Mags Post Third Consecutive Year Of Ad Page Decreases

Data released Tuesday by the Publishers Information Bureau (PIB) confirmed what had seemed inevitable since October: for all the "cautious optimism" expressed by publishing mavens during the last 12 months, the magazine business experienced its third consecutive year of ad page decreases in 2003. And while publishers well into a new year of haggling with advertisers may not be inclined to look back at last year's sluggishness--a 1.0 percent decline in ad pages, with a 6.3 percent uptick in revenues--agency execs said that there are lessons to be learned from the industry's continued struggles.

Zenith Media Senior Vice President, Director of Print Media Steve Greenberger knocked the magazine business for being "sort of lethargic" about blowing its own horn. "They've been whining a lot, when what they need to do is get out there and aggressively show what it is about magazines that consumers like," he says. While Greenberger acknowledged "valuable steps" taken by Magazine Publishers of America in this regard, he doesn't think they were enough: "It hasn't made a large enough impact on advertisers and ad agencies. There's no sense that magazine advertising is a must-have."

advertisement

advertisement

Similarly, several execs questioned whether publishers were hesitant--or too stubborn--to react to the unfavorable market conditions staring them in the face. "[Publishers] were just trying to keep what they had, just trying to hold on," says MediaVest Vice President, Associate Media Director Jim Donohue. On the other hand, while Universal McCann Senior Vice President, Director of Strategic Print Services Brett Stewart noted that "lots of magazines expected revenue and didn't work hard for it," he hailed the few that realized the economy was in tough shape and set prices aggressively. "And we all know that the people in Times Square don't ever fiddle with their prices," he adds sarcastically.

Finally, Stewart expressed concern that magazines did little to trumpet their value vis-à-vis other mediums, especially broadcast. "I'd like to see more selling against other mediums," he explains. "One thing that frustrates me a great deal is how the industry sells magazine against magazine, even in the same [publishing] stable. You have magazine A and magazine B from the same publishing house slamming each other, which makes no sense at all."

All this said, the three execs were quick to note that the magazine business did more than a few things right in 2003. Greenberger lauded individual titles for rebuilding relationships with retail and publishers for reinvesting themselves in marketing. Donohue praised the "more and more interesting" opportunities that exist for customization and positioning, while Stewart said that publishers as a whole were taking more time to understand their clients' business. "It wasn't just selling pages," he emphasizes. "It was the total opposite of the boom years, where all they had to do was answer the phone and take orders."

As for 2004, the agency pundits expect modest growth at best and a repeat of 2003's running in place at worst. "The issues moving forward--the economy, ROI--are no different than the issues that previously existed, really," Stewart shrugs. Greenberger, however, is hopeful that magazines will shift to the same vernacular used by broadcast when it comes to measurement. "Let's say that we start looking at magazines in terms of ratings points," he explains. "If they can be measured and planned alongside broadcast, they might have a better chance of picking up some of those dollars--as opposed to just dollars earmarked for magazines. That could turn out to be something of a hot button this year."

Next story loading loading..