Trinity Mirror’s regional daily titles saw year-on-year online growth across three different platforms, according to the latest ABC figures.
All the newspapers for which the company submits figures showed year-on-year increases for their websites, as well as Facebook and Twitter channels.
Wales Online recorded the largest year-on-year increase on its website during February, with 96,870 daily average unique browsers representing a 52.8pc rise.
On Facebook, the same title recorded the biggest increase in ‘likes’ from February 2015 to February 2016 – with a total of 221,127 readers now receiving updates from its channel on the social media website.
The online arm of the South Wales Echo and Western Mail was also responsible for the biggest increase in Twitter ‘followers’ over the same period.
The following table shows the web figures for February in full:
| Website | Daily Average UB | M-o-M change (pc) | Y-o-Y change (pc) |
| Birmingham Mail | 228,724 | -0.8 | 28.2 |
| Coventry Telegraph | 65,593 | -5.7 | 29.3 |
| Daily Post (Wales) | 96,870 | 14.2 | 52.8 |
| Huddersfield Daily Examiner | 61,805 | 3.4 | 38.2 |
| Liverpool Echo | 498,062 | -10.4 | 22.7 |
| Manchester Evening News | 645,015 | -7 | 40.8 |
| Chronicle Live | 233,563 | -8.5 | 28.2 |
| Teesside Evening Gazette | 115,466 | 2.2 | 35.1 |
| Wales Online | 343,425 | 5 | 55.1 |
The following table shows the Facebook figures for February in full:
| Website | Facebook ‘likes’ | M-o-M change (pc) | Y-oY change (pc) |
| Birmingham Mail | 202,503 | 2.7 | 129.3 |
| Coventry Telegraph | 27,644 | 3.8 | 67.5 |
| Daily Post (Wales) | 97,776 | 4.0 | 137.5 |
| Huddersfield Daily Examiner | 64,668 | 3.0 | 94.6 |
| Liverpool Echo | 1,068,226 | 0.9 | 28.5 |
| Manchester Evening News | 917,668 | 3.3 | 81.6 |
| Chronicle Live | 166,420 | 3.6 | 106.9 |
| Teesside Evening Gazette | 89,322 | 2.1 | 60.5 |
| Wales Online | 221,127 | 6.8 | 144.7 |
The following table shows the Twitter figures for February in full:
| Website | Twitter ‘followers’ | M-o-M change (pc) | Y-o-y change (pc) |
| Birmingham Mail | 129,782 | 3.5 | 63 |
| Coventry Telegraph | 43,188 | 3.4 | 54.7 |
| Daily Post (Wales) | 54,696 | 2.7 | 42.4 |
| Huddersfield Daily Examiner | 38,459 | 2.3 | 39.4 |
| Liverpool Echo | 263,502 | 1.9 | 36.3 |
| Manchester Evening News | 301,364 | 2.5 | 47.1 |
| Chronicle Live | 91,866 | 4.2 | 56.5 |
| Teesside Evening Gazette | 43,871 | 3 | 45.4 |
| Wales Online | 102,765 | 4.7 | 76.8 |
Sign up for our free daily email bulletin
Follow HTFP on Twitter
Got a story? Email the Editor at
Super, smashing, brilliant, lovely. That piddling figure of online income revealed in the recent annual report will be shooting up then towards the sad old print totals, just a gnat’s ahead on x10 the amount. Hurrah for everyone with ‘Digital’ in their job title. Hurrah for the new era of secure jobs, bonuses and rises.
Report this comment
I’m assuming this is being ‘spun’ as good news. If so could someone much younger than me please explain how?
Number of Facebook likes up. Will that pay for an extra reporter or prevent a sub being made redundant?
Increase in in Twitter followers. Marvellous. No need to close that town centre office now.
More traffic on your website? Fantastic. Don’t suppose any of those browsers is paying for the experience or still buying the paper?
The lunatics really have taken over the asylum.
Report this comment
Are you guys being ironic, or something?
Report this comment
I almost don’t want to comment on the web figure stories any more, because I, like many others, are just repeating ourselves – ‘yes, but how much money does it make’ etc etc.
But, really, without sounding like a persistent moaner, who gives monkey’s toenails what the Facebook numbers are? What, exactly does it prove? And how many journalists’ salaries is it paying for?
Some straight answers would be appreciated, and may even shut the moaners like me up.
Report this comment
Ha, ha counting Facebook followers and Twitter fans, brilliant!
It seems Trinity Mirror are about four years behind digital comms. on this one.
I just had a quick glance at Coventry Telegraph’s FB page and hardly anyone interacts with the posts – some don’t even bother to ‘like’ posts.
Vanity stats, nothing more.
Report this comment
If you don’t move with the times in journalism you get left behind. So you can either embrace new ways of getting stories out there (which readers are clamouring for) or you can sit in the corner of your newsroom and moan about how things were better in the days of hot metal and typewriters.
