Category results for "Featured Post"

Inside Fox News’ winning podcast strategy

December 1, 2022 Charlotte Ricca – Independent Media Reporter

In an era of fragmented, news-hungry consumers, it’s become increasingly challenging for brands to cut through the noise and reach their target audience. New competitors and new strategies have forced established players to reassess their businesses and take action. This has resulted in new partnerships, products, and strategies that are yielding exciting results.

One strategy that is gaining traction is podcasting. According to a Pew Research Center survey conducted in July 2021, around a quarter of U.S. adults (23%) say that podcasts are how they get news, at least sometimes. One of the most successful brands in this space is FOX News, whose audio network is currently number 11 in Podtrac’s list of top publishers.

Launched earlier this year, FOX Audio Network combines all of FOX’s leading news, sports and entertainment podcasts into a diverse portfolio that aims to capitalize on the collective power of its large audience. With a catalog of more than 40 on-demand news podcasts, the network delivered record high numbers in 2021, with nearly 180 million unique downloads and 29.9 million unique listeners. A growth of 18% and 15%, respectively, from the previous year.

Interestingly these numbers run counter to research from Reuters, which found that news fatigue is setting in. Less than half (47%) of the Americans in the sample were very, or extremely interested in news, compared with 67% in 2015.

“Post Covid our podcasts are still showing year on year growth, in terms of unique listeners and downloads,” says John Sylvester, Vice President of FOX News Audio.

Two-pronged attack

So what is Fox News Audio’s strategy to keep its audience engaged in a world that may just be tired of news in general?

“We take a two-pronged approach to our news podcasts,” explains Sylvester. “First, we aim to satisfy the needs of our listeners by taking an ‘anytime, everywhere’ approach across multiple platforms. FOX News Audio continues this journey. So whether they are working out, or walking a dog, our podcasts make sure they are staying connected.

“Second, we provide a full gamut of information in the news space. This includes hourly news updates to longer news podcasts, such as FOX News Rundown, which is a deep dive into the news story of the day. There is also weather, business, tech – every need is covered, throughout every aspect of their day. FOX News Audio offers a total solution.”

Their strategy is bolstered by a loyal fan base. Fox News averaged 1.4 million total viewers in July of this year, and was the only basic cable network to exceed the one-million viewer benchmark. It also has the largest audience among 25-54 year olds, averaging 200,000 total demo viewers and 281,000 during primetime. This demographic is coveted by advertisers, and also the key demographic for podcast listeners, making their podcasts a highly attractive marketing tool.

“We create every type of content for every type of advertiser out there,” says Sylvester. “By creating the FOX Audio Network we have provided a unique opportunity for them to reach our broad and loyal podcast audience.”

Perfect brand extension

The network’s advertising is managed by its advertising sales team. However, in a bid to maximize its potential FOX has teamed up with Megaphone, which hosts all content. Since its launch in 2015, Megaphone has been one of the leading podcasting platforms, and in March last year it was acquired by Spotify. With its publishing and monetization tools, the platform better empowers FOX Audio Network to monetize, measure and maximize FOX’s podcast content.

One of those tools is a service called Megaphone Targeted Marketplace (MTM) which tracks listener behavior and pairs it with Nielsen Media Research Segments, to insert targeted ads into podcasts. This innovative technology has seen a backlash, however, as audiences have balked against tracking. As a result, certain blocklists have added Megaphone to them. This means listeners cannot play podcasts if they use certain privacy tools and tracker blockers.

However, Sylvester says dynamic ad insertion hasn’t been a problem in Fox Audio Network’s podcasting space. Their revenue is still heavily driven by advertising, which is built on the loyalty of their audience.

“Our podcasting platform is the perfect brand extension for FOX News fans, and they trust our news and content,” says Sylvester. “We offer a best-in-class product, with a fair and balanced perspective.”

Unlike the viewability challenges often associated with digital video, satellite TV, and cable, these advertisers can rest assured that the vast majority of consumers actually listen to ads on their favorite podcast. An impressive 80% of listeners tune in to all, or most of every podcast episode they start. Furthermore, almost half of these ‘super listeners’ believe that podcast hosts actually use the products/services mentioned on their podcasts. Advertisers are making the most of these engaged listeners by creating relationships with podcast hosts and onboarding them to their service or product.

Trust also comes from the careful selection of the podcast host. While it may seem obvious, many brands neglect the importance of having a clear host for their podcasts. Ideally, brands should consider a host who has industry expertise, can speak to the target audience, and can bring something unique to the table. Bringing in established names, such as Bret Baier, Will Cain and Martha MacCallum, is another key element of FOX Audio Network’s strategy, to attract and retain big audiences.

“Podcasting is a very intimate experience,” says Slyvester. “Our audiences connect with the host on either a daily or weekly basis, which creates trust. They learn to understand their ideology, and rely on them to bring them interesting, relevant content.”

Multi-channel approach

According to Sylvester the main challenge FOX Audio Network faces is to “distinguish yourself and your brand from the robust content out there.” Aside from creating varied, quality content, Sylvester says the key to growing and monetizing your audience is to expand into a multi-channel marketing strategy.

“It’s vital to look at all platforms out there and create monetization levers across all of them,” he advises. “We have partnered with satellite radio, terrestrial radio, audio apps, smart speakers, and more to make sure we really are everywhere, anytime. It’s all about creating multiple areas of monetization opportunities.”

Given that more than half of Americans (56%) say they never get news from podcasts, Sylvester believes there are still opportunities for growth for this nascent industry. One exciting growth area is with video podcasts, which offer a great way to differentiate a brand and attract new audiences.

“We are starting to utilize video as part of our podcasting strategy,” says Sylvester. “Video gives us the opportunity to populate the social media space, so it’s another way to market our podcasts and reach that 56% which is not yet listening. It’s often when consumers discover a podcast on video platforms, such as YouTube or TikTok, that they are then converted to subscribers of the podcasts.”

Certainly, FOX News benefits from its massive audience numbers and the significant investment it is making in its audio strategy. But there are lessons to be learned for organizations of all sizes and at different phases of audio experimentation. Their audio network provides a useful example for brands trying to navigate the ever-growing podcast landscape and reach their target audience in a unique way.

Fox News has done an impressive job of leveraging its brand power to expand into the podcasting space. Indeed, the network has managed to replicate some of what has made it so successful in prime time, while also carving out a unique space for itself in this new medium. Their podcast strategy raises the network’s profile, which helps it grow its overall audience while deepening brand loyalty for existing ones.

Featured Post | Industry-Research | Revenue

What young media users pay for — and why

November 22, 2022 Suzanne S. LaPierre – Independent Media Reporter

Content may want to be free, but that’s not always a sustainable business model. So, what content are users — especially the highly coveted younger demographic — willing to pay for, and why? It’s a broad question but one that’s worth trying to answer.

Massive amounts of time and money have been spent trying to figure this out. So we are aggregating many of the most salient data points to find out what younger generations are opening their virtual wallets for — and what they can do without.

Gaming

Gaming is hugely popular among all generations — especially for young people — and it holds more meaning than mere entertainment. According to 2022 research by Deloitte, 80% of U.S. adults report playing video games, and the practice is almost universal among younger adults: a whopping 96% of Gen Z and Millennials identify as gamers. The study on media trends in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Brazil, and Japan found that these young adults play 11 hours per week. 57% of Boomers and Mature audiences identified as gamers in the same survey, reporting an average of six hours per week gaming. Gen Z adults rank video gaming as their favorite entertainment activity in all countries surveyed.

More than three-quarters (78%) of U.S. gamers in Deloitte’s study report that the practice relaxes them; 61% said gaming helps them express themselves. In addition, 59% agree gaming has helped them through a difficult time, and 53% say gaming keeps them connected socially. These numbers show video games’ importance to people’s lives, especially the more immersive, complex games.

Gaming also leads users to discover other media content. For example, in Deloitte’s survey, 51% of U.S. and 71% of Brazilians said they often discover new music while gaming. While online immersive gaming worlds like Second Life are typically free to join, gamers often choose to spend money on branded virtual goods or even physical merchandise bought in-world. In-game live events such as music concerts are popular, with a quarter of U.S. gamers attending an in-game event last year. According to Deloitte, 82% of those attending live in-game events have made a purchase because of the event. Worth noting is that 65% of the purchases were digital goods, and 34% were physical merchandise, an indication of the overlap between real-world and virtual selves.

Over half of Gen Alpha and Gen Z players have spent money on a game over the past six months, according to a recent report by Newzoo, and 33% of them did so on a mobile device. While young users appear less likely to pay upfront for games on mobile devices due to the prevalence of free games, they are likely to spend money in-game for virtual goods such as currency, gear, or characters. Newzoo reports these are a particular draw for young users, with 93% of Gen Alpha and 91% of Gen Z gamers reporting having made such purchases over the past six months.

According to Voxburner, the most popular games among Gen Z are Minecraft (76%), Call of Duty (73%), and Fortnite (68%). Roblox and Animal Crossing are also popular. While the mobile versions of these games are free or low-cost to install, companies are raking it in via ads and in-app purchases. For example, Fortnite made over $9 billion in its first two years, even though it is free to join and optional purchases such as skins are aesthetic with no impact on gameplay.

Streaming Video on Demand (SVOD)

Perhaps habituated by customizable gaming experiences, younger audiences seem to be customizing their video streaming experience — at least when it comes to spending. As a result, younger users of SVOD services are more likely than older users to churn through services — by joining and then canceling, sometimes repeatedly, according to Deloitte.

