Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Magazine Site Licensing and the BPA Worldwide
Magazine "site licenses". Boring? Hardly. This is actually a great way for all types of publishers to increase reach and revenue in these challenging times.
Currently, a number of professional and trade publishers are distributing to corporations and libraries a "digital edition" for sharing. And many others would like to.
However, publishers that are audited by BPA Worldwide, and would like to "count" these subscriptions on their audit statements, cannot. (The ABC already allows a form of this reporting.)
Currently, BPA Worldwide requires that a contract must require the administrator of the license to notify all individuals of the availability of each issue. Licenses are reported only for a specific number of seats -- and a global or corporate-wide agreement cannot be reported.
There is a lively blog discussion on the topic of "BPA considering non-request electronic circulation as qualified" which directly relates to this issue.
So, one idea is to combine the corporate-wide agreement model with a tracking/reporting 'usage' report (i.e., the number of readers per month). Perhaps we can use the new BPA/Nielsen system as a way to report these to advertisers.
Texterity has announced a new IP address authentication method (see Texterity Announces Site Licensing Program for Digital Editions. However, having the technical means to provide IP address range and "domain" content protection and authorization doesn't solve the "accountability" problem.
Texterity pledges to work with publishers and audit organizations to provide innovative ways to server readers, the publishers, and the advertsers in an accountable and effective manner.
Currently, a number of professional and trade publishers are distributing to corporations and libraries a "digital edition" for sharing. And many others would like to.
However, publishers that are audited by BPA Worldwide, and would like to "count" these subscriptions on their audit statements, cannot. (The ABC already allows a form of this reporting.)
Currently, BPA Worldwide requires that a contract must require the administrator of the license to notify all individuals of the availability of each issue. Licenses are reported only for a specific number of seats -- and a global or corporate-wide agreement cannot be reported.
There is a lively blog discussion on the topic of "BPA considering non-request electronic circulation as qualified" which directly relates to this issue.
So, one idea is to combine the corporate-wide agreement model with a tracking/reporting 'usage' report (i.e., the number of readers per month). Perhaps we can use the new BPA/Nielsen system as a way to report these to advertisers.
Texterity has announced a new IP address authentication method (see Texterity Announces Site Licensing Program for Digital Editions. However, having the technical means to provide IP address range and "domain" content protection and authorization doesn't solve the "accountability" problem.
Texterity pledges to work with publishers and audit organizations to provide innovative ways to server readers, the publishers, and the advertsers in an accountable and effective manner.
Labels: BPA, BPA Circulation, Site Licenses
Comments:
<< Home
I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Kaylee
http://www.craigslistdecoded.info
Kaylee
http://www.craigslistdecoded.info
Cimarron,
A follow up on the question of BPA considering non-request digital editions as qualified. Last week several of our advisory committees began reviewing the question of allowing to count as copies served those publishers’ e-mail alerts with a hyperlink to an electronic edition sent to individuals who did not request the magazine in its digital format.
BPA’s US Publishers, US Business Audience Development, US Consumer Audience Development and the European Audience Development/Fulfillment Advisory Committees shared their thoughts on this item.
Many members of the US Audience Development Committee-Business would like to see non-requested electronic editions count as qualified circulation, but realize that the media buyers and the publishers are not in favor of such a move. As a compromise, they proposed reporting non-requested electronic editions as non-qualified circulation, but allow the publishers to report additional demographic data regarding the non-requested electronic editions in the explanatory paragraph.
The committee also suggested a working group of media buyers, publishers, audience development managers and digital magazine enablers (DMEs) be formed to begin examining the future of reporting digital magazines. The group will be facilitated by Media Ideas as consultant to BPA on this matter.
Meanwhile, both the US Audience Development Committee-Consumer and the European Audience Development/Fulfillment Advisory Committee recommended a reaffirmation of current rules stating electronic editions must be requested to be counted as qualified circulation; however, the committee also recommended allowing non-requested electronic editions as non-qualified circulation with reporting within the average non-qualified table.
Other BPA committees will continue to weigh in with their views on the topic until the item goes before the corporate board on May 21st for a final vote.
Post a Comment
A follow up on the question of BPA considering non-request digital editions as qualified. Last week several of our advisory committees began reviewing the question of allowing to count as copies served those publishers’ e-mail alerts with a hyperlink to an electronic edition sent to individuals who did not request the magazine in its digital format.
BPA’s US Publishers, US Business Audience Development, US Consumer Audience Development and the European Audience Development/Fulfillment Advisory Committees shared their thoughts on this item.
Many members of the US Audience Development Committee-Business would like to see non-requested electronic editions count as qualified circulation, but realize that the media buyers and the publishers are not in favor of such a move. As a compromise, they proposed reporting non-requested electronic editions as non-qualified circulation, but allow the publishers to report additional demographic data regarding the non-requested electronic editions in the explanatory paragraph.
The committee also suggested a working group of media buyers, publishers, audience development managers and digital magazine enablers (DMEs) be formed to begin examining the future of reporting digital magazines. The group will be facilitated by Media Ideas as consultant to BPA on this matter.
Meanwhile, both the US Audience Development Committee-Consumer and the European Audience Development/Fulfillment Advisory Committee recommended a reaffirmation of current rules stating electronic editions must be requested to be counted as qualified circulation; however, the committee also recommended allowing non-requested electronic editions as non-qualified circulation with reporting within the average non-qualified table.
Other BPA committees will continue to weigh in with their views on the topic until the item goes before the corporate board on May 21st for a final vote.
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]