Professional publishing still leads the way

Publishing content - messages, information, advertising - is now a business that everyone is involved in, regardless of the size, shape or purpose of the organisation they represent.
This new age of online communications has unleashed a plethora of platforms through which to communicate with stakeholders. It has also brought democracy to the entire publishing process. Targeted, well-conceived and successful communication need no longer be the preserve of specialist agencies, publishers and marketers. Customers can comment, share and disseminate as they see fit.
There is now a shift to simple, uncluttered websites, supplemented by a value-added presence on social networks and honest, accountable, content via blogs that offers readers and customers something of interest, usually for nothing.
These platforms are easy to understand, harness and develop. They require time, regular commitment and a well thought out strategy from day one. I've blogged on this topic before and will expand in the future.
In the meantime, I am increasingly concerned by the approach individuals and their organisations are taking to the content they post online. These people, often owner-managers or internal communications staff, stand to benefit most from Web 2.0. They can interact with customers like never before, monitor opinion, test new products or ideas and create multiple identities for their brand or mission.
The content on their main websites or profiles is not necessarily a problem (these are treated like any other professional publication), but everything else they publish suffers from a 'fire and forget' approach. LinkedIn groups, for example, are rapidly filling with confusing questions, unstructured discussion groups and shameless spam. A new site - allvoices.com - is already littered with irrelevant PR material.
Worst of all however, is the content produced by people who, in their profiles and biographies, purport to understand the value of Web 2.0 and information sharing, but continue to plug specific products or services when commenting on blogs or contributing to discussion groups. When they do attempt to publish 'independent' content, it is often littered with typos and poor sentence construction. Why? There is no value to this effort and these people are diluting the value of the original communication.
Any form of publishing - whether a comment on an article, a corporate blog, status update or Tweet, should be checked as if it were going to print or to be broadcast. See this earlier post on the value of a gatekeeper.
This leads me to believe that there is still very much a need for publishers, specialist agencies and marketers to provide the quality of content that is lacking. Of course, I would say that. But take a look at the messages, discussions and comments published on your favourite networks and websites, and I guarantee you will be disappointed by the sloppy examples you find.

Professional publishing still leads the way

Business is not an optional part of creativity, it is essential

Creativity is not an option, it is an essential part of business - so ran the headline in The Times for an article by Jim Prior, managing partner of a branding consultancy.
Basically he argues that company executives claim to want 'a brand as strong as Apple', but fail to commit the time and resources to creativity that generates strong branding.
Its a fair point and probably the reason companies such as Dell sell lots of hardware (efficient supply chain management, competitive pricing) but does not have the instant recognition and sex appeal of Apple.
So how does this relate to content and communications? Well, I would argue that a great many publishers and communicators spend too much time on creativity and the branding of their work, rather than on the less-sexy, but crucial, business processes: budgeting, service levels, analysis of response and distribution.
In this current climate it has never been more important to know where every nut and bolt of your publishing process is located, and to interrogate every stage to ensure maximum value.
Here are five starting points for a typical content specialist:

1. Writers - if you employ contributors, ask yourself if you are getting best value from them? Their rates may be competitive, but are they true advocates for your publication or comms strategy? Make sure they are onside and always on the look-out for mutually beneficial opportunities.
2. Print and/or web management costs - when was the last time you put this out to tender?
3. Distribution/marketing - take the opportunity to look at how you deliver information. Before committing resource to another social media channel, examine what you currently do and take the opportunity to clean up lists or gather constructive feedback from customers/readers.
4. Set budgets for individual elements of the publishing process and stick with them. Make sure staff understand the importance of budgeting and its relevance to the success of the business.
5. Consider an external business process accreditation such as ISO9001. Take it from me - external accreditation can be fairly straight forward if tackled in the right way, and could save £thousands in the long term.

Business is not an optional part of creativity, it is essential

Bar code technology helps publishers market online content

Just read a fantastic news item explaining how HarperCollins, the book publisher, is harnessing 2D bar code technology to allow readers to access more information on the book and its subjects, online.
I see great potential for this technology across all forms of publishing - marketing material, information leaflets, magazines and newspapers. Read the whole article here.
This encapsulates perfectly the way in which print and online should work together, with print acting as a launch pad to more specific, in-depth information online.

Bar code technology helps publishers market online content

Now is the time for newspapers to strike out

Why is The Daily Telegraph not making more of its online expenses coverage? The Guardian has captured the initiative on this, publishing the records on their website in a searchable format, that allows ordinary voters like you and I to quickly search for our local MP, or examples of expenditure that concern us most.
There is no way that I would have bought the Telegraph every day for the past four weeks (and counting), just to establish the details concerning my local MP or interests. However, if the information had been published online as well, I would have readily paid a nominal fee per day, week or visit to read what I wanted to. This story could have been the perfect test bed on which to launch a pay-per-view model and begin to experiment with monetising digital content.
I have always championed the fact that Web 2.0 allows publishers to deliver information in a way that cannot be achieved in ink-on-paper. A searchable database of expenses, with extended coverage and analysis for those who want it, would have been brilliant.
Instead, I see the Telegraph are printing a colour supplement with Saturday's paper - yet more newsprint to wade through. Will it boost copy sales? Watch this space.

