August 13th, 2007
If you’ve spent much time reading any time management literature, you’ve probably seen the recommendation to limit your intake of news and other media. Whether they advise you to turn off the TV, stop reading so many magazines, or stay off the Internet news sites, most time management gurus recommend information consumption diets of one kind or another.
What is new, at least to me, is hearing marketing people proclaim the value of limiting media consumption.
For instance, Timothy Ferriss, in The 4-Hour Workweek, recommends cutting out newspaper reading and turning to friends and strangers to keep informed about what’s happening in the world. Then, in a later chapter, he talks about advertising a business in traditional media.
This dichotomy bugs me. Not because we have a social obligation to stay informed and plugged in to a steady stream of information. But because, taken to the extreme, it gets complicated.
If we all cease to interact with media of any kind, we won’t be able to rely on others to keep us informed. If we all stop reading newspapers, and magazines, watching TV, and surfing the Internet, who will see the ads we run to promote our businesses?
More than these semi-rambling musings, though, I really wonder what kind of impact this will have on newsletters. it seems the likeliest outcome is two-fold:
1) People will stay subscribed to your newsletter only as long as it has *immediate* relevance–so, likely only for a month, at most.
or
2) People will stay subscribed to your newsletter only as long as it has emotional resonance–perhaps for several years or longer.
Of course, neither of these outcomes is particularly troublesome–they merely mean you need to take an active role in making sure your newsletter has relevance to your target audience, both in terms of practical information and in emotional connection. But, they are worth considering.
As people become harder to reach, what are you doing to ensure they are receptive to your message? If you suddenly start losing 75% of all your new subscribers (when they unsubscribe promptly upon getting the information they need), what changes might you make to maximize your newsletter’s appeal to the 25% who stay?
I’m curious. Do you limit your exposure to the mass media? What impact has this had on your life? What impact do you foresee it having on your newsletter subscribers if they follow in your footsteps?
Join the discussion by leaving a comment below.
Jes,
I don’t watch TV or read newspapers, but I don’t plan to give up NPR (National Public Radio) or the e-newsletters or groups on the Internet.
I would go crazy working only 4 hours a week. I love my work and working!
Chris
(Edited by Moderator: Chris–I edited your name and website URL–for some reason, the “r” in your name got dropped, along with the “et” in the .net for your website. -Jes)
Hi Jessica,
I quit watching Big Media years ago and only listen to Pacifica Radio, or a public jazz or classical station for my radio interests. I usually watch PBS but that’s getting harder and harder now that big media advertises on the public station and seems to have it’s hand in the mix.
As for my subscribers, well, I’m actually phasing out my newsletter and returning to blogging. After two years of study, I find that my market really doesn’t READ what I send out. But they do read the blog, where I rant like a lunatic. It’s where I got subscribers in the first place. Once I converted to a formal newsletter, they quit reading what it was I was saying. (I got too nice.) They got some good stuff, but it was my down and dirty style on the blog they liked best.
I don’t mind. I understand the ADD of the market and lifestyle.
I won’t give up my morning newspaper and cup of Joe. The newspaper has a start and finish point — if I try to read the news online, it is harder to find an ending point.
I was a television executive for years before becoming a professional organizer, so I have an academic and professional grounding in this issue. Hearing that people are consuming less media makes me cringe because it’s really not true. But, as Stephen Colbert points out, it doesn’t matter if it’s not true: it FEELS true.
First off, newspapers have been a “50+” medium since the mid-1960s. Younger people (under 50s) haven’t turned primarily to newspapers for anything but sports scores in a long, long time. Radio, television and the internet have all, in turn, supplanted 19th century media, just as 24-hour news made the 6:30 nightly newscast irrelevant. But people with even an inch of common sense must realize that failing to maintain a modicum of news-related intellect is not keeping up their end of the social contract. Forget inability to vote; fail to know what’s going on in the world, and you have no right to complain about anything, from prices to politics.