The study found Gen Z consumers are especially sensitive to more expensive services, engaging in “churn and return” — repeatedly canceling and rejoining. This behavior enables them to acquire desired content — like a new season of a favorite series — while avoiding paying for a service when they aren’t using it. In the U.S., 35% of Gen Z users and 38% of Millennials surveyed had canceled and renewed streaming video services during the last 12 months, compared to just 7% of Boomers and older generations.

Similarly, a Morning Consult study demonstrated users of all ages prefer ad-sponsored content that is free or lower cost to higher subscription costs — and Gen Z adults are the most cost-averse when it comes to monthly fees. Only 16% of Gen Z adults surveyed spend more than $30 a month on streaming services, compared to 31% of Millennials. These findings suggest ad-funded tiers could cut churn rates, as subscribers are unlikely to cancel a service with no monthly fee.

Research also suggests that combining media offerings is appealing to younger users. For example, 51% of Gen Zs and Millennials in Deloitte’s survey indicated they would stay with their SVOD subscription if it included gaming, a music service, or another SVOD service.

Social Media

While social media platforms offer free admission, time spent there often leads to purchases. Deloitte found 70% of people in the U.S. say they follow an influencer, and more than half of Gen Z and Millennials say these influencers sway their purchasing decisions.

Social media ads are highly targeted and personalized. More than half of American respondents, 72% of Brazilians, and about 40% in the United Kingdom, Germany, and Japan surveyed by Deloitte say they see ads on social media for products or services they have been seeking. Additionally, 39% of Japanese respondents say that shopping is among the top three activities they engage in on social media.

News

Research by The Knight Foundation found most U.S. Gen Z and Millennials surveyed (65% and 64%, respectively) said it is fair to pay for news, at least under some circumstances. Only 39% of Boomers agreed. About half of Gen Z and Millennials say it is reasonable for news organizations to charge for events; 37% of Gen Z respondents say it is reasonable to charge for exclusive or special content.

Although Gen Z through Gen X report paying less attention to all forms of news compared with the national average, more Gen Z and Millennials say they are willing to pay for news in the future, compared to older generations (22% of Millenials versus 12% of Boomers). Conversely, younger audiences were also more likely to agree that news should be free for all users via government funding and/or private donations: 30% of Gen Z agreed news should be free, compared to 17% of Boomers. Gen X and Boomers are more likely to agree it is fair to support news through advertising (38% and 31%, respectively) than Gen Z (20%).

Research from the American Press Institute’s Media Insight Project showed Gen Z and Millennials are more likely to pay for streaming services that include news content (57%) than pay for news directly (28%).

According to the Knight report, 52% of Gen Z — compared to 45% of Boomers— say they look elsewhere for news content when encountering a paywall. About twice as many Gen Zs (10%) as Boomers (6%) and the Silent Generation (5%) say they try to find the story on social media instead. In addition, boomers (29%) and Gen X (33%) are more likely to skip the news story altogether when encountering a paywall compared to Gen Z (21%). So while younger adults may believe it’s fair for news organizations to charge fees, they also appear to think it’s fair game to try to evade those fees by seeking similar content elsewhere.

Key takeaways for media companies

Young consumers avoid paying for costly subscriptions by churning through the service. Therefore, SVOD companies should explore low-cost or free ad-supported tier options less likely to be dropped by frugal users.
Young people tend to be committed gamers willing to spend money on in-game enhancements. So bundles and perks that include gaming could help SVOD services — and other media companies — retain more subscribers.
While younger generations believe it’s fair for news providers to be publicly funded and/or charge for unique content, they also seek news elsewhere when faced with paywalls. A twofold approach of bundling subscriptions while enabling premium single-serving content to be purchased ala carte may succeed with younger users who expect interconnected experiences with optional or customizable payment options.

Younger audiences may be highly sought after, but their preferences are pretty straightforward. Publishers paying attention to these desires can build packages that cater to them and build a loyal audience for years to come.

Featured Post | Innovation

5 principles to guide your media strategy for 2023

November 17, 2022 Damian Radcliffe, Carolyn S. Chambers Professor in Journalism – University of Oregon

“Only journalism will save journalism,” says Juan Señor, an award-winning journalist and President of the Innovation Media Consulting Group. It is heartening that, as he points out, “people have rediscovered journalism.” Its importance has been cemented over the past several years, he says, “starting with The Trump Bump. Then the pandemic. Now we have a war.”

Señor argues that high-quality, distinctive reporting produced during these tumultuous periods has had an impact. Now, he says publishers need to “keep this momentum going.”

This is a point he emphasizes in the latest Innovation in News Media World Report*, which Señor co-edits. He and fellow editor Jayant Sriram write that “we need to build from this position of strength, even as the media world at large is in a period of unprecedented flux.”

How can publishers do this? Based on our conversation with Señor, and his latest Innovation Report, here are five recommendations for publishers as they look ahead to the uncertainties of the New Year.

1. Keep your foot on the subscription gas

“The key thing is to press on with subscriptions,” Señor recommends. He is bullish about reader revenue, stressing the subscription spike many publishers have witnessed in the past few years. “People know they have to pay for news,” he says, “so be the one that they pay for.”

FIPP’s new Q3 Digital Subscription Snapshot finds that “growth for most brands remains healthy, with period-on-period gains of 5% or more for many.” But growth is slowing, cautions CEO James Hewes. Gains are “significantly down” from this time last year, “when low double-digit growth might have been expected each quarter.”

The cost of living crisis, coupled with rises in many subscriptions, may all be contributing to this. FIPP also points to a maturing of this market. That means that “it is inevitable that growth percentages will begin to decline.”

Despite this, Señor urges publishers to stay the course. “Keep pushing [subscriptions] first and foremost as a strategic priority,” he says, “even if it means heavy discounts.”

A key factor behind this rationale is the cost of attracting new subscribers, which is typically more expensive than keeping new ones. That’s one reason why many publishers are increasingly investing in efforts to reduce churn.

The habitual, relationship-based, nature of media consumption also matters. As economic conditions improve, you may be able to nudge up prices or upsell existing consumers. That’s harder to do with audiences who have churned off.

A picture containing timeline

Description automatically generated — *Retention tactics identified by the American Press Institute and featured in the Innovation in Media 2022-23 World Report*.

2. Continue to explore opportunities for revenue diversification

Alongside maintaining relationships with existing audiences, publishers need to continue to find new routes to revenue. To help them do this, the latest Innovation Report outlines 14 different business models publishers can adopt. Publishers can mix and match these efforts to pull together a good range of diversified offerings.

Aside from subscription-led approaches, other possibilities include a blend of B2B and B2C models such as memberships, events, affiliate marketing, and “think tank” style output. Educational activities, such as those offered by The Economist’s Executive Education program and Family Handman’s DIY University, may also be a good fit for some publishers and their audiences.

As many publishers know, if you wait long enough, then everything old becomes new again. In this regard, Señor is excited about what he describes as “the original habit-formation tool for newspapers – puzzles and games.”

The New York Times’ acquisition of Wordle is the poster child for this, having brought “unprecedented tens of millions of new users to The Times.” And, as The Innovation Report points out, “If even a fraction can then be converted to paying subscribers it would make for an excellent business proposition.”

Puzzles and games are again in vogue as gateways for publishers to capture new subscribers, generate fresh revenue streams and increase the “stickiness” of their relationships with audiences.

Nevertheless, as Esther Kezia Thorpe suggests, “offering games is not a strategy in itself … Publishers need to find ways to bring regular puzzlers into a deeper relationship,” she says, “whether that be through newsletters, social features, or additional layers to the games themselves.”

A picture containing chart

Description automatically generated — *Examples of different publisher business models,*
*from the Innovation in News Media World Report 2022-23*

3. Unlock the power – and results – of product thinking

Publishers have invested – and continue to invest – considerable resources in areas such as games, newsletters, and podcasts. Much of this is driven by a belief that these ventures can serve as a gateway to your content and drive subscriptions and aid retention by deepening bonds with their consumers. Señor calls them “conversion monsters.”

These efforts reflect product thinking, which has risen to the forefront of media strategies over the past decade.

“Product thinking begins with realizing that every way people experience the news is a possible product or feature,” the Innovation Report observes.

Each of these touchpoints, of course, is also potentially monetizable.

As a result, “publishers must now become product companies and not just news media publishers,” Señor believes. That’s a sentiment increasingly applicable to revenue strategies, as well as content propositions.

“Product is changing everything,” agrees Luciana Cardoso, the Brazil-based Vice Chair of News Product Alliance’s Board Of Directors. Cardoso comments on how product is a driver for innovation “because we need to have the customer at the center of everything.”

4. Be tech-led, not led by tech

This desire to be more consumer-centric, is accentuated by the need for publishers to prepare for a world without third-party cookies. Describing this as a ”first-party data moment,” Señor says these developments are “the key to a stronger future for our industry.”

“First-party data gives us the chance to have a direct relationship, control the pricing, content and dialogue with our readers without intermediaries,” the Innovation Report states. “This is a massive shift and one we must prepare for.”

Publishers must also look to the possibilities of Web 3.0. Señor points to the availability of “journalism without browsers” as one critical dimension of this brave new digital world.

“When you look at how Condé Nast is experimenting with this, it’s very, very interesting,” he told us.

One of their titles, GQ magazine, recently launched on Discord. “The way that we are thinking about it is we are throwing a party, GQ is the host, Discord is the venue and you are invited,” says Joel Pavelski, GQ’s Executive Director of Global Audience Development & Social Media.

