Mark Cuban on Marketing Newspaper Blogs - Don’t Call them Blogs

 Email

By John Cantwell

Mark Cuban wrote extensively last week about how newspapers have made a severe marketing error by embracing blogs. His basic points:

• Blogs still have, in the minds of many, a reputation for inaccuracy and unprofessionalism
• It is difficult to qualitatively credential newspaper blogs over independent blogs
• By simply referring to their blogs as blogs (and not branding them in a substantively different way), newspapers cede one of their primary competitive advantages – namely, that they are newspapers and can provide levels of coverage that most blogs can’t. Cuban goes so far as to suggest that newspapers should call their blogs anything but blogs.

Saul Hansell of the New York Times responded a day later in defense of newspaper blogs:

• Times blog posts must follow the same standards as any New York Times article
• Blogs extend conversations between journalists and their readers
• Blogs extend coverage of print stories

I’ll add a few more positives to Saul’s list:

• Blogs allow journalists to respond to stories in real-time
• Blogs allow newspapers to generate new ad revenue by increasing overall pageviews, trackbacks, etc.

So, yes, there are legitimate advantages to newspapers having blogs, and I think blogging will become an increasingly important aspect of newspapers’ businesses as blogs gain wider mainstream acceptance and more dollars are devoted to online instead of print.

Further, it’s incorrect to argue that newspapers should simply call their blogs something else in order to gain a brand advantage. This could easily backfire – knowledgeable readers would say, “Hey, this is a blog – they’re just coming up with a new name for an old thing,” and newspapers would end up looking like a bunch of old fuddy-duddies trying to co-opt blogs as their own, which is precisely what they should avoid.

Still, Cuban makes some valid points, particularly when he argues that newspapers don’t fully utilize the potential of blogs:

I would also market it as an extension of the print version. All the news that cant fit in print. In the sports world, I think this is where main stream media really has dropped the ball. There is no shortage of speculation and opinions on the net. There is an incredible lack of depth when it comes to game and team coverage.

This is a matter of content implementation. Your average newspaper still has more resources at its disposal than almost any blog. Why aren’t newspapers using blogs to extend their coverage (more than they already do)? Readers still perceive newspapers to be of a higher editorial quality than blogs – why not capitalize on such a competitive advantage? Validate what your readers already think. Provide superior content. Offer in-depth analysis. Leverage your press passes to give readers levels of access that bloggers can’t match.

There’s no way to guarantee people will share your content. But offering high-quality, unique content is a HUGE marketing advantage. Print may be dying, but the people, processes and standards that created great newspapers still have applications online. The papers that survive these transitional years will be the ones that leverage their existing strengths in the new marketplace.