Despite all the signs to the contrary, many in the newspaper business still hold on to the idea that print will have a big role to play in the long-term future of news organisations.
The latest forecasts for UK ad spend from WARC and the Advertising Association seem to offer a chink of light for publishers. Newspaper ad spend is expected to return to growth in 2015, rising one percent to £1.42 billion, and magazine ad spend should at least stop falling that year as well.
There has always been a cruel truth to Benjamin Franklin’s famous line, “Time is money.” And for publishers driving the future of content marketing, those three words are proving more appropriate than ever.
Online ad spend a major factor behind second annual increase since 2007, with total figure set to rise 1% to £1.42bn in 2015
So what's wrong with newspaper publishing? As TheMediaBriefing's editor Jasper pointed out recently, only someone with the optimism of Ed Miliband in a bacon sandwich photo opportunity would argue that things are getting better.
Facebook exerts a huge amount of control over how millions of people get their news, and media companies are right to be nervous about this state of affairs — so what should they do about it? One response would be to give readers what Facebook can’t
In a public lecture at LSE, Andrew Miller outlined the Guardian's philosophy for open journalism and its aim to become a 'global media entity'
MENLO PARK, Calif. — Many of the people who read this article will do so because Greg Marra, 26, a Facebook engineer, calculated that it was the kind of thing they might enjoy.
Publishers today are at the mercy of the big social networks. The likes of Facebook and Twitter have not only dominated publishers’ referral traffic, but they’ve also taken over their communities. Today, conversations about articles are far more likely to happen in Facebook feeds than on publishers’ own sites.
“Eighty per cent of mobile time is spent on apps.” It is a statistic I’ve heard quoted more than once over the last week. It’s been used to make the case for news-based mobile and tablet apps; evidence of a reader predilection for apps over websites. In truth, it tells us no such thing.