To say these are difficult economic times, is a vast understatement. In the media industry, publishers must consider new, low-cost options to extend their brand’s reach in an effort to capture the attention of as many marketers they can.
With low circulation and production/distribution costs, the use of non-request electronic (digital) circulation is becoming a very attractive option to this increasingly critical situation.
However, BPA’s current rules (which we are considering amending) prohibit the inclusion of non-request electronic circulation anywhere on the BPA statement. As a result, publishers with this type of circulation are unable to take advantage of this opportunity to grow their audience.
Therefore, we would like you to consider the two positions below and add your comments below:
- Allow for the reporting of non-request electronic circulation as non-qualified in paragraph 9, additional data, only. This is similar to the reporting of non-qualified print copies, which many publishers do now to report trade show copies, rotated copies, or bonus copies.
- Allow the reporting of qualified electronic circulation for all qualified source channels, including Communication from recipient or recipient’s company (other than request), Association Rosters and Directories, Business Directories, Manufacturers, Distributors, and Wholesalers lists and Other sources.
BPA is concerned that non-request electronic circulation could be considered spam and boost circulation levels unnaturally. How does one safeguard against this? Some thoughts, should:
- BPA limit the amount of non-request electronic circulation to 5%, 10% or 15% of the total qualified?
- BPA allow only those e-mails that can be proven to have been delivered?
- BPA require a prominent opt out?
- BPA require specific content in the e-mail’s subject line?
- BPA establish a requirement that those who do opt out are not counted at all (including the first copy served)?
Do you agree, provided data is fully disclosed, the value of this type of circulation should be left to the user of the statement to determine its value?
The above points, as well as your valuable feedback, will serve as an important step forward for BPA publisher, advertiser and agency members.
I urge you and your staff to consider and comment on these two options—and submit alternative ideas of your own—in the area below this post. To post your comments, scroll to the bottom of this blog entry and click on the “Comments” link. You will see a box in which to submit any ideas.
I look forward to reading your comments.
