Print vs Online Coverage – And the Winner Is…
A common issue arose from the topic covered in yesterday’s post (re Nuventix in Scientific American) – what is the value of print vs. online coverage? Many of our long-standing tech clients still strongly believe that print is where it’s at and while I too have caught myself being a bit “old school” on certain topics, this is not one of them. While print stories make for good wall-mounted displays, online coverage is out there working for you, connecting the dots between PR and its impact on your business. Four reasons why online is king:
1) Online usually gets more eyeballs. In the case of SciAm, over 3x’s as many (2M unique monthly website visitors compared to 607K monthly print subscribers)
2) Online supports a company’s SEO objectives. Yesterday, when the Nuventix SciAm story hit, the company realized its 5th highest website traffic day ever.
3) Online can be “pushed” to more eyeballs than just the base website’s visitors via social media tools. The initial Tweet that went out from @sciam on this story reached 42,229 people, according to TweetReach – and that’s just one tool, one avenue.
4) Online has longevity. Last month’s print issue will be recycled when the new one arrives – online stories live on in databases much longer.
You tell me – still jonesin’ for that framed art for your office wall or are you more interested in marketing that contributes to the bottom line?