A regional publisher’s digital chief has defended his company’s decision to publish monthly statistics about its newspapers’ popularity on social media.
Trinity Mirror’s digital publishing director David Higgerson, left, has described endorsement by readers on Facebook and Twitter as an “online currency” which journalism needs to value in order to help bring revenue into the industry.
The company publishes monthly ABC figures on the number of Facebook ‘likes’ and Twitter ‘followers’ its regional daily newspapers receive, which are reported on by HoldtheFrontPage.
On his personal blog, David wrote that while the figures are covered in a “straight-down-the-middle sort of way”, they often prompted questions from commenters about how social media engagement is monetised.
David continued: “It’s a discussion which happens in newsrooms too, and the idea of counting followers and likes only really makes sense if you buy into the fact readers have a new sort of currency to bestow on you: Their endorsement.
“We live in a world in which revenue follows endorsement. Where I live, people are as likely to turn to Streetlife or the local Facebook forum for advice on who to get to do their kitchen as they are to pick up the Yellow Pages or the local newspaper to find an advert.
“That’s because they value the endorsement of someone they know – know in real life, know as in connected with via an online platform – highly. And the same is true of news.
“In a world where anyone can technically be a publisher, news brands have to compete for attention like never before. Being a local publisher is a unique selling point, but it’s not enough to guarantee readers. You are far more likely to get readers if they feel you are giving them something which the appreciate or enjoy.”
“And that’s what makes a like or a follow such an important endorsement. If you can convince someone to like or follow your page on the site they spend a lot of time on, you are winning their endorsement to spend time with them.”
“A like or follow doesn’t convert into pounds instantly. But it does make it far easier to engage with a reader in a way which enables brands to generate money.”
David went on to describe the three ways in which online newsbrands could appear on social networks – by paying to be there, by having their work shared by a reader or by having a relationship with readers on that particular platform.
He added: “It’s at that point the monetisation process which so vexes people concerned about what social media means for journalism can begin.
“That’s why time spent managing a Facebook page, for example, is time well spent. It’s time spent convincing people you have something worth saying that they want to listen, and that you’re (hopefully) listening back to what they’ve to say. It’s time spent preparing the ground for on-going endorsement, and it’s that endorsement which makes us stronger.
“Put simply, endorsement is an online currency which readers value. Journalism needs to value it just as much to ensure the other currency – the real-world currency – flows in our direction too.”
The company does not currently publish social media statistics for the daily titles it acquired in its takeover of Local World.
Sign up for our free daily email bulletin
Follow HTFP on Twitter
Got a story? Email the Editor at
It’s good of David to explain this so comprehensively. But for all his advocacy, endorsements are not a currency that banks or mortgage lenders would recognise, for example. He is right to highlight the “vexed” nature of the link between online engagement and revenue generation as it is this core issue that will decide whether corporations such as TM survive for much longer. Employees will be hoping someone cracks it – fast – but, fair play, this is at least an attempt to illuminate the issue. Question: Why no figures for the former LW titles?
Report this comment
He’s right, of course.
Whatever the moaners say about the good old days and investing in papers etc, that ship has sailed.
Basically, no-one much under 40 buys newspapers. That’s two generations brought up on free internet, instant news. The idea of them shelling out for a cumbersome object containing (at best) yesterday’s news is madness.
The endorsement David talks about is a stepping stone along the digital road. Yes, no-one quite knows exactly where it’s going, but better to be on it than be miles back shouting “evening news” at passers-by.
Report this comment
Round and round we go again,
All understood and all very nice but again,take it to the bank manager and see if he will give you a loan on the basis of likes and followers as opposed to the bottom line accounts and financial health of the business which pay the salaries and cover the overheads.
