Consumers recall advertisements they see or hear on trusted media and for most people that means television. But 18-34 year olds show a greater trust in online media than other age groups.
“85 percent of consumers are most likely to notice advertising for a product or service if they see it on television. User-generated content sites (UGC) achieved a much lower (28 percent) attention level . . . But, 18-34 year-olds are much more comfortable with UGC sites, with 41 percent responding that they are receptive to advertising on those sites.”
The summary provides more details on which advertised products (apparel vs. cars) are most likely to be noticed and trusted by persons of a given age and media.
In a separate but related report, PricewaterhouseCoopers charts annual Internet advertising figures going back to 1997. Find a summary here.
Thanks to Tom Tomorrow for today’s cartoon.
Newspaper cuts exaggerated? Poynter Institute business analyst Rick Edmonds says a census of newsroom employment by the American Society of Newspaper Editors (here) created to track minority hiring shows that:
“total employment in the newsrooms of American dailies of 57,000 full-time professionals. Surprisingly, that is actually more than the 56,400 reported as of the end of 2000. When a big advertising recession struck in 2001, the first round of cuts followed.”
Edmonds notes that there have been newsroom layoffs:
“By my informal count, with the year less than half over, there have already been roughly 20 announced buyout/layoff programs, concentrated at the (major) metros and resulting in the loss of roughly 650 jobs.”
But the upshot of his report seems to be that the death of newspaper journalism is greatly exaggerated because the great mass of papers at the local level have not cut staffs.
Edmonds said the same appears to be true for broadcast media, that is the local job market is not evaporating:
“There is no equivalent of the ASNE newsroom census for broadcast. However Bob Papper of Ball State University surveys news directors annually. He has found the staffing at local broadcast news operations steady or slightly up for the last several years after cuts earlier in the decade.”
These reports ignore the fact that beginners routinely start at small papers, where salaries are in the $20,000s and $30,000s, and work their way up to the major metros where they can double their pay. But those upscale jobs are vanishing — leaving the local journalist like the salmon who has lost its spawning ground.
Speaking of the recently departed: In an impassioned swan song on the Huffington Post, Los Angeles Times business reporter Nancy Cleeland says it’s not that she has left journalism; it’s more like journalism has left its root values — to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.
“Why? The senior editors are not bad people. Like most journalists, they are in the business for the noblest of reasons. But in a region of increasing polarization, where six figure incomes put them in the top tier of the economy, they may not see the inequities in their own backyard.”
Cleeland was one of the reporters who wrote a series (see The WalMart effect) during the Southern California grocery store strike that examined how competition from non-unionized, low cost outlets was complicating the issue. It was an utterly fucking brilliant series. I work at the SF Chronicle (in the midst of its own cuts; so far not me) and I remember how we gathered around the table where we spread out the competing papers and talked about what a rich and nuanced work it was.
I don’t know Cleeland but her bio says she’s a year older than me. It’s a tough time to start over. Good luck, girlfriend.