PR, Marketing and the Business of CAD

The blurring line between advertising and editorial

There. Someone finally went and said it - in a job posting no less. Frontier Airlines' in-flight magazine publishers, Mphasis Integrated, is looking for a Managing Editor via Craigslist. Even with my current career track I gave it a read through to see what was what. It is not a bad job, except for what will probably become, for me, a classic line:

"You should be very much ‘new school’ and supportive of the blurring lines between editorial and advertising (we are not a news magazine, we are an entertainment magazine)"

(Oh and for the purposes of posterity I have copied the entire job ad at the end of this post.)

New school? Blurring lines between editorial and advertising? Is this for real? Okay, let's pick it apart:

This is a manifestation of many things that editors and i have discussed over the years: whether to write the whole truth and nothing but the truth (something for which Steve Wolfe is well-known) or whether to hold back in the fear of distressing a valuable advertiser. And this is an issue that often comes up on this blog.

The established separation of 'church' (editorial) and 'state' (advertising) is a part of journalistic ethics, and although editors do sometimes get forced to be a little nicer than they would like in editorial, they still strive towards the ideal of complete editorial independence. Why? Because any editor worth his salt knows that readers are a) brighter than he/she and b) can spot 'advertorial' work from a mile away.

Yet it looks like Frontier's Inflight magazine is willfully ignoring those little details and asking the Managing Editor to make sure that advertorial looks like editorial, and corresponds to the amount of money changing hands. In journalistic terms this is considered selling one's soul to the devil.

More: One of my colleagues immediately found the term 'new school' to be ageist. Okay, he has about a decade more than I and is more sensitive to things regarding age, but it is an interesting slant - his take is that the assumption being made by the publisher is that 'old editors' are too ethical to be able to handle the 'blurring lines' and therefore they only want young editors (i.e. New School). By that same assumption, he says they will favor a young editor who is less experienced, has had less time to think about the issues regarding editorial integrity and has less hang ups about publishing assumption in the guise of fact.

Now, with this all in mind, and do note that as a Denver-ite Frontier Airlines is My Airline of Choice, it is now clear to me why I never get past the first page of this airline's in-flight magazine, and why I am never tempted to take it home with me. That's because it is crap. It is a beautifully designed piece of crap, but nonetheless, crap. Taking away editorial integrity in the name of money is a short-term solution, whether it is a print or online publication. People see through it instantly. And quit reading and believing. Can they get away with it since it is a corporate/in flight publication? Sure, to a degree, just the way many in-flight magazines have done over the years. But I have always seen Frontier Airlines as being a little different from the rest (great branding on their part), and so I think they should simply quit publishing it at all, and focus instead on some great video on their 'wildblueyonder' video channel on their planes. Now that would make sense to me!

****

The Job posting itself:
2008-05-08

Mphasis Integrated, publisher of Frontier Airlines’ in-flight magazine, W!ld Blue Yonder is looking for a managing editor to work in its Denver, Colorado office. Currently W!LD Blue Yonder is a bimonthly magazine reaching over 1,000,000 readers per month, and our plan is to go monthly effective January 2009.

Working with a small, committed staff, the managing editor is responsible for the editorial content, planning, design, and production of the magazine, and for collaborating on the editorial development of the website (GOwildblueyonder.com). The managing editor’s responsibilities will include some writing (esp. advertorial and branded entertainment pieces); building and overseeing a network of exciting, connected writers; managing fact-checking / proofing processes; and working closely with the entire publishing team (sales, promotions, design, client) to deliver a top-notch, national caliber magazine.

You should be very much ‘new school’ and supportive of the blurring lines between editorial and advertising (we are not a news magazine, we are an entertainment magazine). We are committed to delivering content that both connects with our affluent, well-read audience AND delivers impactful support for the categories of our branded entertainment sponsors, predominantly in travel, but also in living (real estate, shelter, health); business and technology; and entertainment (music, reading, puzzles, fun).