Its all very well being “popular” and “engaging with people” online but until its monetised and helps directly fund the business it is all smoke and mirrors and completely pointless.All it does is divert attention away from the real hard cold issues of continuously falling copy sales,eroded ad sales and all against increasing costs and overheads.
i know many business people who have started and successfuly run their own businesses who all find this ridiculous chasing of popularity hilarious,all succesful businesses are based on making a product or offering a service and charging for it,yet the regional press gets excited that non customers “like ” their product but wont buy them,happily taking them for free and with the owners blessing.
i am sure if i went into a restaurant,had a full three course meal with drinks then walked out without paying simply saying ” very nice,i really liked that, i will tell other people to come here and eat free too” would they be happy to let me walk away seeing my endorsement as a sign of success?,exactly
Until the regional press is run as a business like any other where success is judged by product sales,services bought and overall finanacial health, the decline will continue unabated,particularly when this kind of excuse is given under the guise of a longer term view.
time to stop fooling yourselves take your head out of the clouds and focus on investing in and developing the core products and making them products people will happily pay for
Report this comment
I’ve no gripe with the thrust of David’s central premise on social media interaction. My issue is that someone, somewhere in Trinity Mirror has decided to push their portfolio of newspapers over a cliff in order to concentrate on digital far, far too early. Witness the recent cull around newsrooms – this isn’t a carefully thought out R&D strategy with appropriate investment to achieve its aims, it’s a slash and burn profit grab whilst pursuing what might well turn out to be the wrong strategy.
Report this comment
I really ‘like’ everything on this menu in front of me; does that make me a media strategist?
Report this comment
Warren Butcher gave a presentation at TM a few years back saying they were following the Facebook model of growing engagement and then – somewhere down the line – figuring out how to make money from it.
He was later laid off.
Report this comment
Couple of things:
1) Why isn’t HTFP linking to where these figures are published in this article?
2) I disagree with David. A like or follow is so watered down these days that it isn’t a form of online currency. I like many pages on FB but I rarely see any posts from them because of the algorithm.
Posts from LADBible, for example, collect thousands of likes, however, so using this framework, they must be ‘rich’.
Xex may be right, news in a physical sense is dwindling, but I worry the integrity of news is being hit by this idea of ‘engaging’ and grabbing likes and page hits. An online news site has no limitations like a newspaper, so why would they decide not to run a press release? Even if that release gets 200 page views, it is 200 more than if they hadn’t. The same principal applies with social engagement.
I do agree that news organisations need social media but counting likes and followers is where all other organisations were with social media five years ago. David is also true in his line about time spent managing a FB page is “time well spent” – although this is quite obvious given people are employed in other sectors specifically for that job.
Yet again, the news(paper) sector is behind the times.
Report this comment
Xex, once again this is a misrepresentation of most people’s opinion on here (which seems to be the way debating is done on HTFP these days).
Once again – for the millionth time – this isn’t about print vs digital, it’s about quality journalism vs content.
Many of these daily newspapers are actually having their operations overtaken by independent websites now because they’re concentrating on the wrong things.
The likes of Manchester and Liverpool have about half a dozen websites with great pictures, coverage of local events, you name it, meanwhile the local ‘news’ operation is plugging the same sport story over and over again for the web hits.
Report this comment
The ‘revenue follows endorsement’ theory is the element which still bemuses me, at least in how it applies to TM … or any other publisher.
I often use TripAdvisor to point me toward bars, cafes, restaurants, tourist attractions, etc etc which others have rated highly. Some will therefore gain my revenue via the endorsement of others and I will likely write a review or two to add to TA’s content. However, if I follow the Birmingham Post on Twitter, it’s as a free source of business-related news. My ‘follow’ is endorsement of a kind, but no revenue is ever going to flow their way. If they put up a pay-wall, I’d just use the business e-zines and free to access sites. I simply don’t see how TM monetises my perceived relationship with the Post (or its other titles). I see the raft of motoring reviews, presumably centrally-written content, and some may well follow TM titles to read them, but again, it’s the link to revenue which genuinely escapes me.
Report this comment
Counter of beans has it spot on. Management of the various newspaper groups are paid to find solutions and yet more than 15 years on from the first internet boom they remain clueless.
As clueless in fact about what to do with their newspapers. At the risk of repeating anyone else here we all know that the internet has got to make money in the medium term. The question that I would put to David is: what are you doing about it?
Where are the big ideas? Before TM bought out LW David Montgomery called in some of his brightest editors to London to develop an internet strategy. What ever become of it?
I’ve spent years developing newspaper internet strategies – all aimed at pulling in readers and revenue. I’m not saying they are rocket science or even that they would all work but I’ve not seen a single newspaper group come close to approaching even one of them.
And that is very very worrying.