*Sign-up screen to* *join GQ on Discord*
*(7^th November 2022)*

Condé’s approach enables them to engage with communities in private online spaces, potentially reaching new audiences and serving existing ones in fresh ways. It’s part of a “conscious uncoupling” some publishers are having with traditional tech platforms; and part of a wider shift in media habits seen within the creator economy.

Tapping into these emerging spaces and behaviors may reveal insights that can inform continued product thinking, drive subscription models, as well as support and shape first-party data strategies.

5. Invest in content, especially visual media

Despite encouraging publishers to keep a watchful eye on emerging tech trends, Señor emphasizes that organizations shouldn’t go overboard.

In terms of the industry’s wider financial footing, “the Metaverse, Web 3, none of this stuff will make the difference,” he contends. “What will make the difference is investment in journalism.”

“We need to do original reporting. A lot of people want that,” Señor says.

As part of this, he stresses the importance of high-impact visual journalism, which he believes is “absolutely essential,” and “perhaps the most exciting new field in journalism right now.”

Product thinking can also shape how – and where – these visual-first stories are told. ”This is transformative,” Señor says, pointing out how many of these efforts are driven by a “story first, platform second” dynamic.

Memorable examples, such as video Op-Ed’s pioneered by The New York Times and The Miami Herald’s award-winning “House of Cards” investigation, can also yield multiple outcomes for publishers. Impactful content can be integral to industry recognition (e.g. awards), and a key driver for unlocking new subscriptions, as well as the retention and upselling of existing consumers.

House of Cards: @MiamiHerald’s interactive investigation of the Champlain Towers South collapse is a riveting real-time multimedia masterpiece that helps make sense of the senseless tragedy that killed 98 people with corruption, incompetence and neglect https://t.co/ObrRnUL9vC
— Billy Corben (@BillyCorben) January 1, 2022

Strategic synergies: bringing these principles together

Noting that next year’s Innovation Report will be their 23rd annual publication, Señor says the examples they feature are focused on reach, relevance, or revenue. Often, these elements are deeply intertwined.

Parlaying that relevance into different spaces and products, and encouraging audiences to pay for it, remains essential if publishers are to traverse stormy economic waters and successfully navigate their way through 2023.

“Whatever you do, put all your efforts into gaining and retaining subscribers,” Señor advocates. Everything should be “about sustaining, developing, [and] amplifying your subscription strategy.”

There’s a myriad of interconnected ways to do this. This includes multiple means to generate revenues, distinctive products to attract and retain subscribers, the knock-on effect of memorable – often visually-led – journalism, as well as deepening relationships with audiences both on and off-platform; including in new and emerging digital spaces.

This consumer-centric model eschews the shiny object syndrome that many media players have been guilty of in the past. Instead, as a new year begins to loom on the horizon, focusing on solid content-led foundations should be their guiding light.

As the sun sets on 2022, publishers will once again set sail and steer a path into an uncertain future. Meeting audience needs through the trifecta of content, product and subscriptions, must be their North Star as we quickly advance into these unchartered waters.

*The Innovation In News Media World Report 2022-23 is available to WAN-IFRA members (for free) or for purchase via INNOVATION’s website.

Featured Post | Innovation

Why the New Statesman turns a long-read feature into a podcast every week

November 10, 2022 Esther Kezia Thorpe – Independent Media Reporter

The podcasting boom shows no signs of slowing just yet. As publishers get to grips with flagship shows for their brands, some are now exploring ways they can turn other content into podcasts.

Following the success of its existing shows The New Statesman Podcast and World Review, news publisher the New Statesman launched its third podcast in April of 2022. Both The New Statesman Podcast and World Review doubled their listenership since the creation of an in-house audio team in 2021.

While the first two podcasts followed a more typical interview and discussion format involving the New Statesman’s journalists and guests, Audio Long Reads takes a different approach. Each week, one of the publication’s feature articles is read out loud then published as a podcast that is about half an hour long.

Long reads debuted with four features covering Macron’s France, the anti-ageing industry, a refugee hotel and Cary Raditz’s side of the story. Since then the New Statesman has released an episode every Saturday, focused on the idea of one big listen every weekend.

Many publishers have experimented with audio versions of their articles in order to improve accessibility of written content and open up another way for readers to interact. However, those who have taken the next step and published these as full podcasts are fewer in number.

“The reason that we wanted to do it for the New Statesman was because long-form, deeply reported journalism is one of our greatest strengths,” said Chris Stone, Executive Producer of Audio & Video at New Statesman Media Group. “It is one of the things that the brand has been known for over the years, and so it seemed like a natural thing to adapt from our existing stable of content.”

The importance of curation and selection

The New Statesman publishes multiple features in its website and magazine a week and produces one of them as a podcast. Features Editor Melissa Denes oversees all the written features output, including commissioning and editing the long reads. She also decides which of the New Statesman’s many features get the audio treatment.

There are a number of criteria that a feature has to match to be considered suitable for a podcast. The first is the narrative. In other words: Is it a strong story that is going to engage a listener for an extended period of time? The second factor is the shelf life of the story. Audio Long Reads “have to be evergreen, because we want this to be a catalogue of things that people can come back to,” Stone explained. “We see that people listen to one and then go back and listen to earlier episodes.”

However, being evergreen doesn’t mean they can’t be current or topical. The themes are often chosen based on what’s happening at the time. One recent example released at the end of July is “Boris Johnson: the death of the clown”, looking at how the ex PM’s “buffoon” administration came to a close. Other episodes have covered topics from exploring the surge in adult ADHD diagnoses to the history of women’s football.

Article length is not a determining factor, as Stone cautioned when giving advice to other publishers looking to turn their features into audio products. “Just because something is long, doesn’t make it a good audio long read,” he said. “What is the determining factor is the quality of the story, how much it grabs you, and the authority and eloquence.”

Because the majority of the work has already been done in terms of the content, the workflow for turning a feature into a podcast is straightforward. “We wait until we have a ready-to-publish version of the article before we record it,” said Stone. He notes that they often batch record a few weeks before release. “Compared to doing a conversational podcast, it’s an easier lift.”

Once the audio version is published as a podcast, it has a dedicated podcast article on the New Statesman website. The audio player is also embedded in the full written feature as well, which gives audiences an option to listen to or read the article.

A premium listening experience

One surprising point Stone noted was that production values are particularly important for the Audio Long Reads podcast. “I think you can get away with Zoom calls for conversational podcasts,” he explained. “But for these, the actual pleasure of the listening experience comes into it as well. The ones that have been recorded with the highest production values have seen longer listening times.”

The New Statesman has found that certain voices and certain readers perform particularly well. They have experimented with journalists reading their own stories versus having voice actors doing it. “It’s really nice if we’ve commissioned someone to do a story to give them a chance to read their own,” Stone noted. “But we can’t manage to do that all the time, either for logistical or creative reasons.”

Stone has also explored the possibility of using an AI voice. A growing number of publishers offer AI text-to-speech on their sites as an alternative way to consume a piece. However, for these stories, the richness of the listening experience is of such importance that it’s not a task AI voices are up to taking on … yet.

“The performance element is not to be underestimated,” Stone emphasised. “It only works if you’ve got people who are really good at reading out loud.”

Text-to-speech would also only benefit existing subscribers as the New Statesman’s written content is paywalled. Having a curated selection of features available as a podcast allows the publisher to build a relationship with those who don’t otherwise interact with their journalism.

Steady growth

Although Stone wouldn’t divulge specific listening figures, he did say that it has surpassed his expectations, with listenership growing steadily week on week. “When we launched it, I set a benchmark of getting to 2,000 downloads in the first two or three months,” he said. “Actually, it has far surpassed that. We’re getting thousands of listens a week.”

As a subscription-focused publisher, the Audio Long Reads podcast has been designed to show off some of the New Statesman’s best long-form reporting outside their paywall. Although the podcast is still in the experimental stages, Stone hopes that it will increase users’ propensity to subscribe to their other products.

It’s a strategy which could work well for other publishers with hard paywalls. The content itself has already been created. Repurposing features into long-read podcasts is an inexpensive way to broaden the top of the subscriber funnel, as well as giving existing subscribers another way to interact with the work.

For the New Statesman, being selective is one of the biggest reasons Audio Long Reads has been a success. Carefully choosing which pieces would work well being read aloud, then matching those pieces with people who are good at reading creates a strong product which can build habit and loyalty.

Featured Post | Innovation

How Insider uses Twitter Q&As to increase transparency and trust

November 3, 2022 Jessica Patterson – Independent Media Reporter

In an era where journalism faces a crisis of trust among audiences, Insider has taken to Twitter.

Since 2021, Insider has done over a dozen live Twitter conversations called #TheInsideStory with its staff – from its Singapore bureau chief, to travel and entertainment editors, to reporters covering finance and health. The goal of the series is to help its audience connect with the newsroom and better understand why its staff are passionate about the beats they cover, says Alexandra Cancino, Insider’s Marketing Communications Manager.

In June 2022, Insider did a proprietary study with its readers called Minding the Generation Gap: Media Usage & Trust Across Generations, to better understand how different generation demographics consume and trust media. They found that 94% of Insider readers feel that trustworthiness of a source is important, which reinforced the idea behind The Inside Story according to Cancino.

