Interesting piece in Washington City Paper about the results of the Washington Post's recent focus group on "Generation C" non-subscribers.
Highlights:
So some people don't care to hear that 5:30 a.m. plop at their front door. Many focus groupers, in fact, said they wouldn't even accept the hard-copy version for free. The explanation offered, in many cases, was that they didn't want a bunch of newsprint "piling up" around the house. "People are saying, ?Why is it so big?'" says Gabriel Escobar, the Post's city editor. "It was as if they wanted it almost the size of the short versions of Shakespeare that you can buy at Wal-Mart."
And this was before the Post ran nearly 50 articles on the opening of the National Museum of the American Indian!
Via focus groups, Posties are learning that nonsubscribers haven't lost touch with their journalism. On the contrary, these folks are ferocious, regular readers. It's just that they don't want to touch the paper or pay for it. And the company offers a perfect platform for the free rider?its Web site. "The good news is they're extremely familiar with the paper. The bad news is that they don't want to buy it. News is like air, and we've taught them that," says a Post source who has watched focus groups.
Not a lot of surprises there, but nice to hear it.
The following findings confounded me, though. I'm tempted to toss them off as Washington-specific, or weird focus group stuff (which you always get). But, we'll need to give these some thought, as they are antithetical to our plan.
- The Post should run fewer pictures.
- The Post should provide more coverage of the constitution of the European Union.
- The Post should expand all of its foreign news briefs into full-fledged stories.
- The Post is good for its coupons.
And the take-aways?:
...Yet Downie, at least for now, refuses to mess with the Post's free-Web-site policy, the very heart of its circulation difficulties. In fact, Downie feels the same way about charging for WashingtonPost.com as he famously feels about elections. "That's a very complicated issue, and I don't have a position on it. I am focused on the newspaper," says Downie, who doesn't vote for fear of biasing the paper's coverage.
Two things out of that graf to think about: First, our bet is that if people want in-depth national/international stuff, they can go read it online at the Post, NYT, CNN, etc. When/if these folks start charging, we may have to think about that-- maybe a licensing deal? Secondly, he doesn't vote for fear of biasing coverage?! Unbelievable.
Comments