peterfeld:

heyitsnoah:

Peter and I have had this conversation many times and I’m glad he’s written down his views on the relationship between print and the web for publications:

Still, the flaw in the print person’s perspective is in thinking that there is any relation between your print audience and your web audience. There is none. You are not undercutting your print product by publishing a website because the people who you can reach online have almost no overlap with the people who you reach in print. Your print readers don’t want your website, and your web audience doesn’t. want. your. paper. (or magazine). (There’s a small overlap for whom that’s not true — many of whom are the mediavores who read articles like this one.) Audiences are more stratified by media habits than they are united by common interests.

I don’t totally understand the last bit (italics are his), but the rest rings very true for me. (Just to give some context/credentials: Peter worked in research for print publications for many years, so there’s some rigor to his analysis.)

Via: The Relationship Between Print and the Web // NoahBrier.com

The last sentence means: The differences in media consumption habits — between people who prefer print and those who like to get information online — are more important than their similar interests in a topic.

Publishers with a web and print publication think they are going to attract the same people to both, based on similar interest (gardening, politics, etc.). That’s why they worry about losing their print audience to their website, while at the same time trying heroically to drive their print audience to that website, with contests, “web extras” (one of the most nonsensical ideas going), and other doomed attempts to get people to put down their magazine or newspaper and go to their computer. (This is just as pointless as trying to drive people from the web back to print, the subject of the original AJR piece by Paul Farhi I was reacting to.)

Print media has a disadvantage on the web (compared to web-only enterprises) for several reasons: both the organizational culture and the ideal format for content are so different. But perhaps one of the biggest obstacles is that print publishers are obsessed with figuring out how to make their print publication and website “work together.” They don’t.

All very interesting, but don’t web consumers tend to be more “omnivorous,” consuming content wherever it pops up rather than tracking specific content providers? I love NYTimes.com, but I generally only read something there when I see a link on twitter, tumblr, facebook, or an email from a friend. On the other hand, for the magazines I subscribe to I tend to sit down and flip through the whole thing every month. At the very least, that type of consumption would have a serious impact on the website’s advertising model, right?