It is undisputed that internet, mobile and tablet usage is growing. But is it really true that newspaper consumption on these channels is also increasing and, above all, is the increase in virtual use really making up for the loss of paper-based reading?
It is not that clear. In any case, there is still no study in Switzerland that proves this. However, there are indications that "the truth" is more nuanced.
Let's make a "simple" comparison by contrasting the reach development of individual titles (according to Mach Basic) with that of the title websites (according to NET Metrix profiles from 2007). However, this has two drawbacks. Firstly, the two reach figures contain overlaps, but nobody knows the number of these double users. Secondly, NET Metrix profiles uniformly show weekly reach (unique users per week), while Mach Basic shows readers per issue (LpA), which for daily newspapers almost amounts to a daily reach, for weekly titles to a weekly reach and for monthly titles to a monthly reach. In other words, a direct comparison of the two reach figures is only possible with reservations; the publication frequency of the individual print titles must be taken into account.
Nevertheless, a graphical comparison of coverage trends shows that even titles on the same topic (e.g. business titles) or of the same typology (e.g. large daily newspapers) show different trends. Roughly speaking, five categories can be distinguished: the opponents, the losers, the stagnating, the growing and the winners.
Among the counteracting titles are those whose weekly internet reach is increasing while their readership figures are falling. This is particularly pronounced for Tribune de Genève (chart), Tages-Anzeiger, 24 heures and 20 minutes. However, it is not possible to determine whether these titles are gaining or losing reach on balance on the basis of the available figures. The growing group not only maintains a more or less stable print readership, but also shows a slight increase in web usage (Basler Zeitung, graphic, Le Temps). Finally, the stagnating group includes those titles where print readership remains stable and web usage remains at a (low) level (SonntagsZeitung, Grafik, Handelszeitung, Schweizer Illustrierte, Finanz und Wirtschaft). Then there are the losers, where print readership is clearly declining more sharply than web usage is increasing, and their total user base is declining (Weltwoche, graphic, Annabelle). This leaves the winners, where both print and web usage are growing (20 Minuten D-CH, graphic, Beobachter, Schweizer Familie).
Conclusion
The claim that newspaper consumption is shifting to the web cannot therefore be substantiated across the board. It is clear that most titles reach a certain level of web usage, but then stagnate. The extent of this web usage also varies greatly and is even negligible in some cases.
It is therefore doubtful whether the overall user base of print titles can be maintained or even increased thanks to web usage. It even seems that this is only possible in exceptional cases. The most important indication is provided by the pilot study "Total Audience 1.0" by Wemf and NET Metrix, presented in the 4/11 issue of WW. It is the only study to date that has examined the total user base of a print title and its web portal and broken this down into pure print users, pure web users and dual users. The most important findings: the total user base of a print brand (LpA plus web-only users) can in some cases be a third larger than the print-only reach (examples: Tribune de Genève 35%, Tages-Anzeiger 35%, Basler Zeitung 29%). In most cases, however, the pure web user base is much smaller. Beobachter, Schweizer Illustrierte and Handelszeitung, for example, only have between 3 and 10 percent pure web users. For other titles, the proportion is between 17 and 26 percent (including 20 Minuten). But beware: the "Total Audience 1.0" study is also based on inconsistent reach periods from Mach Basic and Net Metix profiles (LpA and UU/week). If web usage were based on daily rather than weekly reach, the proportion of web users would be around half lower. This can be deduced from the NET Metrix Profile 2011-1 study, which shows daily reach for some titles for the first time (e.g. Tages-Anzeiger: 131,000 UU/day; 354,000 UU/week; 753,000 UU/month). Consequently, the daily web share of the total user base is currently between 2 and a maximum of 25 percent, depending on the title.
If we now look at the development over the last five years, we can see that the print edition of the SonntagsZeitung, for example, has 67,000 fewer weekly readers today than in Mach Basic 2006-1, while at the same time it was only able to generate 17,000 weekly web users on the web. This clearly shows that the SoZ's web usage has not reached the
loss of print readership. The same applies to the Tribune de Genève, which has lost 43,000 daily readers since 2006, but currently has a measured daily web reach of 31,000 people according to Net Metrix 2001-1. Or the Basler Zeitung: it has lost 35,000 readers in five years, but its website is only consulted by 30,000 people per day. In short, these three titles have definitely seen a drop in their total user base. And they are not the only ones: Schweizer Illustrierte, Weltwoche, Annabelle and 24 heures all suffered the same fate.
But there are also other examples, such as the Tages-Anzeiger: its loss of 99,000 readers since 2006 is more than compensated for by its large web user base (measured daily reach: 131,000 UU). Nevertheless, it is unlikely that this title was able to increase its total reach compared to 2006, as the number of daily double users of Tagesanzeiger.ch and the print edition still have to be taken into account, and nobody knows this figure. Based on Total Audience 1.0, however, a non-significant loss can be estimated compared to 2006. On a positive note, the total reach of the Tages-Anzeiger remained more or less stable. After all. Le Temps fared even better, losing only 2000 readers compared to 2006, which it can more than make up for thanks to the web community (measured daily reach: 19000 UU). Le Temps was therefore almost certainly able to slightly increase its overall reach. The situation is probably similar for the Handelszeitung. Markus Knöpfli