In competing for advertising market share versus other media,magazines ad representatives usually don't get into a discussion of whether magazine adverting is effective in moving customers in the same way the internet can,the way television is trying to,and most importantly,the way advertisers are looking to get a return on their investment.The reason is quite simple.
Does a computer visit Google?No,the people operating that computer do.When looking at ESPN's audience numbers,does a media buyer wonder how many TV sets were turned on?In the same way,a copy of a magazine doesn't buy a car,or plan to buy one,the readers of that magazine do.And that's readers,plural,not just the first person to get that copy.
Advertising effectiveness measurement in all other national media,whether measuring brand awareness,purchase intent,driving customers to the web,or consumer actions taken,is derived from an audience,viewership or readership metric,not a distribution metric,and the price of advertising in all other national media,except magazines,is based on audience.
Basing the magazine advertising pricing model on the number of copies distributed is out of date,forcing magazines to operate in advertising isolation,and most importantly is out of sync with the way clients and agencies are demanding advertising effectiveness measurement and accountability.
To bring our business model up to date,the time has come to make a simple yet revolutionary change.Readership,not distribution,should become the currency of magazine advertising.Publishers need to get themselves out of the advertising ghetto by providing advertisers this currency based on the quantity and quality of readership,not the number of copies distributed.
What is this change likely going to mean in terms of circulation practice and strategy.It will mean that we will focus circulation strategy on the two pillars of distribution profitability and readership development.