Magazine Publishers Team Up for Digital Distribution Venture
by Sherri L. Smith
On the heels of Time Inc.’s digital magazine concept, some of the biggest names in magazine publishing have teamed up to get with the program and possibly save the industry. According to the press release, Conde Nast, Time Inc., Meredith, Hearst, and News Corporation have joined forces “to develop open standards for a new digital storefront and related technology that will allow consumers to enjoy their favorite media content on portable digital devices.”
In what many are calling a Hulu for magazines, the pubs are hoping to create a one-stop-shop where people can come and get their favorite mag’s content that would be true to the look and feel of each individual brand. Content would also be available through a variety of portals including mobile phones and presumably e-readers.
There is also hope that this new outing will give the advertising arm of the business a much needed cash injection. To date, ad sales have been dreadful at best and abysmal at worse. According to Adweek, Time Inc.’s Q3 advertising sales dropped 22 percent to $456 million. Time Inc. isn’t the only one feeling the pain, TNS Media Intelligence reports that the industry ad sales went down 15.3 percent in third quarter.
So what does the consumer get out of this collaborative effort?
“For the consumer, this digital initiative will provide access to an extraordinary selection of engaging content products, all customized for easy download on the device of their choice, including smartphones, e-readers and laptops,” explained John Squires, the venture’s interim managing director. “Once purchased, this content will be ‘unlocked’ for consumers to enjoy anywhere, anytime, on any platform.”
If it resembles the Time Inc. concept, I have high hopes for this venture. Hopefully the dinosaur that is print media can move fast enough to remain relevant and don’t get bogged down in a big-name pissing contest. Even though its a little melodramatic, the magazine industry needs to own up to the fact that they’re in serious trouble. In addition to new ways of delivering content they also need to have a plan in place to justify the continued exist of the print arms of their business. Tradition and nostalgia are no longer enough to keep reader attention and advertiser dollars.
Category: News | Tags: Conde Nast, digital magazine, Hearst, Hulu, magazine e-reader, Meredith, news corp, Time IncDid you like this article? Share It!
Robin Jewsbury says:
Anyone can create their own Magazines which will run on any phone/device including the iPhone (but without the need to download from iTunes) at EyeMags.com
Try it, it's totally free to make magazines and download them
uberVU - social comments says:
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by urbanreporter: Magazine Publishers Team Up for Digital Distribution Venture: On the heels of Time Inc.’s digital magazine concept,… http://bit.ly/7ANG3s...
Magazine Publishers Team Up for Digital Distribution Venture … Mobile Advertise says:
[...] more here: Magazine Publishers Team Up for Digital Distribution Venture … By admin | category: advertising sales | tags: adweek, affect-the-market, makers-insist, [...]
benin says:
This is interesting. Was talking with a friend (@JameelGordon) of mine the other day and we both came to the conclusion that this is just a sign of big media collectively saying enough is enough. For the past two to three years they have sort of watched from the side lines as print and TV have become less relevant to increasingly more sophisticated audiences who are able to get the same info not only for free online but also in the format of their choosing.
Of course, big media has a lot at stake and they will probably go to great lengths to protect their interests-whether its innovative stuff evidenced by your article, Hulu-like ventures, or this related piece (http://tinyurl.com/y9zc3g7) or whether they have to use that muscle to buy innovative firms that are too big of a threat to big media so that by vote they can tone the rhetoric down a tad.
Looking at it from another angle though there is one glaring weakness in new media-there seems to be too much noise. Everyone is shouting from their own platforms across to other people doing the same thing. This serves to undermine the integrity of the web as an objective source of information. What it boils down to is that there are no set in stone standards for disseminating information on the web. Instead what we have is something more like the Wild West.
So when big media firms begin to distribute premium content or syndicate premium content; while encouraging open standards-like your piece mentions then what it tells me is that they are beginning to attack that weakness of the online environment by bringing a sense of corporate media (order) to the table.
It is all a matter of adaptation I suppose. Thanks for the piece, BTW. Take care.
benin says:
This is interesting. Was talking with a friend (@JameelGordon) of mine the other day and we both came to the conclusion that this is just a sign of big media collectively saying enough is enough. For the past two to three years they have sort of watched from the side lines as print and TV have become less relevant to increasingly more sophisticated audiences who are able to get the same info not only for free online but also in the format of their choosing.
Of course, big media has a lot at stake and they will probably go to great lengths to protect their interests-whether its innovative stuff evidenced by your article, Hulu-like ventures, or this related piece (http://tinyurl.com/y9zc3g7) or whether they have to use that muscle to buy innovative firms that are too big of a threat to big media so that by vote they can tone the rhetoric down a tad.
Looking at it from another angle though there is one glaring weakness in new media-there seems to be too much noise. Everyone is shouting from their own platforms across to other people doing the same thing. This serves to undermine the integrity of the web as an objective source of information. What it boils down to is that there are no set in stone standards for disseminating information on the web. Instead what we have is something more like the Wild West.
So when big media firms begin to distribute premium content or syndicate premium content; while encouraging open standards-like your piece mentions then what it tells me is that they are beginning to attack that weakness of the online environment by bringing a sense of corporate media (order) to the table.
It is all a matter of adaptation I suppose. Thanks for the piece, BTW. Take care.