Competitive E-News Strategy In a Rat Race Environment

By Howard Rauch

How are some of us surviving in an e-news content environment that seems to be assuming rat race proportions? The situation is getting to be an old story: Publication Y's competitor — Publication X — launches an e-newsletter, so Y follows suit. Who'll staff this new project? Why the same people who edit Y's magazine … what else? Then X goes twice a week. Y cannot be left behind. Then out of nowhere, competitor Z weighs in with a daily. What now for X and Y, especially since there's no budget for added staff necessary to generate credible content on a multi-frequency basis?

The above scenario clearly suggests that in many X vs. Y competitive analysis evaluations, obvious e-news weaknesses will stand out like the proverbial sore thumb. So while there's still time, you need to strengthen your position against any competitive assault. To this end, seek answers to the following three questions:

(1) Do I offer sufficient variety in every issue or has my content become predictable? One way to learn the truth is by running a source analysis based on breaking stories featured in e-newsletters during the past three months. You may find you are in a rut in terms of overusing convenient sources of information.

(2) Do I offer ample coverage of key topics? Are my competitors outdoing me where it counts in terms of reporting key developments? During one project, I came across a site with a "daily news" link that led visitors to a choice of nine hot topics. Yes, there may not be breaking news every day in each category. But the editors clearly had established target areas of information that had maximum site visitor appeal. Many of us lack this strategy. Instead, we publish whatever e-news happens to be available in order to fill space two or three times a week.

(3) How do site visitors rate your current e-news coverage? You don't need a shotgun e-blast survey to get decent feedback. If you've got an editorial board of ten or more authoritative members, sound them out. Is available e-content clearly superior to what had been available in print sections? In what areas of coverage have your competitors surpassed you?

While all this analysis is ongoing, start setting goals for improving e-news content delivery in terms of eight areas I've identified in previous columns [Editor’s note: See here, here, and here.]:

(1) urgency;
(2) enterprise;
(3) direct quotes;
(4) fast-paced leads;
(5) readability;
(6) brevity (particularly average sentence length);
(7) depth of coverage (word count);
(8) link usage.

Immediate improvements for factors (1) and (2) may take some doing. But you can turn over a new leaf quickly if categories (4), (5), (6) and (8) are not up to snuff.

Howard Rauch is president of Editorial Solutions Inc., a consultancy focusing on B2B magazines. Rauch is the 2002 recipient of ASBPE’s Lifetime Achievement Award. You can contact him directly at howard@editsol.com.

Labels: , , ,

 

Marketing Alert: Seven Ways to Pass an E-Newsletter Exam

By Howard Rauch

Most editors are knocking themselves out facing the dual challenge of creating great content for websites and printed media. But be warned: When it comes to electronic media, you must prepare for the eventuality of a competitive analysis attack.

How will you respond to opposition claims that their website is clearly superior? Do you already conduct regular electronic media strengths/weaknesses reviews? If snafus in your content delivery are detected, do you remedy them promptly?

I’ve been thinking more often about stuff like this since I began handling e-newsletter/website review projects. My evaluation process usually begins with a check of how publications drive readers to their websites. Among other things, it’s surprising to find magazines that don’t even include an “on the web” contents page.

The next phase – which is where the rest of this column is focused – is e-newsletter evaluation. As a former newsletter editor, I am especially vexed about one aspect of today’s typical electronic approach. That is . . . most e-newsletters function as a contents page for the website. There is very little independent news value readers can take away without going further. In terms of competitive comparisons, we need to think about how existing information value can be enhanced.

Anyway, here is a list of seven e-newsletter factors that could prove burdensome if your competitors have the edge. In the future, I expect my list to swell to at least 25 items.

1. Dedicated editorial webstaff. This should be the top concern. It’s impressive for competitors to emphasize that advantage if it exists.

2. Evidence of enterprise. One way to get this point across is by identifying several articles that are web exclusives. Linking to newspaper articles or copies of corporate press announcements, while informative, is not the best sign of enterprise.

3. Informative news previews. Several e-newsletters simply list a bunch of headlines. Instead, each head should be accompanied by at least a three- or four-line blurb.

4. Content variety. Instead of a total news item focus, provide a longer preview of a current blog. Include interesting excerpts from current reader forums. Run a problem/solution contest; advise visitors that winners’ names will be posted in an upcoming issue of the magazine.

5. Tightly edited copy. Blurbs linking to news articles that consist of a parade of 30- or 40-word sentences won’t do. In one recent e-newsletter analysis involving 20 news articles, almost half of the sentences used ran beyond 30 words; several were in the 40-50 range.

6. No junk allowed. Most e-newsletter editors understand that featured news blurbs should link to high-value, in-depth website articles. But sometimes less than best-of-show items sneak through. For instance, be wary of allowing three-sentence newsletter blurbs that link to “full” articles (sometimes of a puffy nature) consisting of four or five sentences.

7. Emphasize statistical expertise. If your competition rarely publishes original research, your e-newsletter is an important way to exploit that shortfall. Perhaps you can even include occasional self-contained data summaries – no need to click for additional details.

Whether or not you concur with the above suggestions is incidental. The important thing – as in any competitive analysis review – is that you should create and regularly apply an evaluation system that can be quantified.

Howard Rauch is president of Editorial Solutions Inc., a consultancy focusing on B2B magazines. Rauch is the 2002 recipient of ASBPE’s Lifetime Achievement Award. You can contact him directly at howard@editsol.com.

Labels: , , ,