Requirements:
Five years of progressive editorial and management experience; demonstrated writing and editing skills (esp. AP style); a B.A. or the equivalent; an established network of writer resources; experience in the in-flight or travel category preferred.

Print articles Develop 'Gestation times'

Yesterday we got offered an editorial opportunity for an 'industry trend' article. However, the scheduled date was for the Nov/Dec 2008 issue of the magazine. Yes. 8 months away from now.

The reaction of my team was 'maybe we should go for it' (we are). My reaction was more related to gut instinct: The CAD industry, while dry, is still fast-moving on the technology side. A perceived trend now will either be a wisp of an idea in 8 months time, or an established industry fact. ergo: not a trend.

Okay, so we are used to a couple of print publications that stretch their editorial schedule out by 5-6 months. Most print publications are 1-2 months out. But 8 months??? That is beyond ridiculous especially when compared to the usual 1-2 weeks' lead time for online publications.

I am commenting on this because it pushed me over the edge. Inbetween the 8 months gestation time for this article, we can virtually guarantee at least 8 other placements of the same (similar) article in more progressive publications.

And then publishers complain (every now and then) that print subscription is dropping and they are having to tackle online challenges. Well duh. My patience is low this week and things like this simply drive me to zen-like forms of relaxation for a break. With that in mind, I'm off to meditate for a few minutes...

rach

Bloggers - press here

Roopinder Tara has opened up the theme related to some of our recent posts regarding CAD bloggers over at his CADinsider blog, and it is turning into an interesting discussion.

He is really trying to research an article on what role the bloggers have, and will have in the future, compared to today's 'established CAD press'. So far, he has a lot of responses from bloggers themselves, but did note privately that none of the 'established press' had responded. But I know why - the established press just spent the week in the Intercontinental Mark Hopkins in San Francisco, compliments of Autodesk, where the internet connection in the rooms varied between non-existent and weak;- and for MAC users, simply unavailable.

I predict that the field for 'CAD bloggers' such as Matt Lombard and the others will really open up when a company such as Autodesk invites them to their events and vice versa.

but do go have a read. it's interesting

rach

Bloggers Grow Up a little at SolidWorks World

Last year's SolidWorks World welcomed the company's "independent Bloggers" for the first time. Somewhat shy and a little intimidated by the regular CAD press, they tended to stay quiet, maybe aloof, but perhaps more in fear of the 'Press' label they had been given.

SolidWorks World 2008 welcomed the same group back. They again were on the quieter side during press briefings, but grew noisier and more confident throughout the week's events. While at the event, I had great fun sitting down and chatting with them, and it was interesting to see the continued inferiority complexes they still had when questioned about 'being press'.

Now there are still some distinctions in the press world, although the lines blur a little more with each coming event. The 'independent bloggers' I refer to here are not journalists by trade, but in this case are professional SolidWorks users, voicing their opinions on the side, unfunded and for the love of the software.

On top of that there are many "established press" that still use 'traditional press methods' for their editorial - print and online magazines.

And then there are the 'industry bloggers' (I'll give them that name) that were 'established press' but use blog media as a tool for editorializing.

Now you'll find that many of the now established CAD press started off life as users, just as our "Independent Bloggers" have. Many names you see in traditional CAD press publications are still users. So there is not much difference ultimately. However, many of the SolidWorks bloggers at SolidWorks World definitely have an inferiority complex as to their skills and acknowledgement as press.

Matt Lombard, a SolidWorks "independent blogger", wrote today in a posting about the same subject:
" We are uncouth, don’t spell check before posting, do not know how to use a semi-colon, but people are reading our stuff anyway. In fact, our stuff is creating much more of a stir than any of the conventional press stuff because of our biggest foibles: we have opinions and actually use the technology we write about."

Matt also goes on to point out the differences to other press that were at the event, which includes a number of CAD and financial analysts.
"Questions from these folks had a tendency more to the declarative than iterrogatory. They were always incomprehensible multi-part questions that I couldn’t even imagine who would find the answer even vaguely useful."

Don't worry Matt, the rest of us often feel the same way.