The series kicked off in September 2021 with a live Q&A with Conz Preti, Insider’s parenting + health editor. The goal of the series is to give the audience a behind-the-scenes look at how Insider’s journalism is done. It also gives Insider’s journalists and editors a chance to talk about work, their networks, and their interests.

With six more scheduled through to the end of the year, the series outlines how reporters and editors work. They showcase the breadth and depth of reportage and help grow journalists’ profiles.

“We’re able to use these Q&As as a way to give readers a ‘behind-the-scenes’ peek at who our reporters and editors are, as well as how they perform their craft, including how they source, vet, and share information,” Cancino says. “We want them to feel what feels like a personal relationship with Insider and get to know the correspondents and editors better and why they do what they do.”

Insider view

In one Q&A, Insider spoke with media correspondent Reed Alexander, who was a finance reporter at the time of his Twitter conversation. As a finance reporter, Alexander wrote about the global economy, Wall Street, banks, and markets. The Inside Story gave Alexander the opportunity to get his work in front of a potentially broader audience. It also allowed him to share a side of him that his colleagues didn’t often get to see.

“I had the opportunity to share with our Insider community some of what makes me passionate about business reporting, as well as to share insights into my other undertakings, like teaching a journalism class to undergrads at the University of Miami,” he said. It also “allowed me to share a side of my life that my work community doesn’t often get to see — for instance, pointing out some of my mentors in the newsroom, and explaining how I transitioned from the entertainment industry to a life in journalism.”

Earlier in October, Insider also did a Twitter Q&A with Health Correspondent Hilary Brueck focusing on what was happening in the public health sphere. As a health correspondent, Brueck writes about all facets of public health, including debunking health misinformation and reporting on health-related news.

“The Q&A was a nice opportunity to highlight some of my recent work and share how I approach stories on my beat,” she said. The best part of the Q&A, according to Brueck, “was probably the unexpected opportunity it gave me to connect and reconnect with colleagues and sources who I’ve worked with through the years.”

Evaluating engagement

The live Twitter Q&As have had a knock-on effect in terms of engagement following the events.

Cancino said the Q&As generated thousands of impressions on Twitter and a strong engagement rate — more than 100x Twitter’s benchmark. (According to Statista, the overall Twitter engagement rate is .04%.)

“Our reporters do a great job engaging with and tagging people, groups, and organizations they work with, and those accounts often engage back via retweets and replies,” Cancino said.

“I definitely saw an uptick in likes and retweets on my tweets generally,” Alexander says. “It’s always difficult to isolate or pinpoint one reason for anything as a driver of a broader phenomenon, but certainly I would say it was a benefit for engagement.”

Takeaways

With public trust of national news organizations in decline and widening partisan divides, news organizations are wise to embrace strategies to combat it and regain trust. Contemporary research suggests that transparency is a strategy to improve the public trust and brand perceptions, which in turn presents a way to restore and strengthen trust in journalism.

Perhaps the industry should do showing, not just telling. Insider has found that its Inside Story Twitter Q&As offer just such an opportunity.

“As journalists we should be coming out behind the veil and making ourselves available. We are asking sources … to avail themselves and be open with us. I do think there is an expectation or a best practice of doing that reflexively for our audience and giving them a sense of who we are,” Alexander says.

Being accessible and visible to the audiences and communities that journalists engage with will make them better practitioners of journalism, Alexander says. “I think it’s a great thing for other journalists to be doing… We want people to come to us for various reasons, to engage with us, to read our content, to share information. You know, how do people know where to find you if you are not really available to them and readily accessible?”

Policy issues on the streaming video horizon

October 27, 2022 Chris Pedigo, SVP Government Affairs – DCN

The streaming video marketplace is expanding and evolving at a breakneck pace. While the market was growing long before Covid, the pandemic lockdown spiked demand and cemented new habits for consumers across demographics. Consumers have devloped a ravenous appetite for streaming, which content providers are happy to satisfy.

Not surprisingly, the number of policy issues surrounding streaming video has grown at a similar pace. Some of these issues have been around for a while, while others emerged just this year. As with all expanding markets, it is critical to monitor regulatory and policy activities to ensure that the market is positioned for healthy growth. To that end, let’s review the current slate of legal, regulatory and legislative issues poised to impact streaming video companies.

New taxes and fees

A host of states and municipalities are attempting to extend franchise fees, which are typically levied on cable and internet service providers, to streaming video companies. Similarly, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is considering requiring edge providers (aka companies with apps and websites) to pay into the Universal Service Fund (USF).

The rationale is that the companies that provide high quality, high bandwidth content to consumers should pay for the infrastructure that enables consumers to access this content. Of course, this position fails to recognize the fact that franchise fees and the USF were initially established as a way for cable companies and ISPs to return the benefit they gained from public investment in their infrastructure.

Streaming video companies, however, did not receive any federal or local funding. While actions like these would be detrimental to the entire streaming market, they would disproportionately impact small and diverse content creators because they don’t typically have diversified revenue streams. Instead of levying new taxes on an emerging set of services, it would be better for Congress to continue funding broadband deployment initiatives, which helps level the playing field for equitable access.

Emergency alerts

In 2021, the FCC asked for comments on whether streaming companies should be required to broadcast emergency alerts in the same way that traditional television and cable providers are required to. DCN weighed in with big concerns about the technical and financial burdens of that proposal. We also noted that the costs would likely significantly outweigh the benefits when you consider the fact that consumers already receive these alerts on their phones. The agency prepared a report for Congress and appears to have shelved the proposal for now, but it’s worth monitoring.

Caught up in the techlash

Policymakers at the state and federal level have grown increasingly antagonistic toward big tech platforms. With each new scandal, we typically see a rash of bills introduced in an effort to right the wrongs. Unfortunately, sometimes those bills are overly broad, and they inadvertently affect streaming video companies.

One recent example is the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), which was introduced by a group of bipartisan well-meaning Senators after whistleblower Frances Haugen testified before Congress about Meta’s predatory practices with regard to kids on their platforms. The bill purports to address the role that “social media platforms play… in the mental health crisis for children and teens.” However, the bill would also cover streaming video companies which offer professionally-curated content in a safe environment – pretty much the polar opposite of social media services teeming with user generated content.

Data rights and consumer privacy

In the absence of a federal privacy law, five states have now passed their own privacy laws. Of course, these laws apply to a wide range of businesses, impacting far more than streaming companies. However, the new laws will certainly have an impact on how the sector develops, particularly on how consumer data is collected and used.

For example, the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) builds on existing California privacy law to provide consumers with robust rights to delete, correct and port data that companies hold about them. Starting next year, consumers will also enjoy easy ways to opt out of the sale or transfer of their data.

Meanwhile, big tech companies like Amazon and Google are battling with newer platforms like Roku, and a raft of advertising-supported video providers, to carve out space in the streaming business with an eye toward harnessing valuable flows of consumer data. If this plays out like the broader web, then whoever controls the data will corner the revenue.

As the streaming video market matures, more policy issues will surface. It’s the hallmark of every evolving sector. The question is whether the streaming video market can continue to grow with healthy competition or whether punitive fees and the collateral effects of dealing with the bad behavior of tech platforms will gum up the works.

To ensure that new entrants and innovation have the opportunity to flourish, DCN will continue to advocate for sound legislation that addresses the specified harms and that unnecessary hurdles are removed. Consumers have high expectations, so should we.

How Consumer Reports is fighting to save democracy

October 20, 2022 Bryson Masse – Independent Journalist

Publishers and consumers are on the same side in a fight against gatekeepers wielding market power through inscrutable algorithms, says Marta Tellado, president and CEO of Consumer Reports. Her new book, Buyer Aware, explores the promise of today’s connected products and the many predatory practices and commonplace data harvesting and unacceptable risk.

“The marketplace is changing so dramatically, and so rapidly, but the balance of power has shifted away from consumers. I really wanted to kind of reveal to consumers: what does this new marketplace look like? What protections and rights do you have?” said Tellado in a phone interview.

Consumer respect

That’s where her new book Buyer Aware comes in. Tellado weaves together a history of previous consumer advocacy success stories with the challenges people face today while trying to navigate a world where the gatekeepers of the digital media prefer profit over privacy and attention over accuracy.

“Consumer Reports has been around for 86 years. We’re incredibly proud of the consumer rights and protections that we’ve been able to forge with and for consumers. But the reality is, that many of those things do not translate into the digital space. Technology has raced so far ahead of us,” said Tellado.

All of these threads speak to the premise of the book: that the right of consumers to fair marketplaces be deemed equivalent to people’s civil rights – instead of being an afterthought, as it often feels. Tellado says we’ve reached a critical moment on the frontier of consumer protection, one where Consumer Reports is in a position to be highly instrumental. Throughout the brand’s history, the ongoing efforts of its team has led to accountability in the market. And today’s market is in need of increased accountability.

Publishers implicated in today’s issues

While Buyer Aware includes an overview of the state of financial scams (it’s bad), a status report of today’s latest safety issues and industry responses (also not great), a large portion of the book is dedicated to the threat of big tech’s market power and the misinformation in the media ecosystem. These are two issues in which the publishing industry is directly intertwined – Consumer Reports included.

“What many [media companies] are struggling with, is that we’re in an age where we have monopoly platforms that are essentially gatekeepers,” said Tellado. “They stand between us and the consumers we’re trying to reach.”

Tellado says the digital market doesn’t have the standards, the rules, and the guidelines to sufficiently protect consumers from exploitation. And she points out that publishers are at the mercy of search engine optimization and algorithms which ingrain society’s biases. Certainly, consumer rights are important for society. But she says that even beyond this, fundamental American values are at stake.

