever written has generated such nastiness. The folks at Cygnus are livid. And I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that the staff hates the company.
To those of you who wish to vent your anger on this blog, I ask that you please resend your comments. Feel free to do so anonymously. I understand that many of you fear for your jobs. But if you wish to be anonymous, do not mention bosses, co-workers, administrative staff or others by name or by identifying title. I'm sure that those of you in editorial understand my hesitation to publish anonymous personal attacks and curse words. I'm sure you have similar rules at your publications.
Also, some of you have shared personal anecdotes about the management of Cygnus. These stories, if true, are illustrative of what has gone wrong at the company. But I'm not willing to publish those accusations anonymously. Nor do I have the time and resources to "launch an investigation" of the people in charge. Instead, I would urge you to contact the reporting staff at Folio magazine. Perhaps they would be interested in chasing this story.
Thanks. And good luck in these next few difficult weeks.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
It now appears that I underestimated just how angry folks were.
In the past few days I have rejected 12 comments to this blog because they violate the one rule I have about comments -- no anonymous personal attacks (There is one exception -- I generally allow anonymous personal attacks on me.)
That's a record. Nothing I've ever written has generated such nastiness. The folks at Cygnus are livid. And I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that the staff hates the company.
To those of you who wish to vent your anger on this blog, I ask that you please resend your comments. Feel free to do so anonymously. I understand that many of you fear for your jobs. But if you wish to be anonymous, do not mention bosses, co-workers, administrative staff or others by name or by identifying title. I'm sure that those of you in editorial understand my hesitation to publish anonymous personal attacks and curse words. I'm sure you have similar rules at your publications.
Also, some of you have shared personal anecdotes about the management of Cygnus. These stories, if true, are illustrative of what has gone wrong at the company. But I'm not willing to publish those accusations anonymously. Nor do I have the time and resources to "launch an investigation" of the people in charge. Instead, I would urge you to contact the reporting staff at Folio magazine. Perhaps they would be interested in chasing this story.
Thanks. And good luck in these next few difficult weeks.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Things get ugly at Cygnus
There's some depressing news out of Cygnus Business Media. The B2B publisher is slashing workers' pay by 7.5 percent and cutting hours for hourly workers. Cygnus says senior executives will also have their pay cut. But the company -- seemingly deaf to the public-relations implications of not being transparent -- won't say how much of a cut the big boys will take.
The cost reductions may be related to debt covenants, according to Folio magazine. Cygnus, like many a B2B publisher these days, is controlled by a private equity firm. And as anyone who follows B2B publishing knows, such investors often find themselves owing more than they can pay.
And as we've seen before at Primedia, Ziff Davis and elsewhere -- it's the workers who bear the burden of poorly structured investment deals.
When I launched my consulting business several years ago, Cygnus was one of my first clients. And although I haven't done business with them for a few years now, the company retains a place in my heart. So when I heard the news about the salary cuts, it hit me sort of hard.
The story broke late on Friday as I ended a multiday trip in which I gave two presentations on the future of B2B publishing. And, as I often do, I suggested in both presentations that journalists would need to work harder than ever before to succeed in the fiercely competitive new world of new media.
But as I read the Folio article about Cygnus I was struck by three rather remarkable items that suggest that hard work -- perhaps even extraordinarily hard work -- may not be enough at some companies.
Consider this:
First, it appears Cygnus has seen online ad sales rise year-over-year by more than 50 percent.
Second, the co-CEOs of Cygnus told workers that a decline in print advertising"has accelerated and is significantly larger than we projected during our business reviews, held less than three months ago."
Third, one source expressed dismay that the company's management and owners would be "willing to make the company go through this trauma in order to avoid the modest costs and pain of a bank amendment."
Or in other words:
1. There is evidence that the staff at Cygnus is working harder online than before.
2. Senior management made an error in their projections.
3. The staff is being asked to cover the costs of senior management's mistake -- even though there is another option (reworking the bank agreements.)
I have little doubt that the situation at Cygnus is more complicated than I have portrayed it. Perhaps the debt covenants are unusually tough. Perhaps the creditors are unusually cruel. There are probably dozens of things that I know nothing about that contributed to the decision to cut wages.
Nonetheless, I'm comfortable agreeing with the source in the Folio story who called the salary cuts a "desperate and short-sighted move."
This isn't going to end well.
(Footnote: Speaking of working "harder than ever before to succeed in the fiercely competitive new world of new media," it's worth noting that Folio published its story after the close of business on Friday. But Folio's primary competitors -- BtoB Magazine and min -- still don't have anything on their sites some two days later. )
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
The cost reductions may be related to debt covenants, according to Folio magazine. Cygnus, like many a B2B publisher these days, is controlled by a private equity firm. And as anyone who follows B2B publishing knows, such investors often find themselves owing more than they can pay.
And as we've seen before at Primedia, Ziff Davis and elsewhere -- it's the workers who bear the burden of poorly structured investment deals.
When I launched my consulting business several years ago, Cygnus was one of my first clients. And although I haven't done business with them for a few years now, the company retains a place in my heart. So when I heard the news about the salary cuts, it hit me sort of hard.
The story broke late on Friday as I ended a multiday trip in which I gave two presentations on the future of B2B publishing. And, as I often do, I suggested in both presentations that journalists would need to work harder than ever before to succeed in the fiercely competitive new world of new media.
But as I read the Folio article about Cygnus I was struck by three rather remarkable items that suggest that hard work -- perhaps even extraordinarily hard work -- may not be enough at some companies.
Consider this:
First, it appears Cygnus has seen online ad sales rise year-over-year by more than 50 percent.
Second, the co-CEOs of Cygnus told workers that a decline in print advertising"has accelerated and is significantly larger than we projected during our business reviews, held less than three months ago."
