Tumblelog by Soup.io
Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

May 28 2013


Sports Illustrated is the latest to go for live video webshows

Josh Sternberg at Digiday has the info:

The Time Inc. sports outlet is rolling out a 30-minute daily live talk show called “SI Now powered by Ford” with the hopes of bringing back some of SI’s swagger. Anchored by SI’s Maggie Gray, the show will broadcast live at 1p.m. EDT, Monday through Friday. It will include commentary and analysis from a roster of SI contributors but also tap into the social world where visitors can log into the site to comment, ask questions, answer polls. After the show airs, it will get a second life on the site where visitors can view on demand.

January 27 2011


Death and football: reconstructing the last days of Max Gilpin

In our latest Notable Narrative, “The Boy Who Died of Football,” Sports Illustrated senior writer Thomas Lake takes on the collapse of high school football player Max Gilpin during team practice in Louisville, Kentucky, in 2008. Gilpin’s subsequent death loads the story with power, and Lake labors under a kind of accountability to the dead, as well as an obligation to be fair to the coach who may or may not be responsible.

Along with family members and community officials, the narrative has a shadow cast of characters in the form of thousands of kids nationwide who will be playing football next fall and each fall after that. Could what happened to Max Gilpin happen to them?

Lake juggles elements of news you can use, the drama of the court case and a tremendous amount of reporting, folding it all into a chronology which moves back and forth between that last practice and later testimony. Writing about those who watched Max suffer, Lake directly addresses the challenge of constructing any kind of narrative at all:

The events of the next 50 minutes are a case study in the limits of eyewitness testimony. No video footage surfaced in the police investigation, and the roughly 140 spectators told stories that ranged from the plausible to the mathematically impossible. They couldn’t even agree on whether Stinson was wearing a whistle that day. Nevertheless, a parade of witnesses said they heard the coach say one thing that set the tone for the gassers. It seems strange that Stinson still denies saying it to the runners, because it wasn’t just soccer parents who said they heard it. It wasn’t just assistant coaches and disgruntled players. In the opening statement at Stinson’s trial for the reckless homicide of Max Gilpin, the coach’s own defense attorney acknowledged, “Jason said it.”

Lake brings all the information he can unearth to bear in an effort to understand what those last days were like for Max. The final section juxtaposes the best and the worst: a first kiss and a death scene. In combining them, Lake closes with events so universal their meaning seems clear – as if it might be possible to tell a story not by lining up the facts but by understanding one true thing.

Sponsored post
Reposted bySchrammelhammelMrCoffeinmybetterworldkonikonikonikonikoniambassadorofdumbgroeschtlNaitliszpikkumyygittimmoe

October 07 2010


The Newsonomics of sports avidity

[Each week, our friend Ken Doctor — author of Newsonomics and longtime watcher of the business side of digital news — writes about the economics of the news business for the Lab.]

When The Sporting News began publishing, the telephone was barely 10 years old. First published in 1886, just a decade after “Mr. Watson, come here — I want to see you,” a single copy cost five cents (and a year’s subscription was $2.50).

Flash forward a mere 124 years, and Bell’s invention has been succeeded by brick phones, StarTacs, Palms, and the wonder of our age, the iPhone. But it’s the iPhone’s sister, the iPad, that takes us to our updated story. Take a storied, once-down-on-its-heels brand, the newest-fangled technology, and some smart thinking, and you’ve got a set of products and a business model worth studying.
Sporting News now is actually a set of three distinct products:

  • A biweekly sports magazine, its flagship product, which reaches 500,000 readers.
  • A free website — Sporting News Feed — heavy on breaking news, trending topics and lots of sports video.
  • A newer paid product — aimed at tablets and smartphones, but also to web users — called Sporting News Today.

The pricing of the products is intriguing. First off, Sporting News Today is pitched as a “dime a day” product, 30 issues for $2.99 through Zinio. So what was five cents an issue in 1886 is now a dime “an issue” a century-plus on. As of this week, you can now buy the bundled magazine (standalone: $14.97 for a year) and Sporting News Today apps/access for $39.95 a year.

It’s the path to that pricing and those products that’s interesting.

Last week, I participated in a MediaPost-sponsored Online Media Marketing and Advertising (OMMA) panel, along with Jeff Price, publisher of Sporting News, among others. His comment intrigued me and our follow-up conversation provided more details of his work.

Price joined Sporting News as publisher in February of this year, after seven years as first chief marketing officer and then president of SI Digital. He’s taken a hands-on approach to the job, and that seems to be making a difference in how the company creates and tweaks its products. Price is aiming at an important sports segment, those who rank “eight, nine or 10 on the sports avidity scale” and follow at least three sports (of the six covered by Sporting News). Yes, there is such a scale, and it helps measure highest interest, of course. That’s the group Price is targeting, and therein we have a peek into the newsonomics of sports avidity.