It’s never too late to learn new skills, you know. Food for thought…
Report this comment
Oh god is there anything more depressing than miserable, cynical old hacks being snide about Facebook. Here’s an obvious major benefit – clients and advertisers today really care about social reach. So an impressive FB reach is essential to the financial future of any media company. Then, if you want to be enthusiastic about it, you could celebrate getting your journalism in front of younger and more diverse readers. The one’s who still buy papers are literally dying, so that’s fairly essential too.
Report this comment
I feel the same as slate grey in as much as the same questions remain unanswered when meaningless bundled up figures are published,it’s all a bit boring reading the spin and puff about the number of social media followers in the vain attempt to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes about just how bad the money making ( in theory) newspaper sales figures are.
Until someone is able to monetise followers and ‘likes’ those that buy media or who control advertising budgets will be as wholly unimpressed as the rest of us.
Report this comment
Disgruntled and Dan: the technology is beautiful and no one here is moaning about that. What we are moaning about is the way publishers such as TM trumpet these figures and never, ever state in plain terms what the concomitant revenue rise is, as Slate Grey tells us. The reason for this is that there isn’t one so all these numbers are la-la land. My own view is that news delivered via large, top-heavy (i.e. stuffed with useless “suits”) corporations is not amenable to revenue generation (just look at The Guardian’s dire results and forecasts), though news from small, lean local outfits that do use digital technology might well be, though there have been some closures of these lately. I’d also like Dan to explain, given his (probably correct) views on newspapers why TM recently launched a new national. Over to you, sir…
Report this comment
All very well Dan and very nice if its just about getting words and stories seen and ‘raising the profile’ but like it or not we work for businesses,the regional press is an industry and every business in it is there to make money, to turn profit, to pay wages,overheads,cover costs so all that matters when producing the end product is how much profit is in it.
Social media is a superb add on enhancement to the main core products and advertisers particularity like the vanity aspect of having their tweets RTd or liked so it has its place. However without revenues to enable the business to continue none of us will have jobs and with the sources of revenue such as cover charges and ad revenues falling rapidly week after week the only figures that matter are actual revenue ones,no amount of likes and followers will pay the bills when the main revenue streams dry up
Report this comment
Is the elephant in the room how much power facebook has?
It would be interesting to see the traffic source splits, imagine if it was 70% or the like, facebook could tank things at will.
Or, a policy change at facebook could see the same result in a less deliberate manner.
Report this comment
Dan. I know what advertisers are. I know what readers are. I spent 35 years in journalism. I worked for a national, edited a local, worked on a magazine and did a stint with the BBC. Never once did I use the term client. I don’t even know what a client is. Where did I go wrong young un?
Report this comment
No doubt across the board circulation decreases too!
Report this comment
It’s late and Minim should be quaffing sherry in readiness for bed – but Employee X has summarised the situation perfectly. I’m sure Dan is a fine young Englishman – possibly a provincial football or rugby player from a county ending in “Shire” – making his way in London and parroting the company line for appearance’s sake. But we’re all in businesses, drones or kings and queens, and any number of likes, hits, trends and “social reach” (that meant the number of handy people S London villains knew in my old analogue world) don’t add up to a hill of beans in this capitalist world. We all want the same thing, young man – you, me and Harry Blackwood – but your way ain’t delivering it, so stop pretending it does, just as Minim & Harry concede the old ways have now failed. What we all need, regardless of our generation, is a meeting to brainstorm a profitable future – you for your generation and your future families, me and Harry for a decent send-off. Let’s do it.
Report this comment
You’re confusing me there Dan and I’m involved in social media and web design
‘clients and advertisers’ they’re the same thing aren’t they?
Aren’t they?
If not what’s the difference?
And “…an impressive FB reach is essential to the financial future of any media company..”
You’ve lost me there again,What do you mean by ‘impressive FB reach’?
Do you mean number of followers?
And can you also explain how whatever that means is ‘..essential to the financial future…”?
Maybe you have an idea of how to monetise FB and Twitter which so far has eluded every media group going and is one I can’t see but maybe I’ve missed the point?
Report this comment
Maybe I have missed something here but media bosses all seem to be playing follow the leader.
I cannot understand why they are posting the full news content online for free. An obvious avenue would be to puts ‘tasters’ on the net from newspaper stories and NOT post the whole article so readers have to buy the paper.
And offer advertisers an incentive to go online as well as in print, perhaps half price to go online if the the ad also goes in paper.
Then again maybe I have missed something!
Report this comment
The question is this: If newspapers were not trying to grow their digital audience then do you really think site visitors would be reading the printed version? If so you are living in cloud cuckoo land. Newspaper circulation figures have falling for many years – aided yes by reductions in editorial staff numbers by employers who failed to invest in the future technology 10 or 15 years ago. Those who diss Facebook and social media are way out of touch with what’s going on out there on the streets. I almost find out more about what’s going on in my area via Facebook than I do in our local newspapers. BTW I’m no young journalist – I’m 60.