Third, one source expressed dismay that the company's management and owners would be "willing to make the company go through this trauma in order to avoid the modest costs and pain of a bank amendment."
Or in other words:
1. There is evidence that the staff at Cygnus is working harder online than before.
2. Senior management made an error in their projections.
3. The staff is being asked to cover the costs of senior management's mistake -- even though there is another option (reworking the bank agreements.)
I have little doubt that the situation at Cygnus is more complicated than I have portrayed it. Perhaps the debt covenants are unusually tough. Perhaps the creditors are unusually cruel. There are probably dozens of things that I know nothing about that contributed to the decision to cut wages.
Nonetheless, I'm comfortable agreeing with the source in the Folio story who called the salary cuts a "desperate and short-sighted move."
This isn't going to end well.
(Footnote: Speaking of working "harder than ever before to succeed in the fiercely competitive new world of new media," it's worth noting that Folio published its story after the close of business on Friday. But Folio's primary competitors -- BtoB Magazine and min -- still don't have anything on their sites some two days later. )
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Friday, September 21, 2007
At the Folio:Show next week
Some of the best and brightest folks in the magazine world will be at the Folio:Show next week in New York City.
I'll be there too.
If you're attending, make sure you say hello. I'm co-hosting a session on Wednesday morning titled "Who Should You Hire: Journalists, Market Pros or E-Wizards? Come on by and introduce yourself.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
I'll be there too.
If you're attending, make sure you say hello. I'm co-hosting a session on Wednesday morning titled "Who Should You Hire: Journalists, Market Pros or E-Wizards? Come on by and introduce yourself.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Advertising in the near future
If you read the New York Times today, you'll see a number of articles that point to massive changes in the way we in the media will generate revenue in the near future. Each of the articles touches on different subjects. But combined they tell a tale that points to a whole new world.
And, as is often the case, I'm worried that B2B media isn't ready.
The first article reports that social-networking powerhouse MySpace "says that after experimenting with technology over the last six months it can (now) tailor ads to the personal information that its 110 million active users leave on their profile pages."
The second article reports that AOL is relocating its corporate headquarters to New York City and combining its advertising sales into an operation run by Curtis G. Viebranz, the former chief executive of Tacoda. Tacoda, the king of behavioral targeting, was purchased by AOL earlier this year.
So think about this for a minute: two of the largest players on the Web are throwing their weight behind technology that delivers advertising that is targeted to an individual, rather than to a demographic. MySpace will deliver ads based on what a user tells the company about himself. AOL, using behavioral targeting, will deliver ads based on how a user acts online.
In B2B, we have long touted that our products --either on the Web or in print -- can target ads to a specialized and engaged audience. But it would seem to me that our traditional ad recipe -- the same ad to everyone in an industry -- cannot compete against technology that delivers unique ads to each reader.
Consider, for example, the power of delivering an ad about business-finance software to the CFO, while delivering an ad about storage facilities to the folks in the logistics department.
And consider, for a moment, that the new technologies that AOL and MySpace are adopting mean that those specific ads can be delivered to those specific B2B readers in places other than B2B products.
Soon, very soon, that CFO will be seeing business-finance software ads even when he's reading about sports on some mainstream Web site.
There is, of course, also an opportunity here for online B2B publications. Opening up our readership to these targeted ads would prove attractive to marketers. There's no reason why an advertiser wouldn't want to show an individually targeted ad to the reader of a B2B publication. If one of our readers is in the market for a new car, or is obsessed with video games, or is shopping for a new suit, we should be willing to serve him an appropriate ad even on the pages of Avionics Engineer Monthly.
There are two other articles in today's Times that also point toward this new future. I'll link to them here without further comment.
First, Google has announced plans to offer ads tailored for mobile phones.
Second, the Times has announced it is pulling down the pay wall on its Web site.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, advertising
And, as is often the case, I'm worried that B2B media isn't ready.
The first article reports that social-networking powerhouse MySpace "says that after experimenting with technology over the last six months it can (now) tailor ads to the personal information that its 110 million active users leave on their profile pages."
The second article reports that AOL is relocating its corporate headquarters to New York City and combining its advertising sales into an operation run by Curtis G. Viebranz, the former chief executive of Tacoda. Tacoda, the king of behavioral targeting, was purchased by AOL earlier this year.
So think about this for a minute: two of the largest players on the Web are throwing their weight behind technology that delivers advertising that is targeted to an individual, rather than to a demographic. MySpace will deliver ads based on what a user tells the company about himself. AOL, using behavioral targeting, will deliver ads based on how a user acts online.
In B2B, we have long touted that our products --either on the Web or in print -- can target ads to a specialized and engaged audience. But it would seem to me that our traditional ad recipe -- the same ad to everyone in an industry -- cannot compete against technology that delivers unique ads to each reader.
Consider, for example, the power of delivering an ad about business-finance software to the CFO, while delivering an ad about storage facilities to the folks in the logistics department.
And consider, for a moment, that the new technologies that AOL and MySpace are adopting mean that those specific ads can be delivered to those specific B2B readers in places other than B2B products.
Soon, very soon, that CFO will be seeing business-finance software ads even when he's reading about sports on some mainstream Web site.
There is, of course, also an opportunity here for online B2B publications. Opening up our readership to these targeted ads would prove attractive to marketers. There's no reason why an advertiser wouldn't want to show an individually targeted ad to the reader of a B2B publication. If one of our readers is in the market for a new car, or is obsessed with video games, or is shopping for a new suit, we should be willing to serve him an appropriate ad even on the pages of Avionics Engineer Monthly.
There are two other articles in today's Times that also point toward this new future. I'll link to them here without further comment.
First, Google has announced plans to offer ads tailored for mobile phones.
