What consumers want from online news
McKinsey research shows that different groups of consumers have different attitudes about news products. Media companies should segment their digital offerings.
Andre Dua and Liz Hilton Segel
Web exclusive, August 2007
The progress of digital technology has encouraged the media to make significant investments in upgrading online news properties in hopes of “owning” customers, but a McKinsey study suggests that consumers are thwarting these efforts. The research—an online survey of 2,100 consumers in the United States—found that the respondents divide their time among as many as 16 news brands a week. “Brand promiscuity,” it appears, is the norm. Such findings have implications for media companies as they refine their products and strategies.
Their survey, informed by data gathered during in-depth interviews with consumers, posed questions about several aspects of the respondents’ news consumption, including its frequency and duration, as well as their attitudes toward news. To assess those attitudes, participants were asked how strongly they agreed or disagreed with statements such as “I rely on a few specific news sources that I trust for facts” or “I read blogs for news because they have an independent point of view.” Respondents also answered questions about their news habits across five media platforms (radio, television, newspapers, magazines, and the Internet) and about their preferences among 100 news brands.
They found that consumers rely on a large number of brands: 12 to 16 a week across all five platforms. Moreover, respondents reported using many of those brands daily or, in the case of Internet news sites, many times a day. The reasons given for visiting a number of sources included “every news event has at least two sides,” to “get all the facts,” to “form my own opinion,” or to find specific types of content, such as local news.
Still, respondents expressed clear preferences for certain platforms. Television and the Internet, for instance, were much more likely to be described as useful (by 45 and 26 percent of the respondents, respectively) than were newspapers, radio, and magazines (18, 10, and 1 percent, respectively). When asked to explain which sources of news were most useful, respondents expressed a preference for those offering convenience, comprehensiveness, or timeliness rather than quality. Specifically, they were far more likely to consider a news source useful because it “is the easiest way to get news,” “covers the most topics,” or makes it “easy to get news whenever I want it” than because it has the most accurate content or the deepest analysis
The most significant differences we observed among the respondents concerned their
motivations for consuming news. They identified three segments—“citizen readers,”
“news lovers,” and “digital cynics,” representing 18, 15, and 18 percent of
respondents, respectively—that make up 75 percent of the audience for online
news sites and are thus particularly attractive to media companies seeking to
expand their digital offerings. Four other segments—“traditionalists,” “a few
main sources,” “headliners,” and the “uninvolved”—had much less interest in
online platforms.
Citizen readers say that they have a responsibility to stay informed about current
events and follow news stories to feel connected to other people in their
regions, their countries, and the world. Fully 63 percent of them consider
newspaper reading an important ritual passed down by their families. By
contrast, digital cynics enjoy consuming news much less than other respondents
do and feel little responsibility to stay informed. What’s more, nearly half of
those in this group say that all news sources are biased, and many report that
they trust few news sources to provide accurate information. In addition,
digital cynics were the most likely respondents to avail themselves of
alternative news sources, such as blogs or comedy news programs (The Daily Show, for instance).
Digital cynics, like citizen readers, are heavy consumers of TV and the Internet but
have more or less abandoned newspapers.
Their findings have significant implications for media companies. A multisource
aggregator, for example, could step in to meet the consumers’ desire for volume
and variety in online news. A national news organization could present its
version of major events but also select and provide links to related stories,
blogs, and videos produced by others. Web sites featuring national news could
partner with the sites of local newspapers or TV stations to serve up local
content beyond the real-estate ads and weather-related search functions
typically available. The outlines of such an approach are evident in recent
deals between Yahoo! and local newspaper groups and between CNN and Internet
Broadcasting Systems. Still, much closer cooperation among media companies will
likely be needed.
Furthermore, media companies have a significant opportunity to develop niche news products for underserved consumer segments, particularly the digital cynics. Citizen readers, the target of most traditional print publications, express high satisfaction with existing news products. But digital cynics, who spend 30 to 40 percent less time each day on news than citizen readers and news lovers do, feel dissatisfied with most offline products. Winning the trust of this group will be challenging, as it requires a fundamentally different editorial sensibility. Given the size of the segment—24 million adults—and the number of advertisers coveting it, the prize could be substantial for those that succeed.
About the Authors
Andre Dua is a principal in
McKinsey’s New York office, where Liz Hilton Segel is a director.
No comments:
Post a Comment