From Advertising Age - Full story here

Google Stocks Up on Print and Outdoor Ads for Privacy-Focused Campaign

'Good to Know' Will Run in USA Today, Wall Street Journal and The Economist

New York—The readers of Dow Jones & co.'s The Wall Street Journal have the highest median annual household income ($135,740) among print publications, according to Mediamark Research & Intelligence's MRI Fall 2009 report, which was released this week.

Twelve other print publications had readership with median household income above $100,000, which indicates a business-oriented audience. The other 12 are: Barron's ($126,710); The Economist ($124,701); United Hemispheres ($120,809); Washington Post Sunday ($120,400); The New York Times Sunday ($118,471); The New York Times daily ($115,816); American Way ($108,522); Condé Nast Traveler ($106,407); The Atlantic ($104,786); Southwest Spirit ($102,505); Architectural Digest ($101,159); and Yachting ($100,740).

Full story here

From today's New York Times comes this story of how newspaper web sites are having trouble attracting larger brand advertisers consistently.The reason boils down to two problems we have spoken about on this blog many times - newspaper sites are too expensive and the ability to target is poor.

Full story here.

Part of the story:

It was a good day for newspaper Web sites when Mercedes-Benz USA introduced its updated E-Class cars this summer. Mercedes bought out the ad space on the home pages of The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, and had those sites create special 3-D ads for them, at an estimated cost of $100,000 a site.

The days after were not as good. While Mercedes was happy with the newspaper sites’ performance, it shifted money to cheaper, more tightly aimed ads bought through networks, which bundle ad space from many Web sites.

When Mercedes advertises its more basic models next year, it will largely avoid newspaper Web sites and rely on networks. That lets Mercedes “be very targeted and efficient with our dollars,” said Beth Lange, digital media specialist for Mercedes-Benz USA.

But that also explains why newspaper sites are not holding on to ad dollars, even while overall Internet advertising is creeping back. Newspaper sites are the patent-leather stilettos of the online world: they get used for special occasions, but other shoes get much more daily wear. The beneficiaries of this behavior are networks and exchanges like Advertising.com from AOL and DoubleClick Ad Exchange from Google, which dominate the buying and selling of extra space.

This story in the Wall Street Journal on the pressure being placed on large ad agencies by their clients to reduce fees is really worth reading, if for nothing else, because it gives some insight into the attitude many large agencies have concerning their self-importance and the value of their services. This quote in the story, sort of sums up their general attitude: "The reality is that clients want more for less," says Maurice Levy, chief executive of Paris-based Publicis. "It's something that is unfortunately becoming quite common."

What is surprising is that it took Maurice (who allegedly is an advertising professional with a pulse on what consumers in general want) this long to figure this out. Isn't more for less one of the driving forces of our economy? Wal Mart, Target and Sam's Club have done pretty well operating under this premise. Why does Maurice think that his customers want more for less when it comes to the toilet paper they buy or the clothes they wear but not when it comes to the services of Publicis? It appears that he really thinks companies should pay Publicis more just because they are Publicis. At no point in this article does anyone from any agency say that clients should pay the same or more because they are doing a better job, or driving more sales for their clients. They just believe they should make outrageous commissions because that is the way it has always been. Good luck fighting against the tide, Maurice. Maybe Maurice's dreams will come true and once the economy recovers advertisers will come to their senses and get back to the good old days where they were willing to pay more to the people with the coolest clothes, regardless of the services they provide, but I wouldn't bet my Target jeans on it.

Here is part of the Wall Street Journal story:

While ad companies have historically lagged behind in economic recoveries, this time their rebound may come even later, and be less convincing. Not only have marketers slashed what they spend on ad time and space, but many companies have also significantly reduced what they pay their agencies for ad services, such as creating TV commercials.

Ad executives say marketers have slashed the fees they pay by 5% to 30%. Some companies have even asked that fees be reduced retroactive to Jan. 1, meaning firms are paid less for work they have already completed, say two ad executives.

The New York Times says it will decide this summer whether to offer online content through a subscription model, metered model or a pay as you go micro-payment model. Full story here.

One thing is clear, it is going to start costing money to read the New York Times online. Hopefully, more publications will follow and begin charging for the content that is so expensive to produce. As we have said before, the model, so pervasive among newspapers and magazines that traffic generates revenue, isn't working.

The Wall Street Journal reported on 7/1: 

Gannett Co., the largest U.S. newspaper publisher by daily circulation, will cut between 1,000 and 2,000 jobs out of its 41,500-person work force in response to continuing revenue declines, according to a person familiar with the company's thinking.