From our conversation, here are three takeaways, worth applying more widely:

  • Watch the data — personally. Analytics (see my previous piece on the FT) is important overall, of course. Crunching data on usage, response to offers, and device usage help all publishers tailor their wares. Price took one further step: When the company made a switch to paid access for the Sporting News Today product in early April, it gave users a two-month free trial. Of those that didn’t convert to paid — about 6 percent did, proving the emerging 5-10 percent consensus of who is the target paid audience — Sporting News sent emails to 6,000 of them. Those emails asked why readers didn’t pay up, didn’t convert — and they included Price’s personal e-mail. He got almost 1,000 responses. Those took a week of his time to review, but he learned a lot out of the process that’s now reflected in pricing and product.

Those thousand or so responses divided into three groups: 40 percent who said they wouldn’t pay under any circumstances; 30 percent who said they’d pay, if it were bundled with the print product; and 30 percent who said they’d pay if it were more than the print product, if it gave them more of what the iPad could specifically do with video, data, and overall interactivity. All of that funneled into pricing plans and the tweaking of the iPad product itself.

  • Differentiate the products, reorganize the staff. Sporting News Today launched in 2008 as a free product, one distinctly different from the magazine. In fact, Price estimates that only two percent of the content of Sporting News Today — which promises “30 pages a day, seven day a week by 6 a.m.” — comes from the magazine. It’s increasingly interactive. Price is hiring a new editor-in-chief, one comfortable with a newsroom organized around some shared staffing and then dedicated staffing for each of three products. It’s largely a digital-first operation, but there are lots of moving pieces. “It’s a bit of a Rubik’s Cube,” says Price of the product and business model pieces.

His goal: 250,000 paid subscribers to Sporting News Today by mid-2011; he’s a little less than a tenth of the way there, with a number of strategic marketing relationships to be announced in the next couple of months. He guesstimates that a 25-percent overlap of customer usage may emerge — free website to print magazine to paid digital access — over time.

  • Distinguish yourself from the competition. USA Today Sports is a “snippets” competitor, while Sports Illustrated is more about storytelling, and “ESPN is the 800-pound gorilla in our space.” His plan: Target the busy “commuter, business traveler, and student,” offering a downloadable product so that intermittent connectivity isn’t an issue. The Sporting News position: depth and breadth, covering what moves, in those six sports areas.

How instructive to the news world is Sporting News’ work? Well, we can say that the sports is more entertainment than news, and subject more to entertainment buying habits. But it is news — niched news of, as we’ve learned, high avidity. And that connects us to those we call — you know who you are — news junkies. I don’t know if there’s a news avidity scale (please do tell), but it there is, it’s those who would score 8-plus on it who are the prime prospects for paying for digital news. It’s that 10 percent, plus or minus, of digital readers that all news companies are sighting as they aim for digital reader revenue. So I think the application is fairly direct. We should watch Sporting News, with news in general in mind, and see which models do — and don’t — move into play.

March 04 2010


Washington Post gauging readers’ willingness on paid content, both on new iPhone app and on the website

The Washington Post caused a bit of a stir yesterday when it announced a $1.99-a-year iPhone app. The choice was interesting both because it offered time-limited access to content and because of the low price point — at a time when other newspaper execs are apparently debating prices more than 100 times greater. As our friend Mac Slocum put it: “$1.99 for 12 months of Washington Post content — is that *too* reasonable?”

This morning I spoke with Goli Sheikholeslami, the vice president and general manager of digital operations for The Washington Post/ She said that the Post isn’t thinking about the $1.99 a year as a moneymaker in itself.

“It’s not really so much about this from the point of view of a large revenue stream, but trying to gauge how our readers react to paying for content,” she explained. “It really provides us with a platform for experimentation.”

Why $1.99? The Post considered it a price iPhone users are accustomed to paying, so they’d start there. I asked Sheikholeslami if, beyond the annual subscription fee, there might be other premium content available for in-app purchase. Sports Illustrated’s free swimsuit app has generated a lot of $1.99 purchases inside the app for more bikinis. And Rodale has had success selling additional content within its workout apps; one in three users buys additional content within an app.

“That model does sound like a sound one,” Sheikholeslami said. “Offering a product for free and then a premium product inside of it might be something we’d consider. We might want to test around and see if that model works.”

What about online? Is the Post priming customers to pay for the Post’s online content?

“Right now we don’t have any sort of immediate plans [to charge for web content], but we’re definitely thinking about what new products we can create, including on the web,” Sheikholeslami told me. “If it makes sense to charge for it, we would.”

In addition to the subscription fee, the Post’s new app includes a prominent splash-page ad and display ads throughout the app. Some have argued that advertisers might find an audience that’s paid for digital content more attractive to advertisers than one that is surfing freely. But Sheikholeslami told me the ad strategy isn’t connected to the subscription model.

“I wouldn’t say it’s more or less attractive. From an advertising perspective we do think we can attract a sizeable audience, even with a paid iPhone app,” she said.

Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.
No Soup for you

Don't be the product, buy the product!

YES, I want to SOUP ●UP for ...