“Writing the book was also a way to tell a larger story about our democracy, that it can only really thrive if you have a fair and just marketplace. Those two things are incredibly connected.” However, the main thing that Tellado wants readers to take away is that there are constructive paths forward.

She points to the emergence and vilification of “hipster anti-trust” as the force which shouldn’t be underestimated through patronizing nicknames. With Lina Khan’s ascension at the Federal Trade Commission, the potential of real action taken against the big tech giants is palpable. Tellado also endorses the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act helmed by Minnesota Democratic senator Amy Klobuchar as a legislative solution.

Equipping consumers with tools

In a very on-brand “consumer-empowerment” move at the end of each chapter, Tellado suggests ways an average person could shield themselves from perils found in the previous pages. To combat big tech’s extensive reach over people’s private data, Tellado recommends people reduce the amount they hand over. More innovative options for people to leverage are found after following a QR-coded weblink. Consumer Reports has developed online tools people can use to protect themselves. For example, they offer an app that reveals the information companies collect from individuals.

Perhaps this seems ironic considering how much the book pins on other digital systems. But that’s the point: these new marketplaces are a reflection of how our digital tools are used, not that they’re inherently bad. Despite the risks, the work by Consumer Reports and its peers in the media space show us there is a flag to rally around in defense of the rights of the consumer.

Featured Post | Innovation | Perspectives

Unlock media innovation by experimenting every day

October 13, 2022 Peter Houston – Independent Media Reporter

In science, experimentation is everything. In publishing, maybe not so much.

Innovation is the go-to buzzword for ambitious publishers, but there’s no such thing as plug-and-play innovation. You can’t buy it off the shelf. I’s a process not a product. And it’s always going to be specific to your business.

For workflow specialist Kilian Schalk, experimentation is a crucial part of that process. At the Magazine Street conference in Edinburgh, Scotland, last month, New York-based Schalk emphasized the need for publishing organizations to experiment constantly if they want to get better at what they do.

“Why would you experiment every day? Well, the point is that every little incremental change can make a difference. Every time you do something you’re thinking about it. You’re being present.”

With a career stretching from Rolling Stone to the New Yorker, Schalk understands that where you start experimenting depends on what it is you want to improve in your operation. However, your pain points are the best place to begin.

Kilian Schalk onstage at the Magazine Street conference, Edinburgh
Text on screen behind him reads Assumptions can be dangerous — Kilian Schalk onstage at Magazine Street, Edinburgh
*Photo Credit: Philp Sayer*

“What is most urgently in need of attention within the organization, those are good places to start,” he says.

He also recommends focusing first on experiments that will bring answers quickly.

Newsletters are often a great starting point. That’s because they have a regular cadence, which makes it easy to spot trends, and they operate with the same set of known users. You can also see results quickly. And adjustments made to a single email can deliver significant results.

Optimizing tactics

Effective experimentation should generally be focused on developing and optimizing tactics in the service of a larger strategy. Look first at your strategic plan and consider the measurable targets that you are trying to reach.

Schalk cautions that, sometimes the assumptions embedded in an overarching strategy can be shown to be incorrect. While this can be painful, he says it’s good news and better discovered sooner than later.

“Implementing strategies based on incorrect assumptions will drive organizations into a ditch and kill morale as well as belief in the leadership’s ability to lead,” he warns.

Becoming aware of untested assumptions is a particular challenge for leadership with deeply held beliefs about audiences or products. For Schalk the biggest asset in identifying and challenging these is a diverse and empowered team.

“People must feel free to draw on their own experience to question prevailing beliefs or speak up to ask: ‘How do we know that?’”

Schalk believes the first step surfacing assumptions that you can experiment on is to stay focused on what you are doing and ask questions as you go. He points to methods like the Five Whys to help drill down to the root cause of a problem. It works by identifying a problem and then asking why until you arrive at the reason it’s happening and, hopefully, a potential solution.

“Experimentation is not a lot of work,” says Schalk, “It’s a lot of thinking.”

Data is your friend

Before data was a thing, instinct was everything. Editors especially relied on their gut to make the big decisions from editorial calendars to cover stars. But in the world of real-time media metrics, behavioral data is a much more reliable indicator.

“Our gut instinct sometimes will lead us in good directions. But it’s most dangerous when it is unchallenged and unverified. Discovering that your instincts are incorrect is more valuable than reinforcing previously held beliefs.”

Schalk gives the example of a client whose social media schedule was driven by their content creation workflow. The publisher always shared social posts in the middle of the day, as soon as fresh content had been published to the web. Although they were unhappy with engagement levels, they had never stopped to think about the best time to post. They assumed that audiences would simply read content when it was posted.

Once they surfaced this issue, they tested the assumption by sharing their content at night instead of at 3pm. In doing so, they found that the aggregate audience engagement for their publication was five times higher at night. When they did some research they discovered their new audience were parents and, once they’d put their kids to sleep, that’s when they went on Facebook.

Critical thinking

Schalk says that if you think critically about the nature of your problems, the potential solution is usually not far behind. He explains that “learning how to learn” is a key skill in mastering an efficient experimental mindset and that comes from thinking critically and running experiments on a day-to-day basis.

Giving things a go is very different from running formal experimentation and while there are many ways to set up experiments, the most effective will answer the following three questions:

What has been happening?
What do we think will happen if we do something different?
How will we measure this?

Once the experiment has been run and the data gathered, you can then ask:

What actually happened?
How does what happened compare with what we thought would happen?
What did we learn?

Schalk says things are most likely to go off the rails when a publishing team doesn’t produce a written, measurable hypothesis that they are trying to prove or disprove. They haven’t answered the question ‘What do we think will happen?’

“The human instinct is to preserve energy by not going against the flow,” he explains. “This means people wait for the results then ‘rewrite’ the hypothesis in such a way that it justifies previously held beliefs. This is especially important when it comes to assumptions that leadership holds dear.”

Outside in

A key concern in deciding what experiments to run is whether to focus efforts internally or externally.

The decision ultimately depends on the specific needs of the business, but Schalk says that in a multi-channel world, most brands want to know about their audience first.

Once a clear understanding of what your audience responds well to and where organizational energy should be directed, the focus can shift to internal experiments that will help make specific workflows more efficient and effective, delivering more or different content at the right time to the right places.

From the stage in Edinburgh, Schalk gave some examples of experiments that delivered real results.

A weekly magazine, 100 years old, worried that their subscriber base was getting older. They assumed that their online engagement was concentrated among their oldest readers. However, they discovered that the youngest members of their audience were every bit as engaged online as the oldest. Taking this data as their starting point they experimented with a podcast targeting a younger demographic. It was a hit.

“I was supposed to have lunch with the editor, Zach, but he canceled on me because he had been invited to give a live performance of the podcast in Australia”.

A bi-weekly newspaper alternated print editions with an email newsletter. The open rates on the newsletter were dropping and they knew they were in trouble if they didn’t change something. Instead of publishing on Thursdays, they decided to experiment with a Saturday send. The hypothesis was that open rates would increase because people might have the time to sit back and read it on the weekend. Open rates doubled.

“It took probably 10 seconds to pick a different send time on their newsletter. They just had to have the imagination to try something different.”

A monthly magazine launched a weekly newsletter. Results were good, but they noticed a button in their email distribution service that said ‘Resend content’ which would send the email again to anyone who didn’t open it the first time. The resend increased their open rate by 12%, taking it from 39% to 51%.

“They used what I call the ‘what does this button do’ approach. Now, more than half the people that get their newsletter open it.”

Does experimentation work?

Schalk is careful to point out that not every experiment works and that there is no specific set of instructions or examples to follow. Of course, what works for some publishing organizations might not work for others.

He suggests that it’s OK to use other people’s results as inspiration. However it is important to recognize that unless you are working with your own data you won’t know what you are actually dealing with. “Your circumstances may be quite different from someone else’s. And you may get very different results from a similar experiment.”

Reassuringly, running your own experiments shouldn’t require a huge investment.

“The goal is to adjust what you are already doing in a way that allows you to learn something new. The power is to show you something you didn’t know you didn’t know.”

Industry experts offer 3 ways streaming services can reduce churn

October 6, 2022 Matthew Keys – Independent Media Reporter

The Wall Street Journal recently profiled a couple that they characterized as frustrating customers for streaming services. They subscribe to a streaming service, binge what they want to watch, then drop that service and move on to something else. Unfortunately, they are emblematic of a growing segment of streaming audiences.

When Netflix was king of the streaming services, this practice was rare. This was, in part because Netflix had a little bit of everything: hit shows like “The Office” and “Friends,” interspersed with licensed movies from blockbuster studios and must-watch original programs like “House of Cards” and “Orange is the New Black.” Didn’t have Showtime but wanted to watch “Dexter?” Netflix had it. Want to watch “Breaking Bad” without cable? Netflix had that, too.

But over the last few years—as others seek to reap the attraction of their own IP—Netflix has lost some of those key titles that once made the streaming service a must-have for households. NBC moved “The Office” to its own service, Peacock. Warner Bros. did the same thing with “Friends,” bringing it to HBO Max. “Dexter” is now exclusive to Showtime, which can be had as an add-on within Paramount Plus. “Breaking Bad” is still on Netflix, but only for the next few years, at which point it will presumably be exclusive to upstart streaming service AMC Plus.

Unfortunately, the diffusion of content to various services has created a nightmare scenario for streamers. Now, couples like the one profiled by the Journal are becoming the norm.

