“It is still not enough for language to have clarity and content... it must also have a goal and an imperative. Otherwise from language we descend to chatter, from chatter to babble and from babble to confusion.” - Rene Daumal
Media companies are in an existential dilemma forced on to them by advertisers as the traditional separation between media and advertising is increasingly blurring. New media is becoming all-pervasive and this social media meshed-up landscape is making it harder for media owners to draw a line. In the process of driving efficiency and ROI, advertisers are pushing media owners. In the scenario, media owners may be losing sight of their core selling point – the thing that any advertiser or brand requires from a media house – the platform of credibility.
Advertisers are expecting far too much from media companies and media products. They must understand that the media business is not simply about grabbing eyeballs or attention or delivering reach and frequency. It’s more about how much respect the platform commands. It is the respect and recognition that a brand gains by associating with a particular media company that should matter the most to it, not just the number of people who see the ad or article and respond to it.
Therefore, now more than ever before, there is a need for clarity on what a media company’s core competency and values should be. Media owners have to be first of all clear about their value proposition and what services they offer that are valuable to consumers. They also have to understand the core requirements of the brands for which they want to be a platform.
Media owners cannot be in a quandary about their own identity. They must be clear about who they are, who their clients are and what they can offer the client. They must be clear about the specific nature of their services. They must ask themselves, ‘What does a client want from us?’ Are we a media agency? Are we a PR agency? Are we a marketing agency? Are we a BTL agency? - and come up with a definite answer. More importantly, advertisers and marketers have to walk the talk and respect the answer they or media owners come up with. After all, you do not go to Spice Route at the Imperial and expect dal bukhara along with the sumptuous East Asian fare. It is simply not possible.
This expectation of advertisers and marketers extends to both business to consumer media products as well as business to business media. Most media companies with a presence in the B2B domain cater to clients as media owners as well as specialist agencies. So the relationship with clients must be symbiotic, without taking away from the media company’s credibility. They have to be stakeholders in one another’s growth.
However, in the frenzy to acquire clients and grow their business, advertisers push media companies to accepting multiple roles. Thanks to high expectations, media companies often lose sight of these core principles and try to be too many things at once. They do many things that don’t fulfil the basic requirement of providing a trusted platform that will lend credence to their name.
At the exchange4media conclave 2011 at New Delhi held on July 12, Rajiv Verma, CEO of Hindustan Times Media Limited talked of ‘a partner’ with whom Hindustan Times forged a deal, took an interest and helped them grow their business. In an age where advertisers and marketers want ROI, what HT is doing is commendable but can another company’s business be the media business is another question. Why should the media company be made accountable for business results of its advertiser or partner when the results are dependent on the offer, what the competition is doing and the communication? There is immense scope for debate here - is that the right thing to do from the advertisers’ perspective and is the client killing the golden goose? Is this the way forward for a media company in India in future? Is it just a smart solution-oriented short term business strategy or sustainable partnershipled business model?
We know that in the age of media conglomerates and mergers, joint ownership and what have you, there may not even be concurrent views internally on the business aspect of a media company. In the face of paid news, advertorials and tailored information – that have clearly become the business tools of today – it is imperative for media owners to maintain transparency to preserve the trust factor reposed by people in the company.
There are situations that will require media owners to be careful. Many corporations own media companies. So should the content carried by them be influenced by business interests? Also, should media institutions that survive on advertising fees keep various corporate interests in mind while deciding coverage? Certainly, no one would want to offend advertisers or owners.
With the advent of digital as a growing and preferred medium and Research Online impacting Purchase Offline, and with e-commerce to communities becoming reality, will the CPM, CPC, CPL malaise impact the traditional media business models of newspapers and TV companies? I hope advertisers understand that they cannot expect the media product to be the one-in-all solution – an editorial-led media platform as well as play the role of BTL agency and a PR agency ensuring coverage. If clients insist on that, then the media offering will be a disgusting mix of dal bukhara and Thai red curry. It might lead to stomach-ache even if the client has spent a lot of money on the dishes.
