Content consumption is at an all-time high, but publishers and brands are struggling to find connections. Ignore the power of the individual at your peril.
I think the nub of the matter for legacy publishers is that young people aren't reading anymore (the "post-literate society" has been a hot topic on substack over the last 6 months).
I'd argue digital print has never really been platform-ised like video, partly as it pre-dates platform businesses. Yes, there's Substack, but it's still very niche, Medium (but, meh), and SM that acted as a news article (sort of) aggregator for a time (and Reddit still does). So publishers got plenty of direct traffic from previous generations. For example, every office I worked in the 2010s I'd always see younger staff browsing the Daily Mail side bar of shame. I don't think you see that with early-20s office workers anymore.
If your default as a young user is now straight-to-video, why would you ever go to a publisher's site? So where does that leave publishers and young audiences? Reliant on ad revenue from video platforms?
As an aside, I keep thinking about the downstream impact of all this on trade media. The vast, vast majority of trade media output is digital print. Is anyone Gen Z and below going to be reading this in a decade or so time? And what happens if/when AI displaces a lot of white collar jobs and therefore there is just a much smaller target audience for those trade pubs? For those publishers with large stables of trade media brands, I'd be very concerned about the future.
All very valid points IMO. Definitely think publishers have to get used to the idea of their site as less of a destination and have to build their brands, goods and services on rented land or else they will cease to be relevant.
The volume model is dying, but something else will take its place. Don't think it's necessarily a bad thing for the industry
Great read, and love the quote by Rand. Think I might refer to that one also more often.
Thanks Hans, much appreciated. It's a good one. Principle of building on rented land is a very good one now
I think the nub of the matter for legacy publishers is that young people aren't reading anymore (the "post-literate society" has been a hot topic on substack over the last 6 months).
I'd argue digital print has never really been platform-ised like video, partly as it pre-dates platform businesses. Yes, there's Substack, but it's still very niche, Medium (but, meh), and SM that acted as a news article (sort of) aggregator for a time (and Reddit still does). So publishers got plenty of direct traffic from previous generations. For example, every office I worked in the 2010s I'd always see younger staff browsing the Daily Mail side bar of shame. I don't think you see that with early-20s office workers anymore.
If your default as a young user is now straight-to-video, why would you ever go to a publisher's site? So where does that leave publishers and young audiences? Reliant on ad revenue from video platforms?
As an aside, I keep thinking about the downstream impact of all this on trade media. The vast, vast majority of trade media output is digital print. Is anyone Gen Z and below going to be reading this in a decade or so time? And what happens if/when AI displaces a lot of white collar jobs and therefore there is just a much smaller target audience for those trade pubs? For those publishers with large stables of trade media brands, I'd be very concerned about the future.
All very valid points IMO. Definitely think publishers have to get used to the idea of their site as less of a destination and have to build their brands, goods and services on rented land or else they will cease to be relevant.
The volume model is dying, but something else will take its place. Don't think it's necessarily a bad thing for the industry