Where Millennials Get Their News

In 2003, I recommended to my client, Purdue North Central University, that they stop trying to reach prospective students with newspaper ads. Why? I didn't know anyone under the age of 25 who read a newspaper. Little did I realize how quickly this pattern would spread to other age groups.

The 2009 Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism report tells the rest of the story, and it is a bleak one for newspapers:

Newspaper ad revenues have fallen 23% in the last two years. Some papers are in bankruptcy, and others have lost three-quarters of their value. By our calculations, nearly one out of every five journalists working for newspapers in 2001is now gone, and 2009 may be the worst year yet.

The reason, of course, is a dramatic shift toward getting news online. This shift is apparent for all age groups, but is especially pronounced among Millennials.

"I get my news almost exclusively online."

"Constantly connected. Way too much so. I check the news sometimes more than it is updated."

"I usually get my news from multiple sources.I think I saw a newspaper in a museum once."

"TV stations are for old people worried about the weather."

The top three online news sites, Yahoo, CNN and MSN, all show large jumps in audience size between 2007 and 2008. Each enjoys over 35 million unique viewers a month. Two organizations that track online behavior closely, Pew and Annenberg, each shed extra light on how quickly audiences have shifted their news orientations online:

Pew: In December, 40% of Americans said they got most of their national and international news online, up 67% from 2004, when the number was 24%. That put the web ahead of newspapers (35%). Only television, cable, local and network combined, ranked higher (70%).

Annenberg: Eighty percent of Internet users age 17 and older consider the Internet to be an important source of information for them -- up from 66 percent in 2006 -- and higher than television (68 percent), radio (63 percent), and newspapers (63 percent).

As dramatic as these changes are, they are eclipsed by the larger drama of the changes in where and how people access online news. Mobile viewing, sharing stories on social networks and video sites, e-mail and RSS all make it easier for consumers to customize their news. In becoming their own 'news editors' and 'repackagers' Millennials are leading the way. Social media offers a way for Millennials to control and shape their news by filtering it through friends or reporters they trust.

“I get the news filtered from my friends.” Scott K

“Top stories is good for facebook… but not necessarily what everyone is reading… cause that's that pop stuff… I want editing… ” – Ben T

“It would be nice to be able to customize what news you want to see on facebook.”- Holly H

“Editing is very important.”—Kelsey L

As news organizations search for a business model to replace the advertiser-supported model, they could learn from Millennials who would trust a 'friend' over a news organization. By creating news around specific reporters, personalities or 'personna's', they may create value worth paying for.

Why Digital Media Hasn't Replaced TV Yet

As the Car Guys say, I just 'wasted another 30 perfectly good minutes.' This time I was enjoying nine of the most popular viral videos selected my friend Jim Nichols for his blog at imediaconnection.com. Jim is senior partner, strategist at Catalyst:SF. We have been friends a long time and are currently competing for oldest surviving relic of what are now considered the 'good old days' in advertising. Jim also blogs daily about digital media at www.oldestliving.com. We can recall when you argued vigorously over whether the strategy was 'good taste that's good for you' or 'good tasting goodness', prepared three commercials and headed for the bar. (This was after the Mad Men era by about 15 years, but I was trained by those guys. It is uncannily accurate in substance and detail.)

I am currently pondering the question Jim posed to me in an email a few days ago. Here it is:

As you know, digital’s share of brand marketing dollars is far smaller than the share of time consumers now spend with digital media. Are brands lagging, or is digital lagging in providing actionable solutions for brand marketers?

Mmm. It's easy to say it's because today's marketers aren't embracing new media, but I don't think that would be right. The numerical case for digital media is too compelling. Millennials spend much more time online than watching TV. Yet TV is still the 800 pound gorilla. Why?

The more likely answer is that digital media has a hard time competing with TV as a branding medium, and branding is the main reason for using TV. Historically branding is not as accountable for immediate short term results, so TV often gets a free pass on ROI.

Before you jump on me about digital being a branding medium, I have seen the research, and let me be clear, I am not saying digital can't be used for branding. It's just that TV is/was so perfect: Captive audience, full sight, sound and motion. High production value. Trusted information source. Tremendous reach. Digital media, is well-targeted but lacks the reach and emotional impact of a full screen TV.

Digital media will get there. Search is already maturing as a medium. Online video is getting there. Social media which is now more social than media will develop some best practices that will attract the early adopters and late adopters, especially once word of mouth measurement systems become more standardized. Meanwhile, I wasn't in advertising when there was still a 'TV department' and broadcast operations was done by admins, er secretaries, in their spare time. But Mad Men is a good reminder that this isn't the first time advertisers have had to come to grips with something new.

Meanwhile, here is my favorite viral video from Jim's list. If you want to waste, ahem, spend, 30 perfectly good minutes of your own, I recommend visiting his blog post today! It won't be time wasted!