Report this comment
The demise of local papers was not a natural process, merely brought about by the emergence of digital. It was deliberately sanctioned at top level by nearly all companies. I recall a JP manager telling me that price rises and reduction in staff and quality would hit sales but the top brass “would not mind” because there would be a lot more money from digital. He got the first bit right.
Report this comment
Page likes and shares only any good if converted into cold hard sales conversions…what are their figures on the conversion rates like?
Report this comment
Revenue generated is one thing, but if memory serves TM doesn’t release the engagement rates of content shared on these sites. It’s a pretty standard KPI in the social realm, and wouldn’t that at least be a better guide to the potential value of the audience TM has built via these channels? Maybe David could respond to this point, I believe he does read HTFP?
Report this comment
I could blather on at length but I’ll keep it short. That is the biggest crock of tish I’ve ever read.
Report this comment
You would be genuinely hard pressed to find anyone at a newspaper who knows anything meaningful about the way the web works. They may do compared to the man in the street, but in terms of industry leading knowledge it’s absolutely nowhere to be found, which reflects the industry’s lack of commitment to any long term goals. Hiring a youngster and teaching them how to write an SEO headline is not going to cut the mustard.
Report this comment
I knew Harry Blackwood would come storming in here with his size 12 steel-capped daisy roots – quite right too. And what about the former LW titles? Is there something nasty lurking in David Montgomery’s old woodshed? I think we should be told.
Report this comment
counter of beans, I’m sorry but the regional press isn’t like any other business that can be judged by sales or services bought as it doesn’t have the same sort of tangible product.
The problem here is that you’re using the word ‘product’ to describe the medium of delivery when, really, the product is your news, sport, features etc.
A coffee shop doesn’t care whether you sit in and drink something or take it away in a cup, as long as the ‘product’ in it has been paid for in some way and enjoyed. However, it knows that, if you sit in, it might be able to tempt you into another drink or some food (additional revenue) and, if you take it out, the cup is branded so that people know where you get your coffee from and maybe go there too (marketing).
With digital news, one of the main business models is based upon generating page impressions, but the ‘product’ is still the news that appears on the webpage. This means that each piece of news – your product – is being paid for by the advertiser, rather than the customer, but, once on your website, a customer may be tempted to generate further page impressions (additional revenue). If they like/share it on Facebook or Retweet it, it also gets seen by other people they know/follow who may, in turn, visit your site too (marketing).
Online news has to battle additional issues such as generational expectations, immediacy, relevancy etc but, as Jeff Jones suggests, the only way to realistically tackle these problems is by providing quality content which people trust.
Social media can play a major part in building that trust but the level of cuts at TM do cause me some concerns about maintaining any kind of quality.
Report this comment
While purporting to explain, what Mr Higgerson’s actually doing, rather cleverly, is making the magic mist in which the digital cult chooses to wrap itself even denser. Now there’s a mysterious new thing called ‘endorsement’ for us old farts to scratch our heads over, having previously failed to understand the apparently simple and obvious process by which giving your product away would produce riches beyond the dreams of avarice. I was a young man when news first went online, and have grown old and jaded waiting for the miracle to happen. Rather than building a better mousetrap, what people like Mr Higgerson spend their time doing is explaining in very precise and detailed terms exactly what’s wrong with our mice.
Report this comment
A doff of the cap to David Higgerson for doing what his compatriots never bother to do – come on here and explain themselves.
I can’t agree with his sentiments though. Revenue following endorsement? I just don’t buy it.
Report this comment
To continue on the theme of counter of beans and with today’s Archant redundancies being announced… having said you really “liked” the restaurant you may return the following week to find that you are now being asked to make your own meal, with your own equipment and ingredients and in return it will be “curated” by a teenage intern who will show the world the meal you prepared on Twitter and Facebook.
Report this comment
Ian Halstead and Harry Blackwood are both spot on in their own comments. This is all so much fluffly bull from Mr Higgerson and will make not one iota of difference to TM’s profits or future
Report this comment
“Oliver@ and all that will pay the bills and overheads to finance a business and provide a satisfactory level of profit as demanded by the share holders will it? And the trust issues will need more than followers or likes to be regained.
Bean counter is correct, until the main problems are solved and proper revenue is achieved on a consistent and sustainable level by monetising news or content ( which ever you wish to call it ) other crumbs of revenue from the social media table are inconsequential.