Second, the Times has announced it is pulling down the pay wall on its Web site.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, advertising
Thursday, September 13, 2007
I'm back online ... sort of
The worst of yesterday's crisis has passed.
I've moved my domain to a new host. Email is up and running again.
I will, however, have to rebuild PaulConley.com.
I have all my files backed up in several places. But I'm trying to decide if I want to use this disaster as an opportunity to redesign the site. I'll made the decision by tomorrow. Either way, I'll have a working site again by the end of the weekend.
In the meantime, thanks again for your patience. And if you've sent me an email anytime in the past few days and haven't received a response, please resend.
Thanks!
I've moved my domain to a new host. Email is up and running again.
I will, however, have to rebuild PaulConley.com.
I have all my files backed up in several places. But I'm trying to decide if I want to use this disaster as an opportunity to redesign the site. I'll made the decision by tomorrow. Either way, I'll have a working site again by the end of the weekend.
In the meantime, thanks again for your patience. And if you've sent me an email anytime in the past few days and haven't received a response, please resend.
Thanks!
Monday, September 10, 2007
Criminals, content and competition
A longtime reader of this blog wrote an email to tell me that in my recent series of posts on content marketers I should have mentioned what he called "the first and maybe the best B2B site published by nonpublishers."
And he's right, I should have.
The site he refers to is Security Focus, the self-described "vendor-neutral site" owned by Symantec Corp., makers of Norton anti-virus software. Security Focus covers the world of hackers, viruses and other security issues -- a world where its parent company is a major player. But Security Focus offers news and information without the obvious bias that many journalists would expect to find in a site run by someone from outside the world of media.
Security Focus' has a rather unusual history in the world of publishing. It was made famous by the work of notorious black-hat hacker Kevin Poulsen, who turned to journalism when he turned away from crime. Symantec acquired Security Focus in 2002 (and Poulsen moved on to Wired in 2005. ) Today Security Focus is a premier, online-only publication that has maintained a reputation for reputable reporting "that is not influenced by Symantec corporate policies or products."
It's worth noting that Security Focus does accept ads -- making it different from the classic content-marketing site. As a result, Security Focus competes with traditional publishers for dollars as well as readers.
So it's worth asking -- what company in your space has the prestige and reputation that, if it opted to become a publisher, your readers and/or advertisers would trust it as a source of bias-free information?
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, content marketing
And he's right, I should have.
The site he refers to is Security Focus, the self-described "vendor-neutral site" owned by Symantec Corp., makers of Norton anti-virus software. Security Focus covers the world of hackers, viruses and other security issues -- a world where its parent company is a major player. But Security Focus offers news and information without the obvious bias that many journalists would expect to find in a site run by someone from outside the world of media.
Security Focus' has a rather unusual history in the world of publishing. It was made famous by the work of notorious black-hat hacker Kevin Poulsen, who turned to journalism when he turned away from crime. Symantec acquired Security Focus in 2002 (and Poulsen moved on to Wired in 2005. ) Today Security Focus is a premier, online-only publication that has maintained a reputation for reputable reporting "that is not influenced by Symantec corporate policies or products."
It's worth noting that Security Focus does accept ads -- making it different from the classic content-marketing site. As a result, Security Focus competes with traditional publishers for dollars as well as readers.
So it's worth asking -- what company in your space has the prestige and reputation that, if it opted to become a publisher, your readers and/or advertisers would trust it as a source of bias-free information?
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, content marketing
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Eddies and Ozzies
I don't have much time to give the details, so you'll have to follow the link -- but Folio magazine has released the list of nominees for its Eddie and Ozzie awards.
I want to offer my congratulations to all the nominees. Sometimes it is an honor just to be nominated.
I'm also going to take this opportunity to cast my vote in one of my favorite categories -- the Ozzie for best design of a new B2B magazine.
Take a look at McGraw-Hill's Greensource, and see if you agree that it's one of the most gorgeous magazines the B2B world has ever produced.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, design
I want to offer my congratulations to all the nominees. Sometimes it is an honor just to be nominated.
I'm also going to take this opportunity to cast my vote in one of my favorite categories -- the Ozzie for best design of a new B2B magazine.
Take a look at McGraw-Hill's Greensource, and see if you agree that it's one of the most gorgeous magazines the B2B world has ever produced.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, design
Friday, August 31, 2007
Reading for a long weekend
I, like a good portion of the country, am trying to finish off a few projects today so I can begin the long holiday weekend.
I won't be posting to this blog until sometime next week, unless something truly remarkable happens in the world of B2B.
But if you're the type who will spend this weekend reading on the computer rather than reading by the beach, allow me to share some of the blogs that I've recently added to my newsreader.
Longtime readers of this blog know I'm still in mourning over the closure of CMO Magazine. If you shared my love of that publication, you may want to follow the work of Rob O'Regan, founding Editor in Chief of CMO. Check out his blog, called Magnosticism.
I spent a good portion of this summer waging a battle against the use of annoying and unethical ads in the world of B2B publishing. Now Ryan Block, editor in chief of Engadget, one of my favorite online-only publications, has taken up the fight. You can read his open letter to the industry here, and check out the rest of his blog here.
Just last week I wrote at length about the rise of content marketing. And I get the feeling I'll be writing more about this subject soon. There are opportunities here for B2B. But there are challenges too. If you want to follow this trend, check out the Junta42 Blog.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, content marketing
I won't be posting to this blog until sometime next week, unless something truly remarkable happens in the world of B2B.
But if you're the type who will spend this weekend reading on the computer rather than reading by the beach, allow me to share some of the blogs that I've recently added to my newsreader.
Longtime readers of this blog know I'm still in mourning over the closure of CMO Magazine. If you shared my love of that publication, you may want to follow the work of Rob O'Regan, founding Editor in Chief of CMO. Check out his blog, called Magnosticism.
