Wow. As a reporter covering the online ad space, I've followed Henry Copeland's Blogads project since its near-genesis. I've gotta say, I was a bit shocked (like being a bit pregnant?) by an implication he made while questioning Cliff Sloan (the guy who runs Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive) this afternoon at the IPDI conference here in DC.
During "The Great Debate," a supposed battle between old and new media which devolved into a partisan rant-fest (big surprise), Copeland asked Sloan which portion of the 250 million average pageviews garnered per month on WashingtonPost.com encompasses political content. Sloan knew the site segmented such metrics according to content category, but didn't want to guesstimate. Copeland followed by stating that 100 million pageviews are generated by "political blogs" each month - implying but not stating directly - that advertisers could reach more readers of political content through blogs than through the Washpost site.
Too bad impressions aren't people. If you consider the fact that blog readers tend to be the more voracious types - frequenting several politically-oriented blogs as opposed to just one - Copeland's suggestion that blogs would make for a better media buy for an advertiser seeking readers of political content than ads placed alongside Washpost political content doesn't hold water.
In fact, according to the Blogads reader survey that just came out, fourteen percent of respondents read five blogs daily (the highest percentage among choices given). Another 12.1 percent read a whopping 11-15 blogs. While I don't have equivalent analysis of Washpost readers, I can make a pretty safe assumption from that data that a smaller number of viewers is generating pageview impressions on political blogs than Washpost political content. I may be wrong, but that'd be my guess anyway.
It's interesting that Copeland is pitting himself against a media powerhouse with an established brand like Washpost. I'd be willing to bet that, although advertisers can certainly reach a growing audience of so-called influentials - 40 percent of whom have family incomes of over $90K - advertisers would scoff at the notion that a blog ad buy is comparable to a Washpost ad buy. Just compare the prices of the ads and you'll get an idea of the value advertisers place on Washpost ads over Blogads ads. If anything, they'd be complementary ad buys.
This is not to demean the efficacy of blog ads, or the value of blog content or blog readers. I just think, if I interpreted Copeland's comments correctly, he may be jumping the gun by suggesting that the Washpost site is or should be in direct competition with Blogads.
It was a nice try at a plug for Blogads, though. And as always, I wish Copeland and his burgeoning ad network empire the best of luck 'cause innovators like him deserve to succeed.
OK, here's another question to ask Mr. Sloan when you are next in reporting mode. Links are another important way to count influence online.
Again, the blogosphere is catching up fast and again, when aggregated, blows MSM away:
http://www.sifry.com/alerts/images/Slide0006-1.gif
blogads for opinion makers
www.blogads.com
(617) 395 0176
delicious
digg
technorati
blog readers versus Wpost.com readers
Interesting questions Kate. Thank you for seeing the trajectory of my argument, if not for tagging me a huckster.
Three points:
a) You are right that there's undoubtedly more redundancy among blog impressions than among WPost impressions. But some would argue that redundancy represents high "networkedness," which makes those readers more valuable/influential.
b) I recall that it was Mr. Sloan who, right at the debate's get-go, introduced the page view metric to justify WPost.com's relevance. So the question seemed an obvious one, and I'm sorry he ducked. Since you are a journalist and not a blogger, why not call him and get the real number?
c) Why does it surprise you that thousands of passionate, cross-linking, cursing, organically organized, degree-bearing, often-insider, grass-roots-informed, up-to-the-minute humans might have a bigger and/or more influential audience than Wpost.com?
At last year's conference, Mr. Sloan guffawed at the idea of blog advertising.
Bloggers are the grassroots of the elite and the elite of the grassroots. They sit at the nexus of opinion and action where history traditionally happens.
Do you have any doubt who will be laughing next year? Don't get me wrong, I think that WPost journalists do much great work. I just know that their employer, WPost Inc., is swimming against history's tide.
Henry
blogads for opinion makers
www.blogads.com