I predict that many of these bloggers that have been given their start through the encouragement of SolidWorks will find their way into being mainstream press at some point - if they decide to go that way. Either way, the industry is better off for having more CAD users and experts, with their perspective, than in not having them. And maybe comments like Matt's help the 'established press' understand where they might do better too.

Rach

Tenlinks Acquires CADTalent web site

Our friend Roopinder Tara at Tenlinks.com last week announced that Tenlinks had acquired CADtalent.

This web site, founded by Tony Lillios and his OPENtalent team, provides thousands of CAD-related jobs across the industry, in clearly categorized vertical markets.

We feel this is a good combination for Tenlinks, and will provide the publishing group with a lot more page views (on which to sell ads) and more revenue from job postings. Go check it out

rach

Cadalyst Kills its Daily Newsletter

Last week, Cadalyst announced that it was dropping its 'Cadalyst Daily' email newsletter in favor of its other, weekly email issues including Cadalyst Tips and Tricks Weekly, CAD Managers' Newsletter and the other offerings.

This seemed to be a bit of a shame, but after chatting with Amy Stankeweiz, editor of the publication, she explained that the team wanted to publish more detailed, in-depth articles and analysis, and that the daily newsletter was a format that did not enable that aim.

From personal experience, i know that producing a daily newsletter about anything is highly challenging and requires a lot of team work, and scheduled 'burn out' about once every 3 months. In that light, I always hold Ralph Grabowski in high esteem for the continued quality work that he delivers usually daily or more, on his WorldCADAccess blog.

Amy indicated that no one at Cadalyst has lost their jobs as a result of this change, and that the move had lightened the workload of many of the publication's team, which was apparently what some of them needed.

So it's not really bad news at all.

rach

NYT removes subscription fees for online access

In an interesting move, New York Times today removed its online access fee to all of its editorial.

The newspaper had been charging $49.95 a year for access for the last two years. It has now dropped that in favor of open access, and has included its archives from 1855 to 1922, and 1987 to present. there is a fee for some material from 1923 to 1986.

What has caused this? It seems that the publication is finally starting to monetize its site, which apparently gets 13 million unique readers a month.

"What changed, The Times said, was that many more readers started coming to the site from search engines and links on other sites instead of coming directly to NYTimes.com. These indirect readers, unable to get access to articles behind the pay wall and less likely to pay subscription fees than the more loyal direct users, were seen as opportunities for more page views and increased advertising revenue."

This affects us how? Access to more historical data, and current articles. Which is always good from such a prestigious source. But what about subscription-only industry publications that rely on subsciber money...my very own CADCAMnet (of which I am a part owner) relates to this.

CADCAMNet has maintained an absolute ad-free environment. One which we continue to believe has value for readers. NYT has not. I believe that even with a paid subscription, advertising banners were still served...and even more so now. But is there a value to adverising-free space? And if so, what value can be put on it?

I am curious what people think

rach

Autodesk lawsuit by eBay Seller takes website hits to new levels

So last week, on September 10, 2007, Randall Newton reports on an eBay seller that has had the temerity to sue Autodesk citing illegal use of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

For full disclosure, please note that I am a co-owner of AECnews with Randall Newton.

But the results of the story are amazing: we posted the story to Digg, Technorati and Stumbleupon. In addition, an old friend of Randall's posted it to Boing, Boing.

The end result was that someone then Shash/dotted it. As a result, we saw web page hits at AECnews rise by an incredible 500%, and the story currently has 68 comments on it.

While Autodesk are in the spotlight for being the apparent bad guys in this, this is a cornerstone lawsuit to the whole idea of shrink-wrapped software and the licenses contatined within. Autodesk may be the target of this lawsuit, but they are not the only validators of this practise. Is Autodesk being made a victim in this case? Possibly.

Tim Vernor, who launched the lawsuit, states as follows on his press release. "US courts have not held a "shrink wrap " contract to be valid. Furthermore the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is only intended to enforce copyright violations, not breach of contract."

