(Updated on September 27, 2009)
Forbes writer, Quentin Hardy, defends Google Books. Not because he thinks there's anything altruistic about Google's motives. Nor does he disagree with the lawsuits by competitors and court actions. But because by making such a bold move, "Google took us to a real-world discussion of how to get these volumes
into the digital world in some way that we can live with. It is
questionable whether we would have gotten there without such a bold
move. And, by taking the step of digitizing them, Google has brought
the past life of books into some kind of equivalence with the future
life of books."
This is a good example of the benefits of Rip-ping! the band-aid off. Sure it is painful. But would it be better to drag out this transition, with smoke filled room negotiations ending with phony smiles and handshakes, sometime later revealed as scandalous exchanges of money at the expense of writers and readers? Or, openly through the court system?
Newspapers revenue and profit woes may be on the leading edge of the entire media industry. So their "real-world discussion" of how to transition their business model to the "digital world" will blaze a trail for other forms of traditional media. All eyes will be on newspapers decisions now. And there are many with something to lose when newspapers make a bold change.
I certainly agree that "formerly known as advertisers" will be a source of revenue in the future. The question is how you get there - incrementally, or, with bold, maybe initially painful, change. E&P offers a summary of where newspapers are today on selling online ads. And it doesn't offer much hope.
I agree with Rusty Coats, of E.W. Scripps, "It's essentially the opposite approach of what Coats
calls the "show up and throw up" strategy, where a salesperson rattles
off a list of special sections, guides, and mobile coupons before even
asking: Who do you want to reach? Coats says the technique is based on
what the advertiser is trying to accomplish, versus "what product we
are going to force down their throat this week."
Advertisers will not accomplish their goals with new, more intrusive display ad formats. For example, "the Online Publishers
Association (OPA) (introduced) three new ad units: the fixed panel,
which is embedded in the layout and moves as the user scrolls down the
page; the XXL Box, which has 'page-turn' functionality and video
capability; and the pushdown, which opens to display the advertisement
and then rolls up to the top of the page. " Are you kidding me? This is merely a band-aid to stop the bleeding.
The bleeding is caused by the online free ad-supported revenue model, as graphically illustrated below. A systemic cure is needed to improve. If newspapers don't realize the benefits to their own bottom line of developing experiences consumers will pay for, then do it because this is what advertisers need to accomplish their goals: to sell to consumers.
Be brave. Just as your mother told you before ripping the band-aid off: you won't remember the pain - you'll just remember that you got better. The choices are to extend the time and pain by slowly taking the band-aid off versus boldly ripping it off. Learn how to design media for consumers and sell it. "Formerly known as advertisers" will pay a premium for media that can sell to their consumers.
Budget help from Mint.com
