Population Statistic: Read. React. Repeat.
Monday, June 04, 2021

My first impression of the trend of magazine publishers providing in-house production services for advertising clients, thus bypassing the traditional third-party agency is that it constitutes some sort of church-state division.

That’s not really accurate, of course. Editorial is under no more pressure by having the ad-creation people down the hall than when they’re across town/country. If anything, it’s more like a breach of the state-state division: The business side of a publishing house appropriating another business function that’s ordinarily outsourced. And worse, offering it as a bundled value-added part of the ad buy:

Meredith 360 charges for its services, while Condé Nast and Hearst charge for costs only when they create custom programs for advertisers, executives at those companies said. (Condé Nast also makes a profit from events like Fashion Rocks.) The rate structure means that Condé Nast can often beat ad agencies on price, [Condé Nast Media Group president Richard] Beckman said.

“We don’t have to make money from our creative, because we make money from our media,” he said.

So where does this go? Do in-house agencies retain clients even if those clients stop buying pages in their companies’ publications? How proprietary is the creative — can it be used in rival magazines/outlets? Right now, there are too many questions to form a clear opinion.

by Costa Tsiokos, Mon 06/04/2021 11:38:48 PM
Category: Advert./Mktg., Publishing | Permalink |

Trackback this entry: Right-click and copy link
Feedback »
Leave a comment


PLEASE NOTE: Various types of comment moderation may be triggered once you hit the "Say It!" button below. Common causes for this are the inclusion of several hyperlinks and/or spam words in the comment field. Please do not hit the "Say It!" button more than once. If you feel your comment is being blocked without cause, feel free to email me about it.