New York Times – where are the missed clicks and views?
Most of you have probably already read the very interesting “leaked” audit about the New York Times. If not, I strongly recommend you do: Innovation Report.
One of the findings in this study is that there are many publishers that actually grow audiences re-purposing New York Times content, without the New York Times benefiting from it.
This was intriguing and we decided to investigate, using our database of publishers/bloggers/influencers (name them the way you prefer).
So we built 4 topics that we ran against our organized database of 600,000 bloggers, looking at everything they published over the last 6 months.
Our topics are defined as follows:
- NYT Either is a mention of either the New York Times or a reference to a nytimes url.
- NYT Both is an article where both the New York Times (as a brand) and the nytimes as a url are present (the good guys).
- NYT Url is an article with a reference to a nytimes url but no mention of the New York Times as a brand.
- NYT Name is an article where the brand is mentioned (New York Times), but without any link to the newspaper => these are the views that the New York Times is missing.
And here are the results. [Note that NYT Either should be the sum of the three others, which is almost the case – my topic definition is clearly not 100% perfect… but close.]
So, what we see is that 37% of mentions (59,687) of the New York Times don’t have a link to the newspaper. Pretty significant.
Looking a little deeper, we can highlight the vertical/tribes where the New York Times is mentioned the most:
No real surprise: Economy, Politics, Books are the tribes with the highest volume of mentions.
Now when we look at where (in which tribe) people use the name (New York Times), without references to urls, we get the following chart:
If we compare and get a percentage of “use of the name without url”, we get the following graph:
Read this as follows: “amongst the Literatura Brazil publishers, only 3% of the people mentioning “New York Times” also include a link to the Newspaper”.
We clearly see that book as a category and language (two brazilian tribes in the top5)are the top problems for link back.
For book, this is related to “New York Times bestselling” expression. Here is a quick look at the expressions mentioned the most with New York Times in the Book tribe:
So maybe build a bio database for NYT Bestselling authors and make it easy and useful for publishers to link back?
As for the foreign references, maybe provide a short version in local language for the main foreign market like Spanish and Portuguese. After all, the NYT is advocating learning languages (http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/01/29/is-learning-a-language-other-than-english-worthwhile/more-foreign-languages-means-more-opportunities – see, I put a link back!). Just in the US, Spanish would be a good addition and as a global reference, it may be worth it to have local language versions.
Diving into another mainstream category where the gap is significant, we looked at the “Journalism” tribe and spotted the good guys – don’t want to get into trouble exposing the journalists that steal from the NYT😉.
Here is the list of journalists with “high reach” that link back to the NYT:
First number is the frequency of link back, second the influence withing the Journalism community, third is a reach indicator.