The trouble with getting excited about social media stats and popularity is that it’s all very well as an add on to the core business but when it’s spoken of as a key part of the core business we have a problem ,whilst the core financial platforms of ad revenues and copy sales continue to nose dive no amount of online revenue will be able to cover costs sufficient to ensure the viable trading position of any business, the greater the overheads, the greater the revenue is needed and the greater the risk will be
and sadly whilst people justify this miniscule revenue as anything other than small change and window dressing the rot will continue to get worse meaning if you Oliver, are working in the regional press your job and future might not be as assured as you think it is or as safe as you’d like it to be.
Report this comment
I read these comments and two things strike me. First, it appears that a small number of people who understand how our industry works today have no idea how to explain it to the rest nor do they have the skills to make good money out of it. Second, the majority of people who’ve worked in the industry for years and should really understand how it now works, don’t actually have a clue and won’t listen to anyone who tries to explain why they need to develop new skills.
Report this comment
Liam, if you’ve read any of my comment on other posts, you’ll know I believe that shareholders and regional publishers are the worst thing to happen to local newspapers.
The profit being made in digital isn’t minuscule. Yes, it’s not at the same level as print, but unlike print, it’s growing. If handled properly at a local level, I see no reason why a small to medium-sized business can’t make a reasonable living and profit out of online local news.
It’s simply the unreasonable 25 to 30 per cent profit margins demanded by shareholders that is ruining everyone’s livelihoods.
The key point about these social media stats is that even if some local publishers do manage to go it alone, they can’t continue with things as they are and will have to adopt different working practices. They will need journalists who understand how these ‘crumbs of revenue’ from things like social media make a difference to the overall product and reputation of the business.
Long gone are the days when journalists went out into their patch to speak with people to find a story; there are potential stories being published online every second of the day! Long gone are the days when publishing an article in your daily evening paper was all that mattered; people’s habits around how they consume news has drastically changed.
If you’re in regional press and you don’t think that you need to understand how you can help the business you work for reach and communicate with customers via the ins and outs of social media, e-newsletters, SMS messaging etc then your future is practically already written.
The business model is rapidly changing and you should really understand how and why then you can be prepared to change too. Regional publishers aren’t going to help you to do this so don’t leave yourself out in the cold!
Report this comment
The cold hard fact of the matter is that if you look at the stories, for want of a better word, which are most viewed online, they aren’t news (unless it’s a massive natural or man-made disaster, neither of which it’s really within the power of a news organisation to create). The Mail Online has taught us that what readers really crave is a diet of celebrity bum shots and rants about migrants on benefits, so a business model which doesn’t focus on these areas is doomed, basically. Our challenge going forward is to produce better shots of bigger celebrity bums and ever more inflammatory anti-scrounger rants if we are to maintain the shareholders in the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed. Alan Coren anticipated this approach to marketing back in the Seventies, when to maximise market ‘reach’ he chose the title of his latest book based on the three bestselling subjects at his local bookshop: golf, cats and the Third Reich. The book was called Golfing For Cats, and had a swastika on the front. It’s the future (except now I suppose the ideal story would have an SEO-optimised web head along the lines of: “You won’t believe what this illegal migrant cat that looks like Hitler is doing to Khloe Kardashian’s a*se”).
Report this comment
Steerpike, I get that but you’re missing the point.
Why do you come to HTFP and comment? It’s because you get air your opinion on a subject which matters to YOU and others like you. The general public couldn’t give a toss about this website. It’s not news to them but it is to YOU.
Newspaper have always been split into sections, especially the Sundays, so why can’t we take a similar approach to online local news and give like-minded people different platforms to read and engage on topics which are important to them? Instead, we insist on this one platform fits all approach to the content we produce.
Yes, the difficulty is building a sizeable, engaged audiences on a platforms which can be monetise sufficiently, but plenty of non-journalists do this themselves via YouTube, Twitter, Facebook etc so why can’t journalists? I’ll tell you why. It’s because they’ve either not been given the opportunity by their cost-cutting hungry regional bosses who want to pool all impressions in the website or they’re insistent on doing it ‘how it’s always been done’, much like Dave suggests above!
Report this comment
Dave – nailed it!
Report this comment