As Meryl notes above, “it’s harder to find an ending point”, so while media use changes, people consume “media” in ever increasing numbers. The people who can get away from it when they want to are doing well and avoiding that media addiction…assuming they’re getting intellectual stimulation elsewhere and aren’t just avoiding said stimulation.
The people who sound so proud of not consuming media (like the famous coach who claimed on her teleclass last week that she doesn’t read newspapers, listen to radio, surf the net or watch the news) make me twitch; it’s like acting proud because you don’t consume food; likewise with the people who pridefully note they don’t watch TV, as if the medium in and of itself were any worse (or better) than books, radio, stage plays or hieroglyphics. There’s junk everywhere, even in newsletters; and there are gems. (Wink, wink, Jessica!)
Yes, network television is hurting. Why are the ratings down? Why are the HUT (homes using television) levels down? Could it be because the product is often garbage on network television, targeting the lowest common denominator? Until relatively recently, ratings only measured what people watched LIVE–if you taped something at 10p because you couldn’t stay up until 11p, even if you watched it the next day, if you were a metered household, it didn’t count. Then, they counted your viewership if you watched (via VCR, or now, TIVO) within 72 hours.
Current media measurement just hasn’t kept pace with other media or the fact that programming used to be a choice of three, or four, and is now a choice of 100+ channels in the typical household. People aren’t NOT watching TV, they’re just not watching it the way it used to be. They’re downloading torrents to watch on the subway and TIVOing to view after the kids are in bed and Netflixing whole series to watch full seasons in one weekend.
Teenagers used to talk on their parents’ party lines until the neighbors complained. Now, they text on their own cells. Use changes, but consumption increases. You provide content that matters, and the people will still beat a path to your mousetrappy doorstep.
Me, personally? I started watching LOTS of television as an child, watched even more when it was my profession, and watch quite a bit now, but the increased media options mean I never have to watch trash. (For my tastes, anything that isn’t either news or *narrative* programming (anything that was written by someone whipsmart and not merely un-real reality TV).) On weekends and in the car, I’ve got NPR (“Whaddya Know?” “Wait, Wait”, “Bob Edwards”) or I’m listening to C-SPAN, CNN-Headline News and MSNBC, and during prime time (and well after) I’m watching all the high quality programming that is truly available (if you look for it) on cable.
What does it all mean? Snootily bragging about not consuming media is the 21st century version of claiming not to own a TV, but “truthiness” as Colbert expressed it shows that people are, en masse, consuming more media in more varied ways than ever before. But what do they STICK with? Whatever is most compelling. It’s the message and it’s the method. People’s schedules are overloaded and as Terri notes, there’s some A.D.D. in the marketplace. But if you need and want the content and it’s presented in a well-created, desirable form (be it newsletter, blog or podcast), I believe that if you build it (and keep perfecting it), they will come.
Harrumphing rant-mode off.
I loved this version of your newsletter. I think I’ll borrow this strategy for my next ezine publication.
In response to this paragraph: “If we all cease to interact with media of any kind, we won’t be able to rely on others to keep us informed. If we all stop reading newspapers, and magazines, watching TV, and surfing the Internet, who will see the ads we run to promote our businesses?”
I think the opportunity here is to become more selective. (Tim Ferriss wrote he still reads several magazines and is an avid book reader) Which gives us all, as business owners, a powerful incentive to create compelling, relevant and valuable content. Survival of the fittest (and most adaptable to the marketplace) newsletter/blog if you will.
And while I’ve downsized some media influences in my life, I’ve simply upgraded the quality of what I do let into my environment and lowered my tolerance for stuff that just takes us space.
Well I’m in Marketing and I think the statement of us “Marketing” groups telling others to cut back ect. on their media consumption…is nothing more than the “New angle” of the day…a Dr. Phil for everyone and everything.
