LAT Publisher David Hiller spins it with some positive insight, as reported at LA Observed:
Importantly, readership increased modestly for both daily and Sunday, reaching almost 2.2 million daily and 3.3 million Sunday.How can this be, you ask?
It's about counting not just copies sold, but eyes as well.
As explained by the Audit Bureau, the readers-per-copy average is complicated enough to warrant a white paper on the subject. Anything that's not verifiable by a receipt is bound to cause controversy, especially when advertisers are asked to pay more for an ad because of it.
In the simplest terms, however, reader counts are all about counting not just the people who buy a copy of the paper, but those who read behind the person who bought it. Two people in a subscriber household? Bing! That's two readers for that subscription. Husband and wife buy a paper on their way to breakfast with another couple? Bong! That's four sets of eyes.
So, what Hiller appears to be saying is that fewer people are paying to read the LA Times, but more people are reading it.
— TJ Sullivan in LA
No comments:
Post a Comment
All comments are appreciated, especially those that inspire spirited-but-courteous discussions. Your comment will be reviewed before it is posted on the site.
Anonymous comments are not permitted. I put my name on what I say here, so I hope you don't mind doing so as well.