This is probably a really bad idea for lots of reasons. Coerced leads are usually of low value for advertisers and story ideas that are funded by something as valueless as information, especially without any intention to buy, are likely to be below par. However, interesting idea. 

 

Top 10 Current Events & News Online Destinations - March 2010

Synapse will begin selling magazine subscriptions for magazines through Facebook and associated article links in Facebooks' news feed. Good idea but will people pay for a subscription when they can read the articles they are most interested in at no cost via Facebook already? Until publications restrict access to content, seems likely efforts like this will fall flat.

Magazines to Sell Subscriptions Within Facebook's News Feed

NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- The magazine business may soon have a way to do more with Facebook than engage fans and promote its brands. A mockup of an expanded article running in Facebook's news feed, using InStyle as an example. A mockup of an expanded article running in Facebook's news feed, using InStyle as an example. Synapse, a Time Inc. division that sells subscriptions for many publishers, is collaborating with Alvenda, a company that builds e-commerce applications, to introduce a system letting Facebook users buy print magazine subscriptions without leaving the site or even the Facebook news feed. The system, which Alvenda expects to make live in July or August, will also allow Facebook users to expand those blurbs of magazine content that are now common in the news feed into full articles, complete with advertising -- again without leaving the news feed, much less Facebook itself.

Full story here

A step in the right direction. About time Google started paying a decent price for content. Let's hope the AP holds firm on a decent deal. From PaidContent.org. Full story here.

Google Stops Hosting AP Content

In a sign that Google’s negotiations with the Associated Press over a new licensing contract may have reached a standstill, new AP articles are no longer being hosted in Google (NSDQ: GOOG) News; Search Engine Land‘s Danny Sullivan, who first reported the development, says that new AP articles haven’t been hosted on the site since Dec. 24. Google isn’t providing an explanation. The company’s full statement: “We have a licensing agreement with the Associated Press that permits us to host its content on Google properties such as Google News. Some of that content is still available today. At the moment we’re not adding new hosted content from the AP.”

However, the AP has been in the process of renegotiating its licensing agreement with Google, as well as the big portals—and there have been signs that at least the Google talks have not been going so well. AP CEO Tom Curley, for instance, hinted in October that Google, unlike Microsoft (NSDQ: MSFT), hadn’t been willing to acquiesce to some of the AP’s demands, including that it have access to real-time metrics. “We haven’t talked. We haven’t talked. We haven’t talked with them in any serious way,” he said.

The Google deal dates back to three years ago, when the AP gave Google a license to use its content in unspecified ways. In August 2007, Google began to host material produced by the AP, along with other news agencies, directly on Google News for 30 days.

Sullivan theorizes that because the agreement is set to expire at the end of January, Google may be trying to avoid the complication of hosting AP stories that would have to be pulled down in fewer than 30 days. Presumably, that wouldn’t be a concern if it was clear that both sides were willing to re-up.

 

 

 A TargetCast study reveals some positive results for the newspaper industry. Full story, from MarketingCharts, here.

More from the study: 

Hope for Traditional Media

According to TargetCast, the study reveals a “glimmer of hope for traditional mass media.” While 60% of consumers say newspapers need to change the most to stay relevant, most are nevertheless sticking with the media they’ve known for years. For example, those ages 35+ still consider newspaper ads to be more influential in determining their purchase decisions.

Additionally, more than 40%  of adults ages 18-64 say they prefer the experience of reading a printed newspaper vs. online sources, and just 15% of all respondents say they would rather read magazines online. Among those ages 45+, a solid 57% prefer the experience of reading a printed magazine vs. reading a magazine online. A significant number of adults aged 18-64 (41%) also indicate radio is still relevant in their purchase decisions.
Additional study findings:

• Men are more likely than women to indicate that printed news is a less relevant source of news and information.
• Men are currently using the internet more than women to watch TV shows/videos and play games.
• Newspapers and magazines are not considered as relevant today and are easiest to eliminate from usage.
• The biggest usage declines in printed newspapers, magazines and radio are found among men and young adults ages 18-34.
• TV and internet, respectively, identified as most important media.
• Young adults 18-34 rank the internet as more important than TV .
• Men are more likely than women to indicate they would rather listen to pre-recorded music on my mP3 player than the radio.
• Respondents are more likely to disagree with the statement that printed newspapers are more trustworthy than online sources.
• 72% say that they are not willing to pay for an online newspaper subscription to replace their printed newspaper subscription, implying, TargetCast said, that people expect the news online to be free.

“More than ever, marketers must take into account the evolving media preferences of specific target audiences as they refine their approach to connecting with consumers,” said Peter Sedlarcik, SVP, director of insights and analytics at TargetCast tcm. “Yet, while many may declare print media is dead, our findings show that marketing messages in newspapers and magazines still score well in terms of consumer attentiveness and purchase influence.”

 

 

 John Temple, the former publisher of the now defunct Rocky Mountain News, has posted a speech he recently gave on his blog. Read it here. He makes some great arguments and has sound advice for the industry. It is well worth reading.

Here is an excerpt:

"But before I subject the past to scrutiny, you need to know I don’t exempt myself from criticism. I was the top editorial person for the Rocky’s final 11 years and part of the business leadership team. I bear my own share of responsibility. It’s easy when looking back to see things that might seem obvious to us today, but it was a lot more difficult when we were in the thick of the fight, and most of the revenue growth and almost the total revenue pie came from the main newspaper product. That said, the first lesson I hope people who care about the future of local news take from the Rocky’s experience is this: Being a “great newspaper” isn’t enough in the Internet era. You have to know what business you’re in. We thought we were in the newspaper business. Working on the Web, you need to think of now and forever. At a newspaper, people largely think about tomorrow. Thinking about tomorrow isn’t enough anymore. Consumers today want services when, where and how they want them, and they want to be able to participate, not just receive.

Look, it’s understandable that we thought we were in the newspaper business. In the 1990s, Denver was the site of what was sometimes called America’s last great newspaper war. The Denver Post and the Rocky Mountain News had competed for 100 years and each saw the grand prize close at hand. Each wanted to become the only newspaper in town - something we thought of as “owning the Denver market.” We thought winning would guarantee a stable and profitable future. We misunderstood the competitive landscape and put the vast majority of our efforts into the print war.

The problem was we were fighting the last war. We didn’t understand what was happening to the playing field. Media companies used to think they were in control. That they could “own” a market. What we didn’t take into account is that in this new era, consumers were going to be in control."