Turning News Into Knowledge

As I continue to work with a variety of companies in the media measurement space, I’m always amazed at how differently each project evolves.

This keeps things interesting, and the inevitable tough and unique questions that arise really keep you on your toes. But it also exemplifies why one chart or one formula can’t be counted on to provide answers for every situation.

Recently a client asked me whether it mattered that his organization had reached a greater number of media outlets – but fewer readers – than its main competitor. Cumulatively, the competitor had reached more readers, but with multiple hits in the same paper they were basically hitting the same reader multiple times.

Consider this example:

Company X

Media Hits: 50

Circulation: 4,000,000

Number of Unique Publications: 40

Competitor Y

Media Hits: 50

Circulation: 5,000,000

Number of Unique Publications: 15

In this example we weren’t dealing with any additional variables such as the variances in tone or the merits of dailies vs. community newspapers, so my explanation to the client was that since his organization (and the competitor) were both very well known already, that his organization had essentially won. Since the objective was to raise awareness about a known organization and issue, by reaching more unique readers it provided him with the upper hand.

I would argue in a different scenario where a company is relatively unknown, that it would be quite valuable to hit the same readers over and over again, as long as the media outlet was a credible target.

The key for this client in the future will be to determine at the outset what the goals and objectives are for each campaign, and ensure that the same rationale is used should the competitor manage to beat them out – and not fall into the trap of changing the rules so that they win every time.

Tone is not black and white. It’s not even grey. Sure there are those who believe toning stories as positive, negative, and neutral actually provides an accurate snapshot of what’s going on with your coverage. But the reality is it’s not — and shouldn’t be — that simple.

There are so many factors that can and should be taken into account when determining the tone of a story or a group of stories, that you are really doing a disservice to your entire analysis program if you’re simplifying it that much.

If you asked someone’s opinion of a movie or restaurant, would you want to hear “it was good” or “it was bad”, or would you prefer to know what they thought of it on a scale of 1 to 10?

The latter is obviously more desirable, and provides you with more insight into just how good or how bad it was.

If someone told you a restaurant was OK, he or she had no real complaints and the place was relatively inexpensive, you might see value in it. Conversely, if someone told you the restaurant was OK, but on the expensive side, you may very well stay home or choose another restaurant. And if someone could provide you with exactly what they liked and didn’t like, that’s even better.

The same can be said when it comes to media analysis. The more detailed the information, and the more factors that are taken into account when determining tone, the more informed your decisions can be.