Another Nail in Print’s Coffin
May 17th, 2010 by Bob Bly
According to an article in The Record (5/15/10), here is how average daily media use breaks down among 8 to 18-year-olds:
*Television — 4 hours and 29 minutes.
*Music/audio — 2 hours and 31 minutes.
*Computer — 1 hour and 29 minutes.
*Video games — 1 hour and 13 minutes.
*Print — 38 minutes.
This entry was posted on Monday, May 17th, 2010 at 1:42 pm and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
May 17th, 2010 at 4:30 pm
Sad I wonder if their print media consumption is really even that high.
May 17th, 2010 at 6:31 pm
I am surprised that print consumption is that high.
May 18th, 2010 at 5:25 am
That ads up to 10 hours and 20 minutes. Do kids really waste that much time per day?
May 18th, 2010 at 8:58 am
The common debate among any and all media, including print, television and radio, is how to capture and keep the youth market.
My second observation is does this include the online companion for print publications? Certain print pubs might have higher young readership for their online versions.
May 18th, 2010 at 9:44 am
I’d be more interested in seeing the category “Print” turned into “Reading” time. It matters little where youth get their reading material…as long as they read!
May 18th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
I would be interested to see this compared to the 19 – 29 year old group, then the 30 – 39 etc…
I think we might consume more “print” as we get older (i.e. how many teens read the newspaper?)
Obviously, if the older groups show the same patterns, or close, we might be trending towards the “death of print”.
May 18th, 2010 at 12:57 pm
I’m amazed that television is hanging in there, considering how people have gotten used to receiving everything through the Internet.
May 20th, 2010 at 8:00 am
Yup.
I had one client who had gotten about 60 responses from their ads when they started advertising… then it dwindled down to 25 and, they are constantly in the RED…longing so hard for the good ol’ days.
I managed to rescue their ad, turn things around for them, get them the numbers they want plus – reduce their costs at the same time, all, while fighting really retarded regulations the newspaper publishers impose on advertisers which literally kill off response.
For example, one of the regulations I had to fight was this… literally word for word;
“Font type used should not be similar to the respective publications the advertisement
is placed. Sans Serifs font types (without tails) should be used.”
The other is…
“The word ADVERTISEMENT or ADVERTISING FEATURE is to be conspicuously shown…”
(Gary Halbert has a very good suggestion on how to side step this one, but it’ll add about $100 per insertion for his tactic to work)
And a whole plethora of words that are banned. Advertisers cannot use certain words in the ads or risk the ad being disapproved.
These newspapers deserve what’s coming to them, people are moving online and papers will die a certain death.
There’s even a website dedicated to this;
newspaperdeathwatch.com
Sayonara newspaper…
P.S.: I was combing about 15 magazines from Australia, USA, UK and Singapore at my local Borders and found ZERO proper direct response ad. That’s a very telling sign, I thought to myself, I repeated the process with The International Herald, Wall Street Journal and a handful more international papers, results?… SAME THING. Zero proper direct response ads. Game over “offline”.
May 21st, 2010 at 12:22 am
this is interesting statistics, I’ve never thought that print has so much influence over the others.
Must be a very good copy I guess…
May 24th, 2010 at 6:46 pm
I would like to see those statistic broken down by age group. My experience shows a very sharp division along age lines. Individuals over 50 spend much more than 38 minutes a day in the consumption of print media. It’s all about the target audience.