According to the analytics firm Antenna, around 19% of customers who subscribed to premium, cornerstone streaming services like Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney Plus, and Hulu dropped three or more of their subscriptions between June 2020 and June 2022. That’s an increase of 6% compared to the period between June 2018 and June 2022.

Their loss has been a benefit to newer streaming services like Paramount Plus, Apple TV Plus, Discovery Plus, and others. However, the nature of how the streaming video business works means their models are not ironclad. Most services offer monthly subscriptions, and with no contract or other long-term mechanism to lock them in, customers can drop those start-up services just as easily as churn through the premium ones.

There are some obvious ways a streaming service can keep customers engaged in a way that reduces churn: Offer compelling shows and movies. Keep the price affordable. Make it easy to use. Make it available on every platform and every device. But with a dizzying landscape of streaming services that are spinning up at a breakneck pace, low prices and hit programming aren’t enough of a strategy to keep viewers locked into a service over the long term.

So, we asked some experts in the video space for other ways streaming services can grow their audience while keeping churn levels relatively low. Here is what they suggest:

1. Know your audience, and respond with that content

When the Fox Nation streaming service launched four years ago, the brand was franchised from Fox Nation section of the Fox News website, which offered a mixture of political and social commentary from thought leaders and digital correspondents. In some ways, it was a “Fox News Plus,” in that it carried several streaming political commentary shows and documentaries that were largely hosted by Fox News personalities.

That worked to a point. But as time went on, executives at Fox News Media realized the Fox Nation streaming service could serve as a platform for other types of content. It offered a home for historical documentaries, general entertainment programs, reality-based shows—content that Fox News enthusiasts had to find across a number of other services, if they were offered at all.

So Fox Nation has stepped up to fill the void. The service commissioned original shows and documentaries that it figured would appeal to the average Fox News viewer. And it has made them easy to find in a single service at a low price point.

“We definitely know what the space looks like for Fox Nation: it looks a lot like what the Fox News audience watches when they’re not watching Fox News,” Jason Klarman, president of Fox Nation, said in an interview. “Curation is at the heart of this. It’s about serving an audience that wants us to give them the content that they otherwise might go somewhere else—everything from real estate shows to cooking shows.”

The opinion programming is still there. In fact, Fox Nation viewers get next-day access to prime-time shows like “Tucker Carlson Tonight” and “The Ingraham Angle” as part of their subscription. But they also get shows like “Sharon Osbourne: To Hell and Back,” a documentary that dives into the issues of cancel culture; “The Pursuit with John Rich,” an interview show with the country music star; and “Historical Battles for America,” a docuseries hosted by Kelsey Grammer.

While the Fox News audience might be considered niche, Klarman said focusing on what those viewers would want to see from a general entertainment streaming service has done very well for Fox Nation. In fact, he went so far as to say Fox Nation has one of the lowest churn rates in the industry (second only to Netflix, he says) because the streaming service’s programming is able to make an emotional connection with the core Fox News audience.

“The opportunity is as big as we want it to be,” he said.

2. Partner with a streaming platform

While some companies like Fox, Showtime and Discovery are able to leverage their traditional cable brands to lure viewers into a streaming service, other upstarts like Acorn TV, Britbox, and Shudder have ventured into the streaming landscape with virtually no name recognition. And all still have the challenge of keeping customers once they’ve signed up.

None of this was a problem for media companies in the era before streaming: If a customer wanted premium television, they signed up for cable or satellite. When they did, they could reasonably expect to have access to the channels carrying the shows that were discussed around the water cooler at work the next day. And accessing a new show was as simple as changing the channel.

Today, things are different. Content is spread out across a few services, which makes for a confusing landscape with many gatekeepers. That is a problem that the big four streaming platforms—Roku, Amazon Fire TV, Apple TV, and Android TV (Google TV)—have sought to address with various algorithms that help viewers discover content across services.

Roku takes things a step farther with its Roku Channel, an app that comes preloaded on every Roku device sold. Through the Roku Channel, users can sign up for dozens of third-party streaming services like Showtime, Starz, Discovery Plus, Paramount Plus, Epix, Acorn TV, and others. The services are paid for using Roku Pay, and content is streamed within the Roku Channel app. The approach makes purchasing a new service and streaming shows and movies a frictionless experience for customers.

“The Roku Channel allows us to showcase content and make it easy to discover and find and potentially attract audiences that would never have discovered it,” Nicole Fencel, a Roku executive in charge of premium streaming services, said at the NAPTE Streaming Plus conference last month. “Otherwise, it’s very hard for smaller services to play in an ecosystem that’s consumed by these major services…finding ways to bring that content up and elevate it across the platform is a way that we can help.”

The Roku Channel is not alone in offering this type of feature. The Apple TV app and Amazon’s Prime Video Channels also offer a marketplace for buying third-party streaming subscriptions, with content delivered within those apps. Google is reportedly working on a similar marketplace that will be powered by its YouTube streaming service.

None of those tech companies require streaming services to offer subscriptions through their marketplaces in order to reach customers on their platforms: Showtime, Epix, Paramount Plus, and others are still available as individual downloads, and customers can sign up directly for those services through the websites of each company.

But Fencel said there’s a benefit to partnering with the Roku Channel: Users have an easier time watching movies and TV shows across different services when they do so through that app, and Roku has developed numerous technologies centered around learning what its users like to watch, then surfacing movies and TV shows they may want to watch next.

“Finding ways to bring that content up and elevated across the platform is a way that we can help,” Fencel said, noting that helping users discover new content can lower overall churn rates.

3. If a customer is going to leave, make sure they leave happy

But Roku’s technology, and that of its competitor platforms, can only take a streaming service so far, something that Fencel acknowledged during her interview at NAPTE last month.

“We will make sure we help prevent churn as much as possible, but if a customer is going to make the decision (to leave), they’re going to make the decision,” Fencel said. “So, our job is to try to figure out, how do we re-attract them?”

Some might assume that the answer is simple: Add more programming that people want to watch. Or lower the price of a service to attract more customers. But some streaming services don’t have the benefit of adding programming or changing prices on a whim.

Philo is one such streaming service: It offers more than six dozen live pay television networks, the same found on cable and satellite, for $25 a month. Philo is able to keep the price low by making deals with programming partners that don’t offer cable news or sports channels. And, luckily, Philo carries a handful of channels that are responsible for many cable hits, including AMC (“Breaking Bad,” “The Walking Dead”) and Paramount Network (“Yellowstone”).

However, Philo is still very much at the whim of its programming partners. It can’t control the shows and movies that the live channels choose to carry in a given season. And it knows that customers might sign up to watch a season of a show like “Yellowstone”, and then leave for a different service once that show has run its course for the year.

Thus, Philo’s executives spend a lot of time thinking about the thing they can control: The customer experience. Does the app work? Is there enough variety? Can customers tune in and relax, or do they have to spend a lot of time finding something to watch?

That strategy has worked well for Philo. The service has grown to over 850,000 paying subscribers as of last year. (The company is private and doesn’t regularly reveal how many subscribers it has). Still, like other streaming services, it allows customers to start and stop service on a whim, which it considers to be its advantage over cable and satellite. However, its a situation that keeps the door revolving.

“I think everyone kind of accepts that churn is a reality,” Andrew McCollum, Philo’s chief executive, said in an interview. “But we have a particular belief that it’s really important people have a good experience with Philo, and that even if they leave, they leave happy.”

Philo’s philosophy is that a satisfied customer who ends their subscription will likely return when their favorite show starts up again, or when they discover a new program that is on a channel carried by the service. It is the kind of brand loyalty strategy that starts and ends with the overall customer experience.

“In a world with high churn, if people have a good experience with Philo, and they leave, and they leave happy, the next time they want to watch something we carry, hopefully they’ll come back to us,” McCollum said.

What publishers can learn from the creator economy

September 29, 2022 Damian Radcliffe, Carolyn S. Chambers Professor in Journalism – University of Oregon

The creator economy is estimated to be a $104.2B market with “a substantial growth trajectory similar to the gig economy.” And, just as the gig economy has transformed the shape of work, the creator economy is impacting the media landscape.

*Image* *via* *Influencer Marketing* Hub

Industry-watcher Simon Owens notes how bootstrapped content entrepreneurs are harnessing platforms like YouTube, Instagram, and Substack to engage new audiences, often through verticals overlooked by mainstream outlets. Some are also very successfully monetizing these efforts. Globally, more than two million creators have six-figure incomes, as they tap into opportunities for sponsorship, subscriptions, and other revenue.

Excitement about this potential has unlocked more than $800 million from venture capitalists in recent years. This is “sending strong signals confirming the creator economy is not only legit, but a force to be reckoned with,” Influencer Marketing Hub suggests.

“This is really a new form of work and a new form of entrepreneurship,” according to Kaya Yurieff, a former CNN journalist who covers the creator economy for The Information.

The rapid rise of this sector is evident in the flurry of deals, creative campaigns, and platform developments featured in a four-times-a-week newsletter Yurieff and her colleagues have produced since April 2021.

Five actionable lessons for publishers

Collectively, the size of this market, its characteristics, and projected growth makes this a sector that media companies should not just report on. They should be learning from it too.

Below are five ways that publishers can learn from the creator economy.

1. Harness the value of niche

“As solo operators, creators handle everything from content creation to marketing to monetization,” Owens explains. “This forces them to be incredibly innovative if they want to compete with much larger media organizations for subscription and advertising dollars,” he adds.