I spent a good portion of this summer waging a battle against the use of annoying and unethical ads in the world of B2B publishing. Now Ryan Block, editor in chief of Engadget, one of my favorite online-only publications, has taken up the fight. You can read his open letter to the industry here, and check out the rest of his blog here.
Just last week I wrote at length about the rise of content marketing. And I get the feeling I'll be writing more about this subject soon. There are opportunities here for B2B. But there are challenges too. If you want to follow this trend, check out the Junta42 Blog.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, content marketing
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Turning readers into publishers
Yesterday I blogged about the rise of "content marketing," in which retailers, manufacturers and others have dived into the world of publishing. This new form of editorial has some distinct advantages over traditional publishing -- primarily that content marketers aren't worried about making money from the content itself. Content isn't their business. Rather, content is an expense aimed at building their business.
Today I want to talk about the opportunity I see in content marketing for B2B publishers.
I'll ask that you bear with me. My thoughts on this issue aren't completely formed. So, as I often do, I'm blogging as a way of thinking.
Much of B2B publishing works on the controlled circulation model. Sure, we sell data. And of course, we charge people to attend our trade shows. But our content is free to our readers. Unlike our brothers and sisters in consumer magazines and newspapers, most of us in B2B don't have to worry about newsstand sales and subscription revenue.
We do, however, have to worry about advertising.
But imagine if we could find a way to make money without advertising or subscriptions.
Driving new business
Suppose you're the publisher of one of the dozens of trucking magazines in the B2B world. Your readers work at trucking companies; Your advertisers are companies that sell stuff to trucking companies -- tires and logistics software and rear-view mirrors.
Now suppose that your boss has told you he wants to see revenue growth this year of X percent. Traditionally, you have several options. You can raise ad rates, ask your existing advertisers to buy more ads, find new advertisers, or launch a new product and find advertisers for that.
But instead of looking at advertisers, what would happen if you looked at one of your readers.
Suppose one of your readers is Joe Schmoe, owner of Refrigerated Liquid Transport Corp., provider of climate-controlled, cross-country transport of dairy products. Joe's company is big. Joe is the king of milk movement. He has a 40% share of the U.S. market. And he has a marketing budget of hundreds of thousand dollars a year. But he doesn't spend any of that with you. He's a reader, not an advertiser. He doesn't need to get his brand in front of other trucking companies.
But he does need to get his message in front of dairy producers.
Joe advertises in dairy magazines. His ads run in B2B publications and Web sites such as "Dairy Cow Monthly" and "Chief Milk Officer."
Could you convince Joe that the way to get his message out was to become a content marketer? Could you help him become one?
It's not customary to do it that way
Most large B2B publishers have a custom publishing unit. In a nutshell, their job is to create content for advertisers. Most of the time this involves producing limited-run, print publications that go to a magazine's existing readers. Sometimes it involves creating a microsite or some other advertiser-driven Web product. But in essence, custom publishing is about creating a product for an advertiser.
But I'm talking about something different here. I'm not talking about turning Joe from a reader into an advertiser. I'm not even talking about turning Joe from a reader into a customer of your custom-publishing unit.
I'm talking about turning Joe from a reader into a real-life publisher.
Here's the pitch:
In exchange for X amount of money, (cash that he now spends on ads in magazines you don't own), you'll help Joe become a content marketer.
Joe becomes the publisher of "Milking the Market," an online news site about dairy futures and milk production. It's not about transport. Joe doesn't have to cover himself or his competitors. Rather, he's offering valuable information to his target audience for free. There are no ads on "Milking the Market," although each page is branded with Joe's Refrigerated Liquid Transport Corp. logo. There are no subscription fees. Rather, it is a purely editorial site that helps milk producers make money.
What you give Joe is expertise in online publishing (I don't think this idea would work well at all in print, where the expenses are much higher.)
In particular, you help Joe with:
a) hiring skilled journalists to produce aggregated content and "evergreen" how-to articles (daily news is too expensive, and he'd need a fulltime staff), and
b) using search-engine optimization to get his product in front of his target audience.
There are dozens of variations to this business model. Maybe you work as a consultant to Joe as he gets his content marketing site off the ground. Or perhaps you do all the work yourself, hiring freelancers as needed, and charging Joe a monthly fee. Maybe he buys back-end services from you (server space, access to a CMS, etc.), maybe not.
But however you do it, what you're doing is very different from what you have done in the past.
Because now you're working for a fee, not for ad dollars.
And your client isn't an advertiser, he's a publisher ... just like you.
(Note: It will be clear to many readers that the closest thing to content marketing in B2B is the world of association publishing. That market has been very lucrative for a number of specialized publishers who produce print magazines for trade associations. The associations serve as publishers and provide the subscriber list, but the work of writing, design, etc. is often done by an outside company with editorial expertise. A similar model has emerged online where companies such as SmartBrief, a former consulting client of mine, and rival U.S. News Custom Briefings, aggregate content for associations. But the core of those businesses remains advertising.)
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, content marketing
Today I want to talk about the opportunity I see in content marketing for B2B publishers.
I'll ask that you bear with me. My thoughts on this issue aren't completely formed. So, as I often do, I'm blogging as a way of thinking.
Much of B2B publishing works on the controlled circulation model. Sure, we sell data. And of course, we charge people to attend our trade shows. But our content is free to our readers. Unlike our brothers and sisters in consumer magazines and newspapers, most of us in B2B don't have to worry about newsstand sales and subscription revenue.
We do, however, have to worry about advertising.
But imagine if we could find a way to make money without advertising or subscriptions.
Driving new business
Suppose you're the publisher of one of the dozens of trucking magazines in the B2B world. Your readers work at trucking companies; Your advertisers are companies that sell stuff to trucking companies -- tires and logistics software and rear-view mirrors.
