The New Consumption Dynamic
Supply & Demand
With the recent news about the New York Times and Boston Globe running into financial peril, this seems an apt time to talk about why print publications, both long and short lead, are having so much trouble maintaining their historic revenue streams. The quick and obvious answer is that these publications are being hit from two sides by the new digital environment: since consumers can now get their news for free online, they are purchasing less print publications and, as a result, advertisers are spending less money to reach their diminishing audiences. At first glance, this follows the natural law of economics:
1. Consumers want content.
2. They used to pay for it AND read advertisements while consuming it.
3. They no longer have to.
4. As a result, demand for print publications goes down…and will continue to go down long after the economy rebounds.
But when we look closely at what’s happening, I contend that this has less to do with price and more to do with experience.
Consumer Value & the Experience Product
I just bought the new PunchOut game for the Nintento Wii. Between work and classes, I have no idea when I’ll ever play it, but I was thrilled to discover it was available for the new Nintendo system and I couldn’t wait to tap back into my inner 10 year-old. Bravo to Nintendo for advertising to let me know about it!!
Except they didn’t. Or at least, that’s not how I found out about the game’s availability. A friend of mine posted a YouTube video in Facebook with a comment. Some trash-talking ensued and, before lunch-hour rolled around (Thank you Amazon!!), I owned the game.
The New York Times‘ financial troubles and my decision to buy Punch Out are very closely related: its all about experience.
When you buy a newspaper, you’re all alone. You read through the articles, you glance at the advertisements, you fold it up into neat little origami shapes of readable size and, occasionally (usually on the weekends), you interrupt your partner, co-worker or friend to say, "Hey, check this out". This experience is isolated, and, unless you happen to speak with someone who has read the same article, does little for our ability to share our views, thoughts and impressions from the content.
Now, when The Times posts an article online, I can:
1. Share the article with my followers on Twitter.
2. Post it with comments in my Facebook news feed.
3. Email it to my grandma, boss or brother.
4. Comment below the article and have my thoughts be seen by all New York Times readers.
In my opinion, this ability to share and interact is a new consumption dynamic. It’s like going to a concert instead of buying the CD; the experience has almost infinite touch-points and we feel like we’re a part of it. We all want to share what we know; its basic human nature for us to connect with one another. How can a print version of the same story possibly compete with my ability to interact with the online story? It’s not that the content has changed, my experience has changed and I don’t want to go back to the way things were. I want to share things, hear my friends opinions and be heard myself. While not all of our thoughts and opinions belong in social networks, the power of these new platforms to influence consumers is unmatched in any other form of media. We’re all at the concert, and the record store seems so much less appealing than it used to.
The lesson for brands in this new dynamic is to give people things that are worth discussing. If your product is conversation-worthy, you need a platform that goes beyond a banner ad; you have to build a platform for people to share their experiences with your product and you have to give them tools to do so. If your product isn’t conversation- worthy, you need to get behind some content that is, and make sure you can stay in the conversation. People are willing to pay for products, services and experiences that they value. Advertising in the new consumption dynamic means offering an experience that is worth having.