The changing nature of publishing, and particularly digital publishing, has been highlighted in a couple of stories today on the amount that consumers are willing to spend on media online, and the moves by U.S. publisher Hearst to acquire a different type of business.
The consumer study was KPMG’s Media & Entertainment Barometer, which, as Paid Content highlighted, showed that the time spent with both traditional and digital media over the last six months had increased.
But the actual amount being spent had decreased – traditional media dropped from £9.19 per month to £7.46, and digital media dropped from £1.99 to £0.98. And although more people favoured offline access, those that opted for online went for on-demand availability, the availability of free content, and the fact they’re already in front of a screen.
But obviously the study has taken place during/towards the tail end of a global recession, so I was a little surprised not to see that mentioned in over reports. It would have been interested to see the trend pre-recession to see what was happening. And to have seen a mention of other forms of media beyond newspapers and magazines.
But it seems one U.S. publisher is trying to adapt pretty quickly – I was a bit surprised to read that Hearst is looking to buy SEO and Marketing company iCrossing for around $375 million.
Most of the discussion so far has been around Hearst bringing search engine marketing in-house, along with social media marketing, measurement and analytics. But that seems like a hefty investment in internal knowledge by acquisition – particularly as iCrossing has around 550 employees and two UK offices (Disclosure – iCrossing have provided SEO work to both Bauer Media and Absolute Radio at various times, and I’ve occasionally worked directly with them.)
The other potential outcome is a Hearst-owned iCrossing still working for external clients such as Travelocity, Coca-Cola and Toyota. But will brands still feel comfortable booking their marketing and SEO work through a company which has a vested interest in the properties of one media owner?
Without knowing the plans, and what Hearst currently spends purely on digital marketing, it’s hard to make a definitive statement on what it likely to be the outcome, but I think it’s worth discussing because it’s a very definite move from a big media company to acquire an entirely new revenue stream for a media company. And if it’s a battle to get consumers to pay for digital content, it’s much less of a struggle to persuade companies to pay to reach consumers via search or social networks – the two main sources of online referrals.
Is this the start of a merge between content and marketing for media owners, much as product retailers have begun to produce their own content as part of their own marketing?