Now suppose that your boss has told you he wants to see revenue growth this year of X percent. Traditionally, you have several options. You can raise ad rates, ask your existing advertisers to buy more ads, find new advertisers, or launch a new product and find advertisers for that.
But instead of looking at advertisers, what would happen if you looked at one of your readers.
Suppose one of your readers is Joe Schmoe, owner of Refrigerated Liquid Transport Corp., provider of climate-controlled, cross-country transport of dairy products. Joe's company is big. Joe is the king of milk movement. He has a 40% share of the U.S. market. And he has a marketing budget of hundreds of thousand dollars a year. But he doesn't spend any of that with you. He's a reader, not an advertiser. He doesn't need to get his brand in front of other trucking companies.
But he does need to get his message in front of dairy producers.
Joe advertises in dairy magazines. His ads run in B2B publications and Web sites such as "Dairy Cow Monthly" and "Chief Milk Officer."
Could you convince Joe that the way to get his message out was to become a content marketer? Could you help him become one?
It's not customary to do it that way
Most large B2B publishers have a custom publishing unit. In a nutshell, their job is to create content for advertisers. Most of the time this involves producing limited-run, print publications that go to a magazine's existing readers. Sometimes it involves creating a microsite or some other advertiser-driven Web product. But in essence, custom publishing is about creating a product for an advertiser.
But I'm talking about something different here. I'm not talking about turning Joe from a reader into an advertiser. I'm not even talking about turning Joe from a reader into a customer of your custom-publishing unit.
I'm talking about turning Joe from a reader into a real-life publisher.
Here's the pitch:
In exchange for X amount of money, (cash that he now spends on ads in magazines you don't own), you'll help Joe become a content marketer.
Joe becomes the publisher of "Milking the Market," an online news site about dairy futures and milk production. It's not about transport. Joe doesn't have to cover himself or his competitors. Rather, he's offering valuable information to his target audience for free. There are no ads on "Milking the Market," although each page is branded with Joe's Refrigerated Liquid Transport Corp. logo. There are no subscription fees. Rather, it is a purely editorial site that helps milk producers make money.
What you give Joe is expertise in online publishing (I don't think this idea would work well at all in print, where the expenses are much higher.)
In particular, you help Joe with:
a) hiring skilled journalists to produce aggregated content and "evergreen" how-to articles (daily news is too expensive, and he'd need a fulltime staff), and
b) using search-engine optimization to get his product in front of his target audience.
There are dozens of variations to this business model. Maybe you work as a consultant to Joe as he gets his content marketing site off the ground. Or perhaps you do all the work yourself, hiring freelancers as needed, and charging Joe a monthly fee. Maybe he buys back-end services from you (server space, access to a CMS, etc.), maybe not.
But however you do it, what you're doing is very different from what you have done in the past.
Because now you're working for a fee, not for ad dollars.
And your client isn't an advertiser, he's a publisher ... just like you.
(Note: It will be clear to many readers that the closest thing to content marketing in B2B is the world of association publishing. That market has been very lucrative for a number of specialized publishers who produce print magazines for trade associations. The associations serve as publishers and provide the subscriber list, but the work of writing, design, etc. is often done by an outside company with editorial expertise. A similar model has emerged online where companies such as SmartBrief, a former consulting client of mine, and rival U.S. News Custom Briefings, aggregate content for associations. But the core of those businesses remains advertising.)
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, content marketing
Meet the new boss, different from the old boss
Much of my time these days is spent working on a new B2B site for About.com, now a unit of the New York Times. The site covers the online advertising industry. And I'd urge anyone who works online to take a look. Everyone in the industry -- including those of us on the editorial side -- would do well to understand the money part of the content game.
You can check out the site here.
We launched a few days ago, and things have been going well. We got some press coverage (here and here). And we're getting the sort of search-engine placement at which About excels.
But the thing that excites me most about the new site is that it's a chance to work on a product that is similar to -- although not exactly part of -- a growing trend in online content. And I expect many of you will also soon find yourselves part of this trend.
Allow me to explain.
The About Online Advertising site has two business purposes. First, just like any other commercial site, it exists to make money. We sell ads on the site to generate revenue. But far more interesting is the site's second purpose. About Online Advertising is aimed at entry-level media buyers -- the people who buy ad space for a living. By offering a guide to the industry for newcomers, About hopes to build awareness of its larger brand. In other words, the hope is that media buyers who become readers of About's Online Advertising site will some day become customers of About's hundreds of consumer-focused sites.
Here's why you should care
In the August issue of Folio magazine, Joe Pulizzi, chief content officer for Junta42, wrote a guest column called "Are Corporations the New Kings of Content?"
Joe is talking about the rise of "content marketing" -- in which manufacturers, retailers and others "are jumping with both feet into the province once deemed the sacred right of publishing houses."
Content marketing, as Joe points out, has its roots in custom publishing and branded content. But there is a notable, fundamental difference. When done correctly, "content marketing" involves the creation of exactly the sort of material that is the traditional domain of journalists, not public relations folks.
Or, as Joe puts it, content marketers have "have hired some of the best journalists around, looked for, found and paid for authoritative experts to inform their audiences, set editorial and graphic standards that surpass those of many publications. And, perhaps one of the most critical components, have launched stringent measurement analysis to both determine and improve the content they are sending out.
More importantly, many content marketers seem to have mastered some of the basics of Web publishing -- search-engine optimization, evergreen content and user communities.
Didn't we used to do that?
In another article in that same issue of Folio, Chuck Cordray, general manager of Hearst Magazine's digital media unit, talks about the difficult competitive environment his magazines face online. He mentions two of the kings of content marketing -- a retailer and a manufacturer that have morphed into publishers. "The Kraft foods site is a great site and The Home Depot has the number-one home improvement site,"Cordray said.