One of the ways that they have addressed this is through niche content verticals. Yurieff points to Substack newsletters focused on indigenous news as an example of one “area that traditional publishers historically haven’t dedicated a ton of resources to.”

“Creators have proved that there are audiences for maybe more varied topics than we’ve seen traditionally in the media,” she says.

For publishers, this demonstrates the potential to superserve smaller, targetted, audiences. It isn’t always about scale. Rather, the focus should be on tapping into passions and subjects that audiences will engage with – and potentially pay for.

2. Learn how creators are growing their businesses

Niche verticals don’t necessarily have to remain small. “The most successful of these solo operators eventually end up hiring staff and acting more like traditional media companies,” Owens points out.

He highlights how a former Cosmopolitan editor, Mia Freedman grew Mamamia from a one-person blog to Australia’s largest women-focused media company (with c.100 staff, 99% women). Owens also cites Adam White’s Front Office Sports, which began as a college project and now reaches over 20M people per month, as “examples of creators who leveraged their initial success to grow into more traditional media companies.”

The transferable lessons from these types of success stories are highly relevant to the digital strategies being developed and deployed by publishers. As such, they should be required reading in the C-Suite.

3. Understand it isn’t just about flashy new social networks

Many of the methods used by independent creators to share content and generate engagement – such as newsletters, podcasts, groups and messaging apps, paid memberships, subscriptions and other tactics – will be very familiar to traditional publishers.

That said, in doing this, they are more likely to use newer platforms like Patreon, Discord and Geneva, than traditional publishers. But in terms of their approach, it shows you don’t necessarily have to reinvent the wheel. However, you do need to offer something valuable and distinctive. Content is King. Yet, in many cases, community is nearly as powerful. Distinctiveness can arguably be rooted in content, tone of voice, distribution channels and/or a combination of all three.

The Mamamia podcast network features around 50 different shows and 90 female hosts. According to their website, “it’s the largest women’s podcast network in the world.” Their podcast journey will be of interest to traditional publishers with similar audio ambitions.

By the same token, alongside a daily newsletter and podcast, Front Office Sports has created a paid Pro product. This includes research reports, access to events and market data, as well interactive courses sponsored by the likes of Meta and Ticketmaster.

Areas such as events, courses and research are among the tactics a number of publishers are also exploring as part of their efforts to diversify their revenues. The lessons Front Office Sports learned from these efforts is therefore relevant beyond the creator economy.

*Image: Screenshot highlighting a selection of* *Mamamia’s podcasts*

4. Reach new audiences where they are

Publishers are increasingly moving into spaces like TikTok and Twitch in an effort to engage new (often younger) audiences. To make these efforts more successful, it can pay to hire staffers conversant with the style and tone of the creator economy.

NPR’s Planet Money might seem like a venerable show, but its TikTok account counters that perception. Run by 25-year-old Jack Corbett, it has nearly 750,000 followers. Teen Vogue describes Corbett as “a wacky-professor figure, a talented TikTok comedian, and most importantly, a guide through the largely inaccessible world of economics.”

For NPR, Corbett’s skills potentially brings audiences to Planet Money’s content who would otherwise find it inaccessible, or assume it wasn’t for them. It’s a tactic others should study, if not try to duplicate.

5. Unlock the potential for partnerships

Publishers might, rightly, see the creator economy as a source for talent. But, those hires don’t necessarily need to be full time. Partnerships offer another approach that can potentially work for both parties.

Launched last month, as part of a suite of new advice columns, The Washington Post added TikTok content creator Jules Terpak to its cadre. The weekly column, Ask Jules, explores how technology intersects with digital culture and the lives of her readers.

Moves such as this enable publishers to benefit from a creator’s established audience and recognized expertise. (And in turn, creators may also benefit from an association with, and the resources of, a trusted mainstream media brand.)

Creators have a built-in following and have demonstrated that audiences value their voice and viewpoint. Partnering with them can help publishers diversify their own voice and content offering. This provides a gateway to new audiences for other content and products.

What’s next? Two trends to follow.

The creator economy is home to valuable case studies, talent and skills that the wider media industry can benefit from.

This may become especially acute given the latest set of changes to Facebook’s mobile product. The move is part of what New York Magazine’s John Herrman refers to as social media’s “race to see who can copy TikTok the fastest and with the least dignity.” As a result, It may put a premium on the style and types of content that are the bread and butter of what many top creators produce.

Short-form video

“The algorithm changes will probably push publishers to create more short-form video content,” predicts Owens. “I wouldn’t be surprised if publishers start looking more and more for prior TikTok/Instagram Reels experience when hiring out their social media teams.”

Private communities

For Yurieff, one potential trend to note is the migration of online conversations into “more private spaces… I think that’s something really to watch,” she says.

She cites Discord as an example of a platform which now has “lots of different niches and groups and audiences using it.” It’s part of a wider move among online users to connect in smaller groups, communicating privately and potentially going deeper on certain topics, Yurieff says. These are principles more publishers might want to get on board with.

In that vein, The Information’s move to create opportunities for its subscribers to network directly with each other demonstrates how some of the community principles evident in the creator economy can be applied by media outlets.

“These new features are meant to add more value to the news site’s subscriber base, as opposed to driving meaningful revenue themselves,” Axios reports. Nevertheless, in the future, The Information may look to monetize them.

Like and subscribe

The growth of the industry, and the success of some of its proponents, means that if the creator economy is not on your radar yet, then it should be.

For publishers, the maturing of the creator economy, and the growing numbers engaged in (and with) it, present a number of learning opportunities. We need to be looking at the creator economy, as well as the more traditional media industry, for case studies, talent and insights into how to respond to the next wave of digital disruption.

Yet, despite its growth, “this new breed of creators may be looked upon as charlatans and opportunists by some purists in traditional publishing,” suggests Josep Nolla, VP, Business Development & Partnerships at the e-commerce provider Bolt. “But the reality is there are more similarities than differences between this exciting new economy and traditional publishing,” Nolla advises.

Creators, like traditional publishers, are looking to drive subscriptions, diversify their revenues, and generate engagement and loyalty. They may use different platforms, content styles, or verticals to do this. But arguably, a lot of their core business goals are the same. And there’s a lot to be learned in these similarities – and maybe even more from the differences.

Care to disagree? Then let’s debate it on Discord!

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion | Featured Post

The gender gap in media is still wider than you think

September 27, 2022 Charlotte Ricca – Independent Media Reporter

When it comes to the representation and visibility of women across all media platforms, the industry still comes up short. That’s what The Status of Women In the US Media 2021, a report by Women’s Media Center (WMC), — an organization founded by Gloria Steinem, Jane Fonda, and Robin Morgan — found. Among the U.S.’s top five Sunday news shows more than two-thirds of the guests were men, and most of those guests were white men. While research into gender representation in prime-time broadcast and cable news, print, digital, and wires found that women told only 41% of stories, and just 15% of sports stories.

“This report will help to hold news media accountable for the persistent inequalities in media,” said Steinem in the report .“ Women must be visible and powerful in all aspects of media if American society is ever to be a real democracy.” While the struggle continues, strides are being made — thanks, in part, to top down initiatives.

The gender gap is closing — slowly

According to the Global Media Monitoring Project, things are slowly improving globally. However, the numbers make the U.S. media look like a beacon of hope in terms of inclusion and equality. Between 1995 to 2020, across 120 nations, the number of female news sources and subjects increased from 16% to 24% in newspapers, 15% to 24% in radio news, 21% to 26% in TV news, and 25% to 27% online.

Coverage during Covid-19 was particularly startling, with WMC reporting women comprised just 5% of experts in science, technology, engineering and math, and a third of people quoted in 146,867 articles about the pandemic, in the likes of The New York Times and USA Today.

“One productive step forward would be for media companies to release employment numbers by gender, race, and position,” said Julie Burton, President and CEO, in WMC’s report. “This transparency would allow comprehensive tracking of progress or regress for diverse women in the workplace. We recommend that managers and editors establish standards that require producers, bookers, and journalists to make sure the experts interpreting news stories include representative numbers of women and people of color to ensure that stories are told with authenticity and accuracy.”

Driving diversity with data

The WMC has a database for this exact purpose. SheSource connects journalists, bookers and producers with more than 1,000 female, media-friendly experts in a number of fields, ranging from politics to technology. It is these experts that a growing number of media organizations are seeking out and putting center stage. The BBC launched its 50:50 Project in 2016 to push for gender parity in its content using a data-driven methodology to monitor its content. What started in one newsroom has become a global initiative, used by 150 external partners, spanning 30 countries. These include the Financial Times, Australia’s ABC News and Times Radio, as well as partners in academia, conference businesses, law, public relations and the corporate world.

“It is well established in the BBC and we have got 750 teams filling in spreadsheets every day of every month,” says Miranda Holt, 50:50 External Partners Lead. “It’s very empowering to content makers, because it’s about what you can control. For example, we don’t count politicians or people in the news, but we do count the number of women we interview about that news. It’s about collecting data to effect change.”

In the most recent Impact Report report in March 2022, 61% of all BBC teams reached 50% representation of women in their content. While external partners (of whom 70 out of 145 shared their data) showed a 73% improvement in female representation, after one year of sharing data.

Bloomberg’s New Voices is another successful initiative, which has already made significant strides in amplifying the voices of women. Since launching in early 2018, outside guest appearances of women on Bloomberg Television have increased from 10% to 26%. The program has also provided media training to over 180 women all around the globe, who have gone on to appear more than 530 times on Bloomberg Television, as well as other media outlets.

