The media value of content vs platforms

Is planning a campaign based on the media platform the right move? asks David Brennan. Perhaps we should be putting more emphasis on the surrounding content and the emotional mindset it induces, via whatever platform it populates…

When the old NMA (Newspaper Marketing Agency) evolved into Newsworks last year, this formed a quiet revolution in media marketing. It was the first trade body to define itself specifically by the content its members produce (i.e. news) rather than platform (i.e. newspapers).

It could be argued that Thinkbox had been making this distinction some time before, but even today the word ‘television’ is still strongly associated with the box in the corner of the living room, and television as a content proposition is, arguably, less well-defined than news.

This led me to reappraise what it is about ‘news’ that sets it apart from other content environments within media. After all, we are biologically pre-disposed to seek out the new, whether in our immediate surroundings, our local community or the wider world; it is how our brains work and a fundamental building block of our evolutionary survival.

The importance of the new – or the now – is why TV broadcast schedules remain strong and why news brands have proliferated both online and offline. When separated from the platform, it seems to me that a big part of the news proposition is increasingly about the emotions it generates.

For me, this really struck home recently when I heard the outcome of the Trayvon Martin case in Florida, and the acquittal of George Zimmerman on the basis of the ‘stand your ground’ argument. When I heard the outcome of the Florida jury’s deliberations I felt a strong emotional reaction, almost of despair; stronger than anything most other media experiences can elicit. Last week’s massacre in Nairobi was another example of these deep emotional reactions to the headline news.

Now, I know that despair is not the emotional mindset with which most advertisers would like to be associated, although there are some market sectors (e.g. charities, insurance) where it might work well with the communications objectives. But there are also many positive emotional responses to our consumption of ‘news’.

The long, drawn-out sense of satisfaction I feel when reading the reports of my football team’s latest victory (although, being a Man United fan, that is no longer as guaranteed as it once was) puts me in a mindset that is much more receptive to the right communication.

The frisson of schadenfreude I feel when discovering news of the latest celebrity act of stupidity or politicians’ outright hypocrisy is also one of my guilty pleasures, one which many brands could capitalise on with a well-placed message.

Or even the fist-pump of celebration when we actually get some positive hard news, such as Obama’s two election victories or stories of triumph against the odds for inspiring people fighting adversity or ‘the system’.

My point is that all of these emotions are far more influenced by the content than they are by the platforms on which they appear, whether it is news content or anything else, and yet it is the platform that still forms the focus of the ‘media plan’. I have seen some creditable examples of brands capitalising on big news stories to enhance their communications objectives, but they are few and far between.

This point is not just relevant to news, of course. It could equally be applied to content sectors such as comedy, lifestyle, fashion, celebrity, music; indeed, anything with a clear content definition that will appeal to a particular target audience and, even more importantly, a particular mindset.

However, it is the newsbrands that have been first to make that a clear proposition through Newsworks, so it is news that should be seen as the standard bearer in this switch from platform to content.

This cross-platform approach to content such as news (which could, of course, be sub-categorised into sport, health, celebrity, finance, technology, entertainment etc) makes a great deal more sense than lumping a myriad of different types of content experience under the simple platform categories of online, broadcast and print.

We are seeing more evidence all the time in terms of how consumers are likely to engage with the content, and the surrounding advertising communications, but it still feels like we are only investing in cross-platform content strategies at the margins.

So, maybe we shouldn’t be planning or evaluating a campaign based on the media platform – the traditional split of press/TV/online/outdoor etc. Maybe we should be putting more emphasis on the surrounding content and the emotional mindset it induces, via whatever platform it populates.

If that were to happen, at the very least, it might encourage the news providers to give us more to feel positive about; it would certainly generate a debate about the marketing value of ‘content’, one of those industry terms (like ‘engagement’) that is often-used but in a commoditised, undifferentiated way.