And he ain't kidding. Take a look at Kraft's product, and compare it with Good Housekeeping. Then look at any of the buyers guides on HomeDepot.com, and see if you can find anything better written, better designed or just plain better on Better Homes & Gardens.
In the world of consumer publishing, content marketers are proving again and again that they can create Web sites that are just as compelling as anything produced by editors from traditional publishing companies.
And of course the content marketers have a remarkable advantage over the rest of us -- they don't need to make a profit from their sites. A content marketer site isn't a profit center, it's a marketing expense. It exists to serve the larger brand.
In other words, although content marketers are content creators, they are not in the content business.
Want to see some other examples? Check out WeightWatchers.com -- a content- and community-filled site aimed at promoting the WeightWatchers brand. The cooking and exercise material on the site is every bit as well done as what you'd find on the site of any traditional magazine.
Then take a look at Waterfront Media, which has more than a dozen sites in the exercise/health field -- each of them tied to a well-known brand such as the South Beach Diet or fitness guru Denise Austin.
It should be clear that content marketers have mastered the consumer space. And it would surprise me to no end if this part of the Web world doesn't continue to expand. There are jobs here, and opportunity, and I expect many of today's journalism students will find themselves working in this subset of the industry.
To read why I see opportunity in content marketing for B2B publishers, read Part II of this article.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, content marketing
You can check out the site here.
We launched a few days ago, and things have been going well. We got some press coverage (here and here). And we're getting the sort of search-engine placement at which About excels.
But the thing that excites me most about the new site is that it's a chance to work on a product that is similar to -- although not exactly part of -- a growing trend in online content. And I expect many of you will also soon find yourselves part of this trend.
Allow me to explain.
The About Online Advertising site has two business purposes. First, just like any other commercial site, it exists to make money. We sell ads on the site to generate revenue. But far more interesting is the site's second purpose. About Online Advertising is aimed at entry-level media buyers -- the people who buy ad space for a living. By offering a guide to the industry for newcomers, About hopes to build awareness of its larger brand. In other words, the hope is that media buyers who become readers of About's Online Advertising site will some day become customers of About's hundreds of consumer-focused sites.
Here's why you should care
In the August issue of Folio magazine, Joe Pulizzi, chief content officer for Junta42, wrote a guest column called "Are Corporations the New Kings of Content?"
Joe is talking about the rise of "content marketing" -- in which manufacturers, retailers and others "are jumping with both feet into the province once deemed the sacred right of publishing houses."
Content marketing, as Joe points out, has its roots in custom publishing and branded content. But there is a notable, fundamental difference. When done correctly, "content marketing" involves the creation of exactly the sort of material that is the traditional domain of journalists, not public relations folks.
Or, as Joe puts it, content marketers have "have hired some of the best journalists around, looked for, found and paid for authoritative experts to inform their audiences, set editorial and graphic standards that surpass those of many publications. And, perhaps one of the most critical components, have launched stringent measurement analysis to both determine and improve the content they are sending out.
More importantly, many content marketers seem to have mastered some of the basics of Web publishing -- search-engine optimization, evergreen content and user communities.
Didn't we used to do that?
In another article in that same issue of Folio, Chuck Cordray, general manager of Hearst Magazine's digital media unit, talks about the difficult competitive environment his magazines face online. He mentions two of the kings of content marketing -- a retailer and a manufacturer that have morphed into publishers. "The Kraft foods site is a great site and The Home Depot has the number-one home improvement site,"Cordray said.
And he ain't kidding. Take a look at Kraft's product, and compare it with Good Housekeeping. Then look at any of the buyers guides on HomeDepot.com, and see if you can find anything better written, better designed or just plain better on Better Homes & Gardens.
In the world of consumer publishing, content marketers are proving again and again that they can create Web sites that are just as compelling as anything produced by editors from traditional publishing companies.
And of course the content marketers have a remarkable advantage over the rest of us -- they don't need to make a profit from their sites. A content marketer site isn't a profit center, it's a marketing expense. It exists to serve the larger brand.
In other words, although content marketers are content creators, they are not in the content business.
Want to see some other examples? Check out WeightWatchers.com -- a content- and community-filled site aimed at promoting the WeightWatchers brand. The cooking and exercise material on the site is every bit as well done as what you'd find on the site of any traditional magazine.
Then take a look at Waterfront Media, which has more than a dozen sites in the exercise/health field -- each of them tied to a well-known brand such as the South Beach Diet or fitness guru Denise Austin.
It should be clear that content marketers have mastered the consumer space. And it would surprise me to no end if this part of the Web world doesn't continue to expand. There are jobs here, and opportunity, and I expect many of today's journalism students will find themselves working in this subset of the industry.
To read why I see opportunity in content marketing for B2B publishers, read Part II of this article.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, content marketing
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Getting religion about being agnostic
Nothing excites me as much as learning that a B2B journalist has become re-excited about our profession.
So you can imagine how pleased I was to read a piece from the editor of Healthcare IT News, in which she talks about how the Web allowed her and the rest of the staff to reconnect with the joy of breaking daily news. "We started acting like daily journalists again – eager to be first and best with the story. The shift has done us good. I guess we’ve become “media agnostic.” But, it’s more than that. We picked up the pace. We read more, we called more CIOs and doctors, health insurers and policy makers, we wrote more, we understood better. We dug deeper."
I have tried -- and have often failed -- to convince my fellow B2B reporters and editors that the world of new media offers us a chance to reconnect with the reasons we first picked up a notebook.
And I'm going to take this opportunity to try one more time.
Journalism isn't a job. It is a calling. There are a thousand other professions that are more stable and more lucrative. This field will often break your heart. And being a journalist almost certainly means that you will always struggle financially.