Equity at every level

Another way to ensure gender equity in content, is to ensure equity in content creators. If the newsroom doesn’t reflect society, the content it produces isn’t likely to either. Even though women outnumber men in journalism programs and colleges, they become the minority voice soon after entering the workforce. On average, women represent 41.7% of newsroom employees and produce 37% of reports. Furthermore, men account for 69% of all newswire bylines published by the Associated Press and Reuters, 63% of prime-time news anchors or correspondents, and write 60% of all online news.

Emma Tucker is the first female editor of the Sunday Times in 100 years and says she is all too aware of the impact her newsroom has on its readership. “We are very conscious of the need to diversify our newsrooms,” Tucker says. “It’s a work in progress, but we are aware of it. For example, we encourage applications from as broad a pool as possible to our graduate and apprenticeship schemes and we are making strides there. We know that if we want to grow our audience and build new cohorts of Sunday Times subscribers, we need to produce content that matters to a more diverse audience.”

Holt agrees it makes good commercial and economic sense to increase female representation in the newsroom and beyond. While 50:50 is about content and not about content creators, it naturally has a knock-on effect.

“The BBC has set new targets for the end of 2023 for our workforce to aim for 50% women representation, 20% Black, Asian and minority ethnic, 12% disabled and 25% from lower socio-economic backgrounds,” explains Holt. “These figures are based on the demographics of the UK, and as the national broadcaster it’s the people of the UK who pay for BBC content, so we have to represent them. And senior leaders are being held to this.”

Leadership is at the heart of a recent report by Reuters Institute, which analyzed the gender breakdown of top editors in 240 major online and offline news outlets in 12 different markets, across five continents. The results are shocking with women representing just 21% of the 179 top editors, despite the fact that, on average, 40% of journalists are women. The good news is that the U.S. and U.K. appear to be flying the flag for female leaders in the media, as half or more of new top editors appointed there in the last year were women.

Closing the pay gap

Not only are there fewer female reporters, they also earn less than their male colleagues, according to the WMC report. At the Associated Press there is a pay gap of $15,000 between white, male journalists and black, female reporters, while female reporters on the LA Times take home $14,334 less than their male counterparts. Similarly, at the New York Times, for reporters with annual salaries of $150k or more, only 36% are women. Working at the Washington Post? Women can expect to be paid 86 cents for every dollar white men are paid.

However, there are exceptions. Walt Disney Co. has just released data on employee earning by race and gender for the first time, revealing that women earn 99.4% of men. However, as Natasha Lamb, a managing partner at Arjuna Capita who put forward the proposal for the report, points out: “Disney is stepping into an elite group that are showing leadership on pay equity.” Transparency, it seems, is still a rarity rather than the norm.

While we should applaud these organizations working toward gender equity there is still much work to do. One reason could be that leaders in news media across the world believe their organizations already do a good job in terms of gender diversity, and therefore do not collect or make available data about their diversity. Or they don’t even have anyone formally in charge of this vital process.

But this has to change. Greater transparency is key, with media companies releasing employment numbers by gender and position. While creating new talent strategies to support and promote women in media, will ensure the “pipeline” excuse is buried deep underground, once and for all. According to Katica Roy, the founder and CEO of Pipeline Equity, these strategies should include hiring, pay, promotion, performance, and potential.

Representation leads to engagement

The word “engagement” is constantly used in media circles, but you can’t engage with your audience without representing the diversity of their communities. “Ultimately, any company that creates content should be thinking about how they appear to the external world, and how they represent society fairly,” says Holt. “This leads to diversity in the workforce at every level in a dynamic way, by identifying people, progressing people, and retaining those people. Only then can the media and its content truly reflect and represent women. Only then we will truly have gender equity.”

The cracks in Google’s adtech façade are starting to show

September 22, 2022 Jason Kint, CEO – DCN

Behind the scenes, Google is flailing – despite its predictably tight control over industry narratives.

The underlying shockwaves stem from an increasingly widespread understanding of Google’s dominant role over the entire adtech supply chain. Those who have sought to unpack and explain the complexities of the company’s hold on the industry can thank a senior Google employee for providing this apt analogy in discovery: They described Google’s role in adtech as “if Goldman or Citibank owned the New York Stock Exchange.” Now that’s something a jurist can understand.

The escalation of enforcement

In the last sixty days, Google has floated three different test balloons in an attempt to head off the intensifying scrutiny:

The Wall Street Journal reported Google has offered to split off part of its adtech business in an effort to head off the Department of Justice’s filing of a landmark lawsuit – expected this month according to a Bloomberg report. The only problem: Google’s offer was to split the adtech business and put it under a different part of parent Alphabet. To extend the previous analogy, placing the NYSE in a different division of Goldman Sachs would not solve the inherent issue. Hard pass.
Google announced a new feature with the innocuous title of “Confirming Gross Revenue.” They’ve pitched it to advertisers and publishers – and little doubt to enforcers, too – as providing transparency in a “privacy-safe way” as to the money flow in the advertising supply chain. The problem with it is that Google will avoid having to provide insights into auctions, transactional flow, or any real detail as to how Google’s decisions determine revenues across the market. Google’s press announcement crows that “Display & Video 360 is onboard as an early tester.” That sort of says it all, since Google owns DV360.
Google once again delayed its deprecation of third-party cookies, something that they’ve been dragging their feet on for nearly three years. From the very beginning, Google has used misleading Google-authored research of the Google-dominated supply and data system to suggest their delays are only due to their interests in not harming publishers. What is true is that a wrong move by Google (hello Floc, hello Topics) can very well continue the ongoing harm to premium publishers by treating every website as an interchangeable commodity. If there’s any chance that a move will hurt Google’s ad business, it won’t happen.

Litigation, legislation, and learning

So why all the flailing? To illuminate what’s going on underneath the surface, let’s take a roll call. Fifteen U.S. states, the U.S. Department of Justice, the E.U. Competition Commission, the U.K. Competition and Markets Authority … Netherlands … France … well, suffice it to say that the list is long (and growing) for investigations, lawsuits, and enforcement action underway – all of which are probing Google’s advertising tech business(es).

The E.U. has been particularly active by fining Google more than $8 billion across three decisions. It also recently passed its new landmark gatekeeper law, the Digital Markets Act, and is ramping up enforcement of its landmark privacy law, the GDPR, by pressing Google-friendly Irish regulators.

Importantly, enforcers and litigators are studying and learning from each other across issues of competition and data privacy worldwide. And they’re keeping especially close eyes on the Texas-led lawsuit which now counts 15 bipartisan state attorneys general as plaintiffs along with countless private plaintiffs. They certainly won’t have overlooked Google losing much of its arguments last week in attempting to dismiss this case. This blow came at the hands of a SDNY Court which very much seems to understand Google’s business. And that’s a huge problem for Google.

Full court press

Although “Jedi Blue” received the most press attention, due to the allegations of Google colluding with Facebook, there are a range of other very serious allegations which the Court has now given the green light for further discovery and trial. And, significantly, they are readily explainable to a jury. Two foremost allegations are the tying of Google’s adtech services and the manipulation of its auctions.

What if I told you Google required the use of its ad server in order to receive the benefits of Google’s market-leading ad exchange and the fast-growing advertising demand dollars flowing through it? Some might call this “tying,” which – if proven – is illegal. Note that Google had about 50% of the ad server market when it acquired DoubleClick (DFP). It has since steadily increased that stake to claim nearly 99% of large publishers. Please allow me to quote the Court:

“The States plausibly allege that Google used its monopoly power in AdX to actually coerce publishers into licensing a separate and distinct product, Google’s DFP ad server, and that Google’s actions had anticompetitive effects in both markets, affecting a substantial amount of interstate commerce.”

Or what if I told you Google had paid its publisher clients based on the third-highest price in an auction while collecting on the second-highest price with the determination it would re-route the variance into more advertising demand for its own services? Some might call this, “market manipulation,” which – if proven – may well have been an illegal way to protect its monopoly. As the Court again summarized Google’s project “Bell”:

“In other words, Bell penalized publishers who did not grant AdX preferential access by paying them based upon the third-place bid rather than a second-place bid, while using the difference to increase the bids made to publishers who allowed preferential access.”

In fact, the only count which was dismissed in the lawsuit is the infamous “Jedi Blue” allegation. Despite Google anchoring its press spin on this win, it’s this single dismissal – one that befuddled many legal experts watching the case. I wager this one will resurface again as the E.U. and U.K. have already announced their own investigations. Also, the “Jedi Blue” allegations are included in a private lawsuit against Facebook that has already been given the green light in the northern district of California. Each of these efforts builds on the others and the subsequent learnings can only aid the U.S. Department of Justice in its work.

Antitrust is in the air

It was rightly said nearly three years ago that antitrust enforcement will take significant time. The wheels of justice do indeed turn slowly. Attempting to propose solutions before the investigations and allegations landed would be premature, but Google’s efforts to settle these cases shows they are nervous. And Google’s efforts to manipulate the outcome may be the most transparent thing about its business.

The reality is many of the charges against Google have now been found plausible and will proceed into deeper discovery just as many other regulators and legislatures attempt to curb its power. Make no mistake, Google is stumbling in a way we’ve never seen in its two decades. Of course, the company will look to proactively lay out solutions for all of us. But we all see through this. No one should settle for anything less than a return to competition and the rebalancing of bargaining power that comes with it.