Category Archives: Content

ONE SIZE DOESN’T FIT ALL – THREE CONTENT IMPERATIVES

At the risk of sounding repetitive, I will try to air my views on how I feel the content business could change in 2017. I promise to keep it short.

Who’s the audience? This question has yet to be answered satisfactorily. Because even as there are many writings dissecting how digital is going to change the world of content, most of these either approach it from a monetisation point of view or assume an almost homogenous audience. But when you look at the data, that is anything but the case.

For example, there are three areas no one is really talking about:

1) Are we creating enough relevant content to make the young, post-millennial crowd care about important issues?

2) Are we really serving women content that is more than just television soaps and fashion tips?

3) How do we introduce meaningful content to millions of new rural internet users?

Each of these segments has distinct content requirements. Each of them needs to be reached and engaged with in different ways.

1) Getting the youth to care

Millennials, rather post-millennials, are hot property for most marketers. But they are a difficult and fickle demographic too. The need is to present substantive information to them in an engaging, contextual, approachable and unbiased manner.

Established mainstream media houses have rolled up their sleeves to ride this wave. So have the new digitally-native disruptors like ScoopWhoop, along with a bunch of social-media powered viral content players like The Logical Indian and The Political Indian.

However, most of the content being churned out is fairly shallow, relying primarily on entertainment or culturally popular tropes to attract traffic. The audience is not being viewed as serious information consumers, but rather, as a tool to achieve virality.

But data indicates a hunger for information: 80 percent of youth (18 to 24-year-olds) use the internet as their first source of information (as per the Google State of Mobile Internet Report, 2016). The report also states that the youth spends, on an average, at least half an hour every day browsing for information, and that 55 percent of them do research online before any buying decision.

What we need to realise is that these will be consumers of serious content tomorrow; part of the decision making process.

Organisations that can speak to and empower this section may find a whole new market for themselves to occupy and mine. How? Try using popular themes/memes, explainers, infographics, engaging multimedia versions and community involvement. How you distribute is also important – for instance, Snapchat and Instagram might be better ways to express short-form information than to expect people to come to a website.

2) Who is serving the ladies?

In my opinion, women have been underserved and taken for granted by most content outlets for far too long. The content provided has stayed limited to entertainment and fashion. Why is it that we can’t think of leveraging content in a way that brings millions of women into the fold of news, information, and problem solving, in a meaningful and empowering manner?

Women need a breadth of information from a trusted source with which they can engage. The daily range of information that women look for is wider than men. For example, typically, a man looks for general news, politics, sports and gadgets/tech, whereas a woman is not only interested in news and politics, but also in things like career, health, family, parenting, lifestyle and wellness.

However, the way they interact with information is different – it is not a second-by-second pinging on their phones, but fewer and more substantial pieces of content that attracts them. Similarly, because the sense of community is stronger, sourcing content through a network of contributors will lead to more interaction, engagement and trust.

The time is ripe for a digital product that can be informative and empower the growing woman digital user. After all, it is a significant market segment, which is growing phenomenally. According to data by Google Survey India, in association with Pew Research and ShesConnected, about 60 million women are online in India, of which over 24 million access the internet daily. Also, importantly, 75 percent are in the 15-34 age group. Moreover, the Google State of Mobile Internet Report states that both working (approx. growth rate 100%) non-working women are the fastest growing segment (approx. growth rate 250%) of internet users in India.

3) Is there anything for rural India?

Without a doubt, this is the next frontier of digital growth. The need for quality information is paramount, but most content producers are more than happy churning out low quality entertainment content or sensationalistic news that will get advertisers reach.

If we go by a BCG report, then the number of connected rural consumers is likely to increase from about 120 million in 2015 to almost 315 million in 2020, a jump of almost 30 percent every year. This means that almost half of all connected Indians will be rural users. Further, more than 60 percent of rural users have been online for less than two years, which means most rural users are still relatively immature digitally, and their usage patterns can be expected to evolve as they gain experience.