But we got into this game because of who we are. We need this. We need to tell stories and break news. And we need to do it better and faster today than we did yesterday. That's who we are.
If you don't love this profession as you once did, it's not because the profession has changed. You have lost your love because you have lost your way.
But I promise you, the Web can you lead you back home.
Just ask the folks at Healthcare IT News.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
So you can imagine how pleased I was to read a piece from the editor of Healthcare IT News, in which she talks about how the Web allowed her and the rest of the staff to reconnect with the joy of breaking daily news. "We started acting like daily journalists again – eager to be first and best with the story. The shift has done us good. I guess we’ve become “media agnostic.” But, it’s more than that. We picked up the pace. We read more, we called more CIOs and doctors, health insurers and policy makers, we wrote more, we understood better. We dug deeper."
I have tried -- and have often failed -- to convince my fellow B2B reporters and editors that the world of new media offers us a chance to reconnect with the reasons we first picked up a notebook.
And I'm going to take this opportunity to try one more time.
Journalism isn't a job. It is a calling. There are a thousand other professions that are more stable and more lucrative. This field will often break your heart. And being a journalist almost certainly means that you will always struggle financially.
But we got into this game because of who we are. We need this. We need to tell stories and break news. And we need to do it better and faster today than we did yesterday. That's who we are.
If you don't love this profession as you once did, it's not because the profession has changed. You have lost your love because you have lost your way.
But I promise you, the Web can you lead you back home.
Just ask the folks at Healthcare IT News.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Friday, August 10, 2007
Is turnaround fair play?
Two recent incidents in journalism have left me feeling both disturbed and pleased. In both cases, reporters acting in a less-than-professional manner found themselves on the receiving end of their own offensive practices.
First is the public outing and hazing of the NBC Dateline reporter who apparently declined press credentials at Defcon 15. Check out the video here. What you'll see is a bunch of Defcon attendees acting like Dateline reporters, chasing after her and saying "We only want to ask you a few questions" as she flees to her car. It is both scary and funny.
Second is what may be Facebook's first major journalism scandal. Slate recently published a story saying that Rudy Giuliani's daughter had joined a Facebook group of Barack Obama supporters. That story received enormous coverage in the rest of the press. But what many mainstream reporters have missed (or, perhaps, ignored) is that Guliani's daughter is a minor and that her Facebook page wasn't open to the public. She is not a public figure, and she did nothing to put herself into the spotlight. Rather, Slate simply violated the privacy of a minor. It's also worth noting that the reporter violated the terms of her own Facebook account by lifting material from Ms. Giuliani's page, and that the story and photo that Slate ran are misleading. Now the reporter's personal life -- including her email address and phone number -- are being spread around the Web by angry bloggers. Check out the details here.
As a journalist, I cannot help but be disturbed by the video image of an angry crowd following a reporter. Nor can I help but be disturbed by the implication that the way to respond to poor reporting is to harass the reporter.
But as a news consumer, I also cannot help but find these incidents in which reporters became the victims of their own worst practices -- entrapment, chasing people down the street with cameras, invading privacy, etc. -- as right and just.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, journalism ethics
First is the public outing and hazing of the NBC Dateline reporter who apparently declined press credentials at Defcon 15. Check out the video here. What you'll see is a bunch of Defcon attendees acting like Dateline reporters, chasing after her and saying "We only want to ask you a few questions" as she flees to her car. It is both scary and funny.
Second is what may be Facebook's first major journalism scandal. Slate recently published a story saying that Rudy Giuliani's daughter had joined a Facebook group of Barack Obama supporters. That story received enormous coverage in the rest of the press. But what many mainstream reporters have missed (or, perhaps, ignored) is that Guliani's daughter is a minor and that her Facebook page wasn't open to the public. She is not a public figure, and she did nothing to put herself into the spotlight. Rather, Slate simply violated the privacy of a minor. It's also worth noting that the reporter violated the terms of her own Facebook account by lifting material from Ms. Giuliani's page, and that the story and photo that Slate ran are misleading. Now the reporter's personal life -- including her email address and phone number -- are being spread around the Web by angry bloggers. Check out the details here.
As a journalist, I cannot help but be disturbed by the video image of an angry crowd following a reporter. Nor can I help but be disturbed by the implication that the way to respond to poor reporting is to harass the reporter.
But as a news consumer, I also cannot help but find these incidents in which reporters became the victims of their own worst practices -- entrapment, chasing people down the street with cameras, invading privacy, etc. -- as right and just.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, journalism ethics
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Old and hip
I awoke this morning, feeling sore and cranky. And I realized that today is Aug. 7, which means it was 18 years ago today I was discharged from the Army.
The idea that so much time has passed since I was a young, highly motivated knucklehead with an M-16, always depresses me. It makes me feel old. And this morning I sat on the couch drinking coffee and feeling sorry for myself, when my wife, who is 15 years younger than I, asked me a question that changed my mood:
"You ever hear of a thing called Facebook?"
She has no interest in my work. And she doesn't read this blog. So of course she had never seen any of the things I've written about Facebook. But that's fine. Because today when she asked that question, I felt, for just a minute, younger and more hip than she.
And lord knows I needed that today.
Speaking of young and hip, if you're reading this post on my blog (rather than through an RSS feed), you'll see a new link on the right that says "Follow me on Twitter."
Twitter is a "micro-blogging" platform. And in my never-ending quest to remain digitally connected, I started using it last week.
I have quickly become addicted. I'm sure I'll write more about Twitter (as well as rival Pownce, which I just started using) soon.
And next August, when I'm yet another year further away from the young soldier I once was, I'm hoping that my wife will turn to me and ask "You ever hear of a thing called Twitter?"
To read the news story that brought Facebook to my wife's attention today, click here.
