Digital publishing is growing. Not only are publishers achieving growth in their web audience, for example the Daily Mail’s Mail Online growing daily traffic by 12.3% in October last year, but figures for smart phones and tablets are also on the up, with Conde Nast announcing a 268% digital subscription increase last year too.
So, with the buzz surrounding digital publishing and the growth it is experiencing, combined with the unfortunate decline that print is facing, what better time to pose the question which everyone concerned wants an answer to: can traditional print based publishing survive the onslaught of digital?
We are a sponsor of Digital Ad Lab, an independent, non-profit open forum for those involved in all aspects of digital workflows, which provides a platform for participants to discuss issues relating to the creation and delivery of digital content.
One of the answers to the print v digital question may have come at the recent Digital Ad Lab meeting, which coincided with the Digital London show held at the impressive London ExCel.
A panel discussion with representatives from YUDU Media, Hearst, Financial Times, Butler, Tanner and Dennis and e-graphics came together to provide their views on the prevailing topic.
Full details of the discussion can be found here, but the panel shared the same view that print and digital were there to complement and enhance each other as they serve different purposes.
Digital is serving the ever growing need for dynamically consuming content on the go, while the traditional attributes of printed publications can’t be replaced - right down to the smell and texture of the publication itself.
It was suggested, however, that in time the difference could become even clearer, with digital becoming the mass media channel for accessing content, as print becomes more premium and more about status by being given as a gift.
Putting your iPad on your coffee table isn’t quite the same as spreading a few of your favourite high quality magazines next to your box of shortbreads, as pointed out by the panel.
It was pointed out that the key to both channels being successful was quality content; whether it’s in print or digital just dictates how this content is delivered and who it is delivered to.
In which case, I wonder whether the impact of digital on print publishing will depend on how digital publishing is approached? It is clear publishers recognise there is a challenge in efficiently publishing to digital, but more important in these difficult economic times is how publishers measure their audience. It is a challenge which needs meeting head-on.
Even within digital publishing, however, there is a debate on how best it is approached. The developments of HTML5, as adopted by the Financial Times among others, enables publishers to produce one application which can be accessed on any device, whereas the more native apps are device specific . That means for each device publishers want to deliver to, they need to repeat their work.
It’s a snapshot view I know, but given the economic pressures publishers are faced with, wouldn’t it make sense to only have to produce one application, rather than investing the resource many times over? At least that’s where we see the benefits.
For the time being print and digital may complement and enhance each other, the route publishers decide to adopt could determine just how successful digital publishing is for them, and whether or not they need to turn back to their old print friend for help.
For more information on Digital Ad Lab, or to attend a Digital Ad Lab meeting, contact Hannah Newberry at Hannah@leafagency.com.