Report this comment
In simplistic terms celebrating an increase in Facebook likes and Twitter followers is the same as holding the door open for shoplifters, they’re actually proud of the number of people going to their ‘shop’ and taking the goods through the back door rather than paying for them over the counter.
Have you also noticed how the regional press has gone from being a ‘book shop’ where people come in and choose their reading material then pay for it, to a lending library where anyone walks in and takes the books they want without paying, then the owner delights in telling everyone that no ones buying anything but hey, great news , more and more people are taking our stuff so that’s fantastic news!
Pats on the back all round
‘Can I help you sir?’
‘ no thanks I’m only browsing’
Report this comment
CallneCynical,
You’re 60?
“Diss”?!
Report this comment
callnecynical
i dont think anyones “dissing” facebook or social media?
everyone knows of its appeal and benefits and how useful it can be as an “enhancement” ,an add on to the core products,and a very useful aside to gloss the main products,to tempt and to enhance and reach new audiences who wouldnt buy a newspaper,
The question everyones asking is ,in business terms wheres the monetary benefit in getting more follolwers and likes if its not helping revenues and profits?
Show us what these growth figures mean in actual revenue terms
theyre meaningless apart from in vanity terms
Do you think the local new car dealer is impressed with the number of brochures given out or people coming in and looking at the cars? or the number of cars actually sold?
We all work for businesses as has been pointed out previously,not charities, andthe future of any business is growing its paid for customers,the repeat buyer,be they advertisers or those buying copies of the papers.numbers,percentages and increases on something thats free is pointless.far better to concentrate and improve on the paid for elements than to fool yourelf youre popular because more people are taking your stuff for free.
show us hard fast revenue figures y/y period v period ,actual v target,sales v budget and we will get a clear picture of how healthy and popular the products are,pointless social media likes are only being included to gloss over just how bad the real core business revenues are,hence media figres the reps quote now talk in terms of reach and total viewers whcih fools no one.
local business people dont care about popularity on social media,just respoinse and cost v numbers
thsi latest trend of plastering over the cracks by including all elements is fooliong no one. tyell us what its worth and we will listen,avoid thwe question and that says all we need to know
Report this comment
typos in my post? guilty as charged,must do better ,5/10 apologies
Report this comment
Ok, so you all have what you probably would describe as a healthy contempt for anything ‘suits’ want you to believe.
So what would you do differently? Not put stuff on the web because you think people will then buy more papers? Not shout about big audiences on the internet because you believe there isn’t any money there? Reveal all digital earnings even though that’s never going to happen?
You, in short, want to have your cake and eat it. You want what you know won’t be revealed because it can’t (and no other company in any sector would either), and then you prefer to dismiss anyone who doesn’t share your view of the world as ‘corporates’ or ‘suits’. And we wonder why readers deserted our ‘our way or no way and pay 50p for it’ newspapers.
You are all very quick at criticising, but if your concern really is driven by a desire to still be in work in 15 years time, lets hear some of your solutions……
Report this comment
@Mark
“An obvious avenue would be to puts ‘tasters’ on the net from newspaper stories and NOT post the whole article so readers have to buy the paper.”
That is not really how most people expect websites to work – it’s a bit like Amazon saying hey you can look at that product – but you can’t order it online you’ve got to go to a shop to order it or itunes saying hey can listen to 30 seconds of a song – then you’ve got to go to a record shop to buy the full tune.
I can’t imagine many people would look on their phone – see a ‘taster’ of a headline then rush off down to their newsagents – more likely they would just try and find the information from a different website.
The days of newspapers being the ‘only’ source of local information are long gone.
I just despair when papers try this – and also when some of them went through a time of saying “We will have the full match report on monday” for football games – so, so pointless when people have Sky Sports, local radio, Football club websites etc.
Not only is it counter-productive, you send your users off to rival websites – it looks like your company can’t be bothered to engage or adapt to people in the internet age.
Report this comment
Confused throws down the gauntlet and quite right too. I’ll be too old to be working in 15 years’ time but for those still planning careers in news I would be looking at hiving away enterprises from the big corporations, business models built on foundations of massive revenues and shaped by a vision of continual expansion, as was recently the case at The Guardian. All that’s gone and this is the where the “suits” element comes in. Corporations are by definition hierarchical organisations with layers of management to which no one would necessarily object if the money’s there to pay them. But, as we all know, it ain’t, so we have a situation where people who contribute nothing directly to profit-generation cost a disproportionate part of a declining revenue stream for absolutely zero return. In a lean, mean outfit of the future, everyone employed, in whatever capacity, would be relevantly skilled, creatively and commercially. Print will be closely allied to online (or wherever the technology is by then) and the two media will bolster each other, not be put in a strange configuration where one gives away for free the products of the other. This may be full of holes but, you’re right, the debate has to be started now (probably 20 years late) if anyone at all is to be working in local news in 15 years’ time.
