Demise of Two Venerable B2B Mags Signal Need for New PR Strategies
Another two bite the dust.
The most recent demise is Time, Inc.’s Business 2.0 which will shut down after the October issue. Business 2.0 launched in 1998 at the height of the Internet boom, specifically to cover the wild ups and downs of the burgeoning world wide web.
In June 2007, CMP Media announced that it would be shutting down 17 year old network computing. Network Computing was launched in 1990 in the early stages of the Internet it was all about creating connected Computer Resources and improving productivity. I was happily ensconced at CMP in 1990 as the Publisher of Unix Today. Those were heady days when were were able to start a niche technology magazine and turn it into a profitable $15 million a year property within 4 years of launch.
Network Computing was all about the future of technology. The timing was great back then. Print advertising was plentiful. After all, what were the alternatives? Sales calls, direct marketing, and PR. There was no worldwide web, no blogs, no eNewsletters, no banner ads, no webcasts, podcasts or vodcasts.
Each publication was the victim of a dramatic drop in advertising revenue which ultimately spelled doom. But in a larger sense, their collective demise signals problems that are endemic to the publishing industry. It’s not that marketers are spending less money overall, but they’re certainly spending less on traditional advertising.
Why? today’s marketers face a need to deliver tangible return on investment. This has always been a challenge for business to business publications to prove. It’s all well and good—and perhaps even correct—to talk about the importance of branding and to the contribution that advertising makes to building a brand. Unfortunately, in recent years, the financial folks C-level executives are demanding more accountability.
Another marketing implication is suggested by Doug Haslam, in TechPR Gems. The disappearance of Business 2.0, of Network Computing, of Infoworld and others imply fewer PR outlets for marketers. Referring to the dramatic downsizing at CMP, Doug expresses concern and uncertainty:
Such a big hit all at once does give pause. I guess we”ll see how this shakes out; perhaps we see a strengthened TechWeb come out of this. Perhaps some other media outlet fills in the gap created by this consolidation. Perhaps you can tell by this paragraph that I just don’t know what will happen next.
In fact, PR strategies must change, as buyers migrate to the web.
As it happens, in the emerging area of content marketing, companies are beginning to go directly to buyers both online and in-print with relevant and compelling information. More money is being invested in a web sites which provides the kind of content that publishing companies would have offered in the past. In addition, successful companies typically have a larger database, including email addresses, than do magazines in which they have an advertising.
This means that marketers have a chance to become trusted content providers for current and future customers. Their PR strategies will ultimately involve to going directly to their prospects with that content. As Doug suggests their will probably be fewer PR outlets. But, there will still be plenty of PR opportunities.
Trackback to TechPR Gems:
Trackbacks [0]
There are no trackbacks.
Post Comment
Fields marked with * are required.
Comments [2]
Thanks for the link!
Updating to Business 2.0, it appears that Fortune magazine will now be creating more opportunities for that kind of pitching. The other side, particularly in this case, is that online outlets, such as TechCrunch, Engadget, and Mashable, have sprung up to cover what is going on in the “mew” tech world, so perhaps those additional opportunities are the ones that have already been established.
You are making me think about how creating content is one of the ways to go. When you put this in the context of creating blogs and podcasts, then people like me can understand where this gets at. The most important thing will be that the content creates value rather than selling at the customers.
Doug,
I’m glad to get you started on the path to content marketing. My background is primarily in technology publishing where content was everything. What was true then–and is largely still true now: marketers don’t do a very good job of understanding what their customers really need to know. Even if they do understand, they tend to restrict marketing efforts to billboard-style messaging–Big, flashy graphics, a few words that attempt to stop passersby in their tracks. You may want to read the ThomasNet article to see how important and how measurable great content can be.