Re: CPM isn't dead, it's just sick

From: John Gaskill <gm_at_info-central-usa.com>
Date: Wed 14 Nov 2001 21:25:37 -0500

JIM STERNE <jsterne_at_targetmarketing.com> WROTE
(in part):

>Content sites that deliver qualified prospects to
>advertisers will not flourish because they cannot
>deliver unbiased, quality content to their readers.
>They will be recognized as insincere journalists
>and lose readership.

This is nuts.

If I believed this I would never advertise in
Business Week, Advertising Age, The New York
Times, The New Yorker, National Geographic,
Smithsonian, or any of hundreds of other titles
which deliver specific audiences.

The whole value of editorial integrity is that
it produces a "quality product" which attracts a
regular audience which wants that product.
As a byproduct, the regularity of the audience
gives it discernable demographic traits.

I submit that Jim and many other subscribers
to this list don't "get it" when it comes to making
the mental jump from understanding editorial
integrity to delivering it in a publication. If a
web publication has a defined audience, it
should be able to attract advertisers for CPM
or CPA ad buys. How they are priced is up
to the buyer and seller.

The secret is in knowing when to say "No"
to the advertisers or reps calling at your door,
and making sure for the sake of your pub and
your readers that you say "No" consistently.

My $ 0.02.

Regards to all.

John Gaskill
jg_at_Info-Central-USA.com
http://Info-Central-USA.com





Received on Wed Nov 14 2001 - 20:25:37 CST