On a serious note I agree with Julie, statistics and research show the exact opposite…we’re inundated with media in every flavor possible, but that’s not a bad thing I actually have found in my work its a good thing. People can be selective and that’s the point at the end of the day…there has never been a time more important for all of us who are in this field to seize the opportunity to not become a “clone” Newsletters in particulair are of extreme value to my clients as they serve in advertising my client base and their client base. What is relevant is key today…I write and design for my clients so that they are ultimately forming a relationship with their prospects through newsletters. What sets us apart is that are content is geographically of interest, we also include an overall theme that engages the entire family…like going to MacDonald’s for the toy…they look forward to the next issue. Event listings have shown about a 75% retainability rate for up to three months…my clients mugshot is on the fridge for that time frame. All in all I think you have to have both; relevant information and emotional tie ins. On a personal level getting away from just speaking of newsletters…I can tell you I will never be curling up with any tech gadget to read in bed at night! Its all about balance and creativity.
My first responce was a bit more refined…but no number and it went out to cyberspace. Interesting read this is…SEE!!!
Thank you all for the comments! Y’all put me to shame with your eloquence
, and it’s been such a pleasure reading what you had to say.
Chris–I hadn’t thought about this until just now, but if you haven’t, you might want to check out Ferriss’s book–it’s more about defining success on your own terms (and questioning the notion of working 9-5, M-F until retirement) and might be an intriguing springboard for you for your own toolkit
. But I agree with you–I like what I do much too much to take the sort of hands-off approach that a 4-hour workweek would require.
Terri–That’s wonderful to hear that you’re bringing your readers what they want–in the format that most appeals to them. As readers become more savvy, the delivery medium is definitely gaining importance at breakneck speeds. (It’s simply not enough any more just to get the message right–although that’s still crucial.)
Anne–I’m so glad to hear you got WordPress integrated in! How do you like it so far? And you make a good point about like-minded consumers–although not all companies can rely on their customers having the same preferences as the company runners, that’s often a great place to start the decision-making process.
Meryl–Awesome point about the newsletter having a start and finish point, although I whenever I sit down with a paper, I always find myself jotting down something or other that I want to look up later
.
Julie–What do you say I just scrap my post and replace it with yours
? Because you did a much, much better job than I could have, and you did it with a sense of humor. (Seriously, where *is* that newsletter of yours? You’ve got your new computer now… It’s time to start publishing!)
Karin–I’m delighted you enjoyed it–thank you for mentioning that
. You make a great point about upgrading what you let in. Much like so much of the paring down of life–as there are more options we can either let ourselves get completely swept out to sea or we can be more selective.
Charlene–Sorry your first response got lost–I wish we didn’t need that confirmation number for comments, but otherwise the site gets overloaded with spam. I’m so glad you shared your thoughts about clone newsletters–you’re absolutely right. Differentiation is fundamental to retaining readers.
Thank you for continuing this conversation with me!
Jes
Just a quick note to add to everything that’s been said. A report in the UK news this week suggested that more and more people are listening to radio broadcasts, but not always on a radio. Increasingly, radio programming is accessed via the internet or mobile phones (cell phones).
I’ll leave my comment at that, and leave you to make your own deductions from it.
That’s really intriguing that people are listing to more radio in the UK these days, Richard. It’s interesting how much delivery preferences are growing and shifting.
Jessica,
While reading through your “Newsletters in Focus” I have a few gaps that the words are not visible. I appreciate the comments made, with your responses. I still feel that contact with our customers between visits and calls needs to be made keeping your name in front of your customers. Also updating your cusotmers what changes you are making and how you are always looking for a better way to do business. If it is true people are reading less newspapers, media, your name is not getting to your clients. Even if your cusotmer does not read your newsletter it is a point of contact. I have been trying to keep the front of the newsletter with information your customer will find interesting.
Jessica, what a lovely way to get a discussion going!
I am a reader, and read the Sunday paper, magazines,
books from the library, AND see the news at tele. But
lately I feel overwhelmed with information (visual)
and move more towards listening to cd’s and radio.
My newsletter to my clients I keep as short as possible.
I keep it very to the point and try not to confuse or
overwhelm them.
Thanks, Karin