Now is the time for newspapers to strike out

Never forget your gatekeeper

Speaking with a variety of publishers recently reminded me of a recurring gap in many organisation's publishing processes - the final check pre-press.
This applies on- and off-line, and was drummed into me at a tender age, when I was cutting my teeth on a local newspaper.
I am not referring to tone, or even grammar and spelling, but simply checking the content overall. You know, the really simple items that are so easily left out, rarely noticed, but could be critically important from the point of view of a reader, lawyer or advertiser. Items include image credits, pull quotes (does it match the article, or has it been grabbed from somewhere else by a designer?), late-change facts and figures or even folios (are the pages numbered consecutively?)
Too often editors, art directors and subs (assuming that luxury is available) pontificate over a creative detail, overlooking more serious errors. Image captions are particularly important and something that all publishers should watch carefully. With cheap 'n cheerful galleries springing up all the time on the net, many staff assume there are no Ts&Cs to observe.
All organisations who are publishing content (that's all of them these days) should draw up a simple list of 'forgettables' such as those listed above, then ensure that someone is responsible for checking each and every one before going to press - the gatekeeper.
That person should, ideally, be someone removed from the day-to-day creative process. Even better, someone with an eye for detail who is as near as possible to your average reader. In small organisations I often find the best person for this role is someone from the accounts team.
Ultimately of course, the publisher must take responsibility for these items and in my experience setting time aside at the beginning or end of a day, with a strong coffee, away from email and phones, is the best formula.

Never forget your gatekeeper

A simple to-do list for social media

I have just completed a project for a fast growing publishing company, introducing some simple social media ideas to their day-to-day business.
As described in my previous post, the old adage of 'keep it simple, stupid' applies when embarking on channels such as Twitter, but I did find another handy post from Junta42, summarising all the housekeeping measures you can undertake to make sure profiles and networks are as useful as possible. Read the article in full here.
You will see a couple of contradictions between what Joe Pullizi of Junta42 recommends and my own approach, most notably the choice of blog platform. I feel that, for many SMEs and independent bloggers, Wordpress and similar are too time-consuming to set up by comparison to Blogger. Ultimately all these projects are about communicating content, therefore clear, simple and time-efficient solutions must be best, especially when it is difficult to correlate a direct ROI between a blog and business income.

A simple to-do list for social media

Blogs, social media and Web 2.0 - look before you leap

Many business and organisations - large and small - are perceived to be 'playing catch up' when it comes to their online presence.
However, is a full suite of profiles, networks, blogs and tweets really the answer for every organisation? How do you determine what is most important and worth the time and investment?
I have been working with a fast-growing publisher whose focus is firmly on capital growth - quite right too. But they also recognise a need to demonstrate to their readers and investors that they understand the benefits of additional relevant media.
Below is a list of questions I asked the owners before embarking on a solution. I have attempted to place them in approximate order of priority.

1. How will a blog, Tweets and social network presence benefit your business?
2. How much time can you afford to write interesting, engaging content for posts, tweets and discussions?
3. How much investment (time and money) will these benefits warrant?
4. What is the vision for this content?
5. How will you measure the effects and manage responses?
6. How will you develop and review this work on a monthly basis?

Remember, these questions are basic and apply to an organisation where every penny counts.
Points 1-3 are most important - if you cannot execute something well, it is probably not worth doing at all, and indicative of wider management problems in the organisation.

Blogs, social media and Web 2.0 - look before you leap

Asking a difficult question - how much is your content worth?

With advertising revenues in such a state of flux, many publishers might regret the hugely discounted subscription fees they have been promoting.
Many business plans for publishers highlight subscriptions revenue as a steady bedrock of income, but in actual fact they are only concerned with the overall subscriptions volume that they can include in pitches to advertisers.
Now this balance needs to shift, so that subscriptions income is profitable and goes some way to limiting the huge deficits left by the loss of advertising (particularly if GM were one of your clients!).
The question is - do publisher's know where the true value of their content lies, and how to price subscriptions on- and off-line accordingly? What will an audience be prepared to pay and how is this influenced by what you have been previously charging?
I came across this interesting piece from Guy Lecharles Gonzalez at FolioMag, describing the challenge for bookstall publishers. Worth a read.
In the meantime, this got me thinking about how such developments could prove positive for custom publishers - anyone providing quality content aimed at specific customers or markets. While 'independent' publishers juggle ad revenue and subscriptions prices, potential advertisers can get better value by engaging directly with their customers in a custom, quality editorial environment. Click here for evidence of this.
In the meantime, mainstream magazine publishers will have to take a deep breath and place the emphasis of value on their content and the way in which it engages the audience.

Asking a difficult question - how much is your content worth?

Charity newsletter makes money

Good content in print can generate significant ROI. Take a look at this case study of how a children's charity has transformed their newsletter: http://tiny.cc/79Or4
The article demonstrates that:

1. Good research will reveal best practise and help support your business case
2. You must understand your audience: what do they really want to read?
3. 'Less is more' where content is concerned

Here is another example of a great charity newsletter.

Charity newsletter makes money