With the uncovering in recent weeks of schemes to
inflate circulation at the Chicago Sun-Times, Newsday and Hoy, the media community is once
again in a roil over the entire auditing process for both newspapers and magazines, which
have also seen their share of circulation scams in recent years, most memorably with
Rosie. All this prompts longtime media watcher Paul Benjou to wonder whether there isn't a
better way to track the effectiveness of print advertising in reaching those readers of
most interest to advertisers. His idea is to move away from the very idea of basing
ad rates on total circulation figures.
An avalanche starts with one snowflake.
Several have already drifted down to affect both the magazine and newspaper
industries and, more importantly, the Audit Bureau of Circulations, which is responsible
for keeping abuses of the auditing of circulation reports in check.
Covert and false submissions by what's perceived as a few magazine and
newspaper members have now brought the entire audit process by the ABC into question.
Advertisers are furious with both the media and their agency partners, and
rightly so. There has been a definite erosion of standards and practices, and by all
parties.
No one seems to have the time or the inclination to dig deeper into flaws in
the auditing process.
The culprits here are the media, of course. But the ABC has also proved to be
an unworthy policing agent.
And agencies should be taken to task for failing to uphold their end of the
bargain, which is to serve as the client's watchful eye over the audit process. Agencies
long ago abandoned the notion that they need to teach their media people how to navigate
through ABC statements and indeed question their findings.
The blame doesn't stop there.
Budget restraints have undercut agency training across the board, and much of
that can be blamed on advertisers demanding more at less cost. That's forced agencies to
make broad-stroke cuts in "below the line" expenditures.
Eventually, it all catches up. Now the avalanche can't be stopped.
All of this leads me to propose an entirely different approach to
measuring the real impact of what our print partners deliver to advertisers.
My idea is to move away from circulation guarantees altogether, replacing
them with CPM guarantees. Those guarantees would be against demographics for magazines.
For newspapers, there would be broader readership CPM guarantees.
The ability to do this already exists through both Simmons and MRI. An
expansion of field audits, with increased frequency and a faster tracking for data
releases, would generate more reliable and more usable returns. Of course, like the ABC,
Simmons and MRI would face tough scrutiny of their methodology.
Can this work? Absolutely.
But it will require thinking on a 180-degree turn with new process management
in place.
With ABC taking a back seat to MRI and Simmons, worries over false
circulation claims would no longer be such a concern. The key data would not be total
readers and total copies distributed and sold but how effectively key readers within those
broader numbers are reached. Advertisers would be able to buy
print as the now buy television, and that would make print that
much more attractive.
This provocative proposal will no doubt throw the media into fits of
rage.
To say the least, it would entirely change the selling process, flipping it
on its head. But at the same time it would get those media sellers to begin thinking more
strategically about not just their businesses but their clients' businesses as well.
The seed is planted. Let the snow fly! |
