Your new post is loading...
What’s the difference between The New York Times, and, say, DNAInfo New York? Maybe about $20.
The Times, along with outlets like ESPN, Hearst, Discovery Communications, Gannett, Slate, and ABC, all consider themselves “premium” media. That means they can charge advertisers “premium prices,” as compared to the great mass of news and entertainment sites out there, like a DNAInfo, a site covering local news across New York City’s five boroughs. That $20 or so difference is how much more the Times can charge for access to each thousand of its readers (a cost-per-thousand rate, or CPM) as compared to lesser-branded sites.
It’s just an approximation but it holds true across major media:
Big branded media companies believe that the “context” they provide and their “quality audiences” justifies higher-than-average rates.
Their pitch to advertisers goes like this:
We’ve got tons of readers, and they’re smart and affluent. They really trust us. And when they’re on our site, they’re paying attention.
In a word, their argument is a single word: effectiveness.
With the publication of a new comScore study this morning, they just got more justification for their justifying. Entitled “The Halo Effect: How Advertising on Premium Publishers Drives Higher Ad Effectiveness,” comScore puts a few numbers on that effectiveness.Its key word: lift....
"No matter how you are targeting and how effective you are at reaching audience, you need to pay attention to where your ads are running." New study offers valuable insights.