The Magazine Business Really is Just Business
This week, Advertising Age magazine’s cover story, The A-List, includes 10 magazines that “reach beyond the printed page to build a future as finely honed media brands.” The big winner: Women’s Health.
The article was an eye-opener for me because, although I’ve read all of the magazines on the list, I was wholly unaware of the fact that every one of them has become its own cross-selling empire. To be included on the list, a magazine must be operate as a brand, which may include the following:
smart licensing moves
becoming retailers in their own right
creating revenue-generating digital content
building smart cross-media content and ad platforms
finding a way to engage and monetize their communities
Whew! Even one of those things, (say, creating revenue-generating digital content) can be really, really difficult. And it goes to show that the magazine business is not really about magazines anymore: it’s about business.
It’s worth noting that every one of these publications has an intense editorial and creative focus on its readers. National Geographic isn’t trying to convert the FHM demo; National Geographic continues to excel at delighting a core constituency. It’s mission: exploration and conservation and bringing the wonders of the planet to people.
But, I’d guess that each of the magazines on the list has as many (or more) staffers dedicated to biz dev, technology, measurement and analysis as they do for editorial and design. It takes constant measurement and analysis to know if and when something is working, and to know when to adjust or pull the plug if something is not working.
National Geographic, according to the article, has more than 550,000 Facebook fans, 20,000 Twitter fans, and more than 190,000 YouTube subscribers. It also has ancillary publications, (“Adventure” and “Traveler”) and a cable television station. Think about what that means for measurement and analysis.
Consumers expect to be able to access to their favorite content in numerous delivery channels. They also expect content providers to reach out to them where they live (Facebook, Twitter, cable channels, iPhone apps).
And now, a question: Will it ever make sense again, in any circumstance, to start a new magazine on its own, without an integrated marketing plan that includes numerous content delivery channels? I can’t see it.
It makes total sense to start a magazine on its own. How else do you create a cross-platform media brand? You have to start with a core constituency that becomes your foundation for a larger endeavor. Attempting things the other way around would be far too capital intensive. You could, however, include your diversification and brand strategy in your early stage business plan, though. You’re correct in stating that magazines can’t really exist as single products anymore, but nothing can. A Web site by itself lacks visibility and significant revenue potential (at least at this stage). The key is to do your homework, sincerely focus on innovation (not just say so), and to use resources efficiently: things that the publishing industry, sui generis, has not done well in the past.
I wouldn’t say a new magazine should aim to come out of the gate as a cross-platform brand (although “Food Network Magazine” seems to have achieved that—after 12 months, it already ranks as the “second-largest foodie book”).
But I would suggest that any business thinking of starting a magazine should plan, from day-one, to reach its audience in multiple channels: print, online, and perhaps one other delivery channel. If you’d like to grow an audience solely through delivering content in the printed page, the odds are stacked against it. There was only one magazine mentioned in the Advertising Age article (not in the top-10) “Saveur” that was cited b/c of it’s “laser-sharp focus on great print editorial.” But even then, its editor in chief has been moonlighting as a judge on Bravo’s “Top Chef Masters” and Food Network’s “Iron Chef.”
I guess the fundamental point I’m trying to make is that you need to leverage an established ‘seed group’ to create a successful, cross-platform media brand. A magazine is still a better proposition than a website (for now) as an independent medium because it has higher visibility. Of course you have to have a multi-pronged approach, as I noted in my original comment. You can enter the market with only a magazine. You can’t sustain a magazine in the market alone, though. Not in this revenue environment.