To read more about micro-blogging, click here.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
The idea that so much time has passed since I was a young, highly motivated knucklehead with an M-16, always depresses me. It makes me feel old. And this morning I sat on the couch drinking coffee and feeling sorry for myself, when my wife, who is 15 years younger than I, asked me a question that changed my mood:
"You ever hear of a thing called Facebook?"
She has no interest in my work. And she doesn't read this blog. So of course she had never seen any of the things I've written about Facebook. But that's fine. Because today when she asked that question, I felt, for just a minute, younger and more hip than she.
And lord knows I needed that today.
Speaking of young and hip, if you're reading this post on my blog (rather than through an RSS feed), you'll see a new link on the right that says "Follow me on Twitter."
Twitter is a "micro-blogging" platform. And in my never-ending quest to remain digitally connected, I started using it last week.
I have quickly become addicted. I'm sure I'll write more about Twitter (as well as rival Pownce, which I just started using) soon.
And next August, when I'm yet another year further away from the young soldier I once was, I'm hoping that my wife will turn to me and ask "You ever hear of a thing called Twitter?"
To read the news story that brought Facebook to my wife's attention today, click here.
To read more about micro-blogging, click here.
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Monday, August 06, 2007
Congratulations to the ASBPE winners
I didn't attend the ASBPE banquet last week (although I did attend one day of the convention), so I only learned the names of this year's award winners a few moments ago.
Congratulations to Public CIO and Builder, which won Magazine of the Year honors in their respective circulation categories. I also want to offer a special and heartfelt "well done" to CFO, CIO and PCWorld, which won the Gold, Silver and Bronze medals for multiplatform journalism (PCWorld also won Web Site Publication of the Year.)
And speaking on behalf of the entire blogosphere, I offer my congratulations to Brian's Brain, which won for Best Overall B2B Blog.
You can see all the winners on ASBPE's Web site.
(Disclosure: I was a judge in this year's ASBPE competition.)
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Congratulations to Public CIO and Builder, which won Magazine of the Year honors in their respective circulation categories. I also want to offer a special and heartfelt "well done" to CFO, CIO and PCWorld, which won the Gold, Silver and Bronze medals for multiplatform journalism (PCWorld also won Web Site Publication of the Year.)
And speaking on behalf of the entire blogosphere, I offer my congratulations to Brian's Brain, which won for Best Overall B2B Blog.
You can see all the winners on ASBPE's Web site.
(Disclosure: I was a judge in this year's ASBPE competition.)
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media
Friday, August 03, 2007
Editor in ads; Ads in editorial
I attended the ASBPE conference here in New York yesterday, where the final session covered ethics in our industry. No one in the room seemed to have any problem in drawing the line between editorial and advertising. And the presence of such clarity about what is right and what is wrong left me feeling encouraged. Even more pleasing was that throughout the day people kept coming up to me, introducing themselves, and thanking me for the work I've done on ethics on this blog. So when I left the hotel last night, I was feeling positively gleeful.
Then I checked my email.
I opened a newsletter from Folio and read an article that reminded me that things aren't always what they should be in magazine publishing, and that many people in our industry do not make us proud.
Folio reported on a scandal in which the editor-in-chief of XXL Magazine appeared in an ad in his magazine.
Take a look here.
Clyde Smith at prohiphop.com first broke the news about the inappropriate ad. And Folio quotes from comments I made that appear on Clyde's site.
But it's not just me, Clyde and the folks at Folio who question the actions of XXL's editor. Marlene Kahan, executive director of ASME, told Folio that "No person on an editorial staff should ever be involved in producing or participating in advertising."
I was pleased to see that ASME was willing to weigh in on this issue. XXL's editor-in-chief was wrong. And ASME had an obligation to say so.
However, I cannot hide my continued disappointment that ASME (and ABM) have failed to weigh in on the IntelliTXT scandal. As of today, we've been waiting three months for word from either group.
In other words, ABM and ASME have failed to do in three months what ASBPE managed to do in a day -- issue a statement saying that IntelliTXT ads violate our industry's ethics rules.
(Addendum: Regular readers of this blog, and most anyone who has heard me speak in recent months, know that I generally sing the praises of XXL -- or at least of its Web site. It was back in November that I first became aware of the work of Jason Brightman on xxlmag.com. You can read here how impressed I was. Jason recently left XXL to join IDG, a client of mine. )
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, journalism ethics, advertising
Then I checked my email.
I opened a newsletter from Folio and read an article that reminded me that things aren't always what they should be in magazine publishing, and that many people in our industry do not make us proud.
Folio reported on a scandal in which the editor-in-chief of XXL Magazine appeared in an ad in his magazine.
Take a look here.
Clyde Smith at prohiphop.com first broke the news about the inappropriate ad. And Folio quotes from comments I made that appear on Clyde's site.
But it's not just me, Clyde and the folks at Folio who question the actions of XXL's editor. Marlene Kahan, executive director of ASME, told Folio that "No person on an editorial staff should ever be involved in producing or participating in advertising."
I was pleased to see that ASME was willing to weigh in on this issue. XXL's editor-in-chief was wrong. And ASME had an obligation to say so.
However, I cannot hide my continued disappointment that ASME (and ABM) have failed to weigh in on the IntelliTXT scandal. As of today, we've been waiting three months for word from either group.
In other words, ABM and ASME have failed to do in three months what ASBPE managed to do in a day -- issue a statement saying that IntelliTXT ads violate our industry's ethics rules.
(Addendum: Regular readers of this blog, and most anyone who has heard me speak in recent months, know that I generally sing the praises of XXL -- or at least of its Web site. It was back in November that I first became aware of the work of Jason Brightman on xxlmag.com. You can read here how impressed I was. Jason recently left XXL to join IDG, a client of mine. )
tags: journalism, b2b, media, trade press, magazines, newsletters, business media, journalism ethics, advertising
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)