This is the opportunity. But, how can a primarily urban media deliver content in the correct tonality and maintain empathy?

By viewing rural India as a real place, not as the stereotype that mainstream media does. Rural content doesn’t only mean farming-related issues and folk art-related entertainment. People in rural India are just as curious about the rest of the world as they are about governance, infrastructure, career, healthcare and gender issues.

This could be well achieved through a network of citizen journalists from every block and panchayat. This could be interspersed by expert contributors on issues that involve topics like personal health and career. And to close the loop, providers of content can position themselves as tools for better governance and an information source for local authorities. (This model is being executed well by Gaon Connection in UP)

Further, for the purposes of rural India, a destination website might not be a wise strategy. Instead, a strong WhatsApp and social media strategy will be key. Creating an early beachhead through meaningful content should be of paramount importance to any content business.  And yes, monetisation will not be an elusive goal.

Pay For Content Or Watch Ads

AdvertorialAdvertorials – not everyone likes them. No. Not even if you call it branded content. But then are these “evil” and “misleading”? I don’t think so. As long as the intent is clearly mentioned in the header (the image alongside prominently shows that this is an “advertorial”) and the publication does not pass it off as journalism.

Yes it is an eye sore and maybe it treads on the thin line between editorial sanctity and commercialism, and one could argue that since the publication mentioned has a separate supplement for advertorials, why not place it there?

The reason is the tussle between revenue yield (that’s much, much higher on page 1), cost of publication and brand visibility.

But why do brands and publications do it? One is that mainstream newspapers are still growing in India and therefore the reach is unparalleled. Second, just like internet and radio you can target campaigns either for national dissemination or limit them to a geography Vs. television where there is a lot of leakage. Third, advertorials – the well-executed & well-written ones – work better than mere ads. This is because they are more informative and co-opt the readers mind rather than push a message. Fourth, if the space can be monetized, why not? After all, somebody’s got to pay the bills.

Let’s also take a look at some other factors. India is a very price sensitive market. Even now, most people would rather not pay for content (it’s been an uphill battle for TV & internet). So, if newspapers X or Y were to suddenly charge a realistic Rs 15 for the daily paper (leave alone the Sunday glossies), the elasticity would ensure that demand plummets overnight. In that scenario, the paper that prices lower would capture significant market share.

Hence, every publication is deeply discounted on subscription, and looks at selling ads all over to subsidise that cost. The same goes for TV news. When you are being armed with information that can help you execute trades worth millions, why should your TV news channel fees be a paltry Rs 11 or 12 per month? (check this TRAI pay channel a-la-carte rates)

So why shouldn’t a publication or channel not seek to monetize their inventory innovatively? After all, they are all for profit businesses – their business being to bring you information.

heatmapIn the online world, this transforms itself into what is called native ads, which nest in your regular feed, but are marked distinctively as being “advertorials” or “sponsored”. This is because however fantastic your banner ads or flash animations, reader studies have shown that eyeballs rarely register those ads. Look at the heat-map alongside showing banner blindness.

But why do fewer people raise a stink over these native ads? Maybe it is because they are more contextualised and individualised to a person’s taste and hence, one doesn’t deem it to be too much of interference. Also, creating multiple access parameters is easier online. Those who pay are not shown ads, those who don’t pay have to bear the ads.

But the bottomline is those who will not pay a fee for content will have to pay the content creators’ bills by watching ads.

Media Industry and Digital Business Models: HBR

It has been a great 20 years for U.S. media innovators, with hundreds of billions of dollars created by companies that are helping democratize content production and distribution while developing new ways to connect advertisers and customers. Google and its disruptive advertising model leads the pack with a $370 billion market capitalization, but consider also companies like Facebook ($225 billion), LinkedIn ($25 billion), Twitter ($24 billion), TripAdvisor ($11 billion), and Yelp ($3 billion).

Of course, for most traditional publishing incumbents, “great” is not the word that springs to mind.

This article has appeared on Harvard Business Review. Read more HERE