The comments at AECnews are wide, varied and, some of them propose illegal actions. That being said, this potentially has an effective impact on the software industry as a whole. I see the two points as significant:

1) Autodesk has followed the conventions of other software companies to prevent its software from being sold. Whether it is legal or illegal (or the contract unenforceable) remains to be seen.

2) By having a story that uses major 'impact words', those we think being "eBAY", "Lawsuit", "autodesk" and DMCA", Randall has seen a huge increase in blog activity, and a massive (for our industry) 68 responses to the story.

From an industry point of view, this could be incredible guidance on the legality of Shrink-wrapped licenses and their legal standing. From a marketing point of view, if you want attention, having keywords like this is incredibly effective.

Tim Vernor, the plaintiff in the case, is expecting a settlement at some point. His advocates on AECnews.com are suggesting a fund for him to follow through on the lawsuit. Bluntly, I would prefer to see clarity on the case itself rather than a settlement.

There is an exclusive interview on video with Vernor at www.cadcamnet.tv in this week's CCNtv report. Go through to about the 8 minute point to see what he has to say.

r

Get Your Videos Ready

You can hardly miss the huge jump that video on the web has taken in recent months:- with YouTube and many pretenders rapidly coming online, the availability of small video cameras and web cams, now everyone can submit their work, no matter how good or bad it is.

There is also increased usage of the web, according to a recent survey by IBM, and published by the Wall Street Journal on August 22, 2007. According to the article, 'the study found that 19% of respondents spend six or more hours a day online versus only 9% who spend that much time watching television. Additionally, 60% use the Internet one to four hours a day versus 66% who watch that much TV.'

(They do also note that the survey was conducted across the internet, so the sample will inevitably have some bias.)

The article continues, "The survey offers one insight: People want to connect to others with similar interests, consume the media they want, when they want it, and they want to create experiences for others, be it through video or blogs."

The point, though, "IBM says that companies can’t rely on established marketing practices and that they have to “make advertising more compelling, or risk being ignored.” We know that print advertising is shaky, and standard web banner advertising is not getting the desired results any more. TV commercials are getting Tivo'd out. But then how to get the message out?

Vendors and their marketers are going to have to find more and more creative ways to advertise to an increasingly sophisticated web audience in a way that is acceptable. Inevitably that will include video on vendor web sites, as well as using the growing SEO tools to keep momentum going. Videos have a much wider acceptance and availability than they ever did, and people are getting used to 'watching TV' on their laptops. It doesn't take a genius to predict that in the very foreseeable future, your TV will actually be powered through your central home server, which will dish up movies, TV programs, web sites, and so on.

The ones who get it right will be the ones who nail the best combination of ways to promote their product without it being blocked as an ad. How do you do that? Through being entertaining, and educational....Put your thinking caps on people!

What's after email?

Randall found an interesting post this week on Forbes.com regarding the rise of video everywhere, with the release of smaller, faster, better video cameras - an inevitable development that means we have to brace for yet more 'changing room video scandals' as video technology gets better.

but within that article, randall pinpointed an interesting sidebar - 'Email. That's so 90's.'

He highlights a comment by Jonathan Schwartz, the CEO of Sun Microsystems, where he explains how an employee described email as 'old-fashioned'. I have to agree. Email as it currently operates is out-of-date, spam-ridden, inefficient...a general pain of the arse. I find out weekly that a whole bunch of my emails didn't get received - ones which are directly business-related. And the only way i find out is because someone calls to bitch that I didn't send that proposal, that press release etc. I didn't get a bounce message, just upset business partners. Really, it has to be better than this!

But if email is old-fashioned, it begs the question of what could possibly replace it. I envision a future that uses 'email-type' technology but without the spam. Where messages are 'guaranteed' to get through. Where people that can send messages are in an 'approved network'. I don't know what this technology is, but I suspect that professional networks like LinkedIn might be the next step. Maybe you could create a 'personal' space where no one can email without being approved through your personal Linked network. Would i pay money for that? Probably. Depends on how much it costs I guess!

Rach