Report this comment
Confused
Improve the core products so more people buy them
Invest in quality staff in ALL departments as opposed to dumbing down which then comes across in the end product
Invest in target market publications that serve a specific market – competitors are doing this to great effect
Use social media to promote the core products not give them away free
Use FB to taste the pad for content
And if stats are published back them up with meaningful revenue figures to substantiate the ‘growth ‘
Honesty in how poor the figures are and what we intend to do to grow these numbers
Remove head from clouds and get back to basics
There are more
Report this comment
The straw man in these arguments is always that people who don’t think this new way of doing things is any good are ‘anti internet’. That’s not the case, we’re ‘anti content’ and ‘pro journalism’.
Content follows the debate and journalism leads it, simple as. When I worked at a weekly way back when I’d get an email from a news editor with just a phone number on in and be told to give them a call and see if there was a story. If there was, I’d write it and people would talk about it the next day.
When I do shifts at an online paper now, I get an email from a a news editor with a link to another newspaper’s clickbait (often made up or stolen from the States) story and told to ‘do a version of this’.
Modern journalism is about not missing out on what everyone else has got, rather than finding your own stuff and publishing it first – which for any decent journalist is 90% of the juice.
I went to watch Spotlight recently, and the Boston Globe investigative team that uncovered a church cover up of child abuse used to get a year to do a story, A YEAR! I used to read council reports on the toilet.
Report this comment
“Here’s an obvious major benefit – clients and advertisers today really care about social reach. So an impressive FB reach is essential to the financial future of any media company.”
Dan, advertisers don’t need anyone’s reach on FB. They can create their own ad in under ten minutes, which is targeted to people who do exactly what they want.
Why would an “impressive FB reach” be essential? If that is the case, the media companies might as well buy followers…
Note: don’t buy followers, it is a pointless act that boosts a vanity stat.
Report this comment
Employee X – is there any proof that an ‘improved core product’ will attract more readers? Look at the Sunday Times, what an amazing paper that is and still people are buying it in far fewer numbers than they used to.
Surely the problem is that the ‘core product’ is a bundle of stuff which people can pick and mix from elsewhere for free now.
And there’s no proof people will pay for content online unless you are the FT. So you’re right that people need to remove heads from clouds …
Report this comment
Confused seems to be so named and he or she has certainly confused me by his or her last couple of replies
I’m none the wiser after reading any of the posts than I was originally and can’t understand any point he is trying to make
I’ll read everyone else’s comments then I’ll go lie down
Report this comment
Please, please, please stop this nonsense of insisting that the newspaper is the ‘product’. I’m sick of it and it shows complete lack of understanding around the fundamental principles of your role a journalist today.
Your product is the news, sport, features, entertainment etc. Your newspapers, magazine, websites, social media and e-newsletters are the mediums with which you are able to now deliver it.
Each one has different audience demographics and each one shares information with you in different ways about how they wish to consume the information you provide. This is vital to the future of all publishing. Facebook knows it, Google knows it, Apple knows it and I’m pretty sure 1XL was created with exactly that in mind too.
Likes on a Facebook page are not just a vanity metric but providing them without any context, I agree, is pretty useless. There is a clear correlation between the number of likes and the volume of engagement in your articles. In some cases, Richard Wilson, buying likes or followers can actually be beneficial (but it’s rare).
This is where audience comes into it. If you target your Facebook posts to reach your local audience your engagement around local news will increase and it then makes sense to target local advertisers in those articles. With stories which might have wider appeal, you can change those targeting options and focus on selling advertising to regional firms and/or national brands.
Unfortunately, the regional publishers are only focusing on the latter and maybe even be buying ‘likes’ for this very purpose but, whatever the outcome, it’s all currently a detriment to local news.
Let them do what they want around national ‘impressions’ and ‘page views’ but, locally, we need to see our stories being pushed out to targeted audiences that engage with specific topics and see adverts that are relevant to them. This is what local businesses will pay for and what the readers will be happy to consume.
For social media, I say publish engagement rates alongside referral rates and ad clicks. It’s all easy enough to track through events, goals and conversions in GTM and improving the frequency of that journey is what will keep us all in jobs. We’ll also have a better idea of the actual value of each click to the business and on which medium to focus specific efforts.
Report this comment
If anyone gets down this far and actually bothers to read this comment, here goes….
I wonder if any of those Facebook clicks and likes are driven by a newspaper spending money on Facebook ads.
Report this comment
gone fishin’, I certainly hope so or they’d really be missing a trick!
Report this comment