Earlier this month, the Newspaper Association of America kicked off an ad campaign that touted newspapers as a "multi-medium." While that is no doubt true (and so are nearly every other media outlet today -- who doesn't have a web site?), what I found most interesting was NAA's spin on their latest Newspaper Audience database (NAdbase) results.
"In addition, on average newspaper Web sites have contributed to a 13.7 percent increase in total newspaper audience for the coveted 25- to 34-year-old demographic and a 9.2 percent increase for 18- to 24-year-olds (Scarborough)."
Notice the wording: the web sites have contributed to the increase in the total newspaper audience." I'd like to know how much that contribution is. My guess is that, in those particular demographics, most, if not all, the increase in audience is online. The dead-trees product is still flailing. The statement misleads.
Also, the online press release (which is absolutely filled with puffery that would make any flack proud -- for shame!) said: The NAdbase analysis also shows the continued broad reach of the print audience from Scarborough, with nearly three out of four adults in the top 50 markets (115 million) reading the newspaper over the course of a week (5 weekdays/1 Sunday).
What does reading over the course of the week mean? It could mean that 3 of 4 adults read a paper once during those six days. Those numbers aren't all that good. Also, to get picky, what does reading a newspaper really mean? Do all 115 million even look at every page, much less every ROP ad? I doubt it, though that is the bottom-line, unstated implication, the idea sold to potential advertisers. If your ad is buried on A-8 with a bunch of others, do you really think most readers see it? I am sure someone can drill down a bit in the data and find some of this information or do a study that really gets at what people actually see. But it probably won't be NAA.
I believe in trying to save newspapers, but not with PR puffery. Let's get good, objective research and better-written, non-puff press releases about that research. Oh, and I hope someone at NAA soon learns that the word data is plural.
The poorly written release (my editing students would be amused) is at http://www.naa.org/sitecore/content/Global/PressCenter/2007/TRADE-CAMPAIGN-2007.aspx?lg=naaorg
NAA is a non-profit organization serving the newspaper industry. http://www.naa.org
Some of what it does is good, but not in this case.
No comments:
Post a Comment