(Almost) everything remained stable
Press Statistics: Frustration in the spring, a high point in the fall: Despite declining circulation, Mach Basic reports growing reach for many print titles. Nothing out of the ordinary, say media researchers.
Press statistics Frustration in spring, highs in fall: despite circulation losses, Mach Basic shows growing reach for many print titles. Nothing out of the ordinary, say the media researchers. "The above-average, sometimes significant changes in circulation and readership of individual titles require an explanation," demands Roland Oetterli, Publishing Director of the Aargauer Zeitung. And he is not alone in this view. "We have already asked Wemf to explain this phenomenon to us, which is inexplicable at first glance," adds Jürg Brauchli, Head of Newspapers at Tamedia. Ringier spokeswoman Eva Keller would also like some clarification from the AG für Werbemedienforschung. The fact that a large proportion of print titles are experiencing falling circulations and rising readership figures at the same time is indeed giving rise to some heated discussions in the publishing industry. Even doubts about Wemf's methodology are being raised here and there. Some people are also asking whether the "phenomenon" can perhaps be explained using the figures from the MA Leader, at least for the titles surveyed.
Hands off, say the professionals, because the picture only seems more confusing. The only constant here: A title that loses a lot of circulation usually also loses a lot of top leaders - or vice versa. Gains and losses among the leaders, on the other hand, show no correlation with circulation fluctuations.
Own newspaper as a luxury...
The explanation from NZZ publishing director Tobias Trevisan may be more helpful. He recalls that newspapers had increased in circulation for many years without increasing their reach to the same extent. This was primarily due to the individualization of households. Trevisan deduces from this that "in good years, people have the 'luxury' of subscribing to their own newspaper, while in years when they have to save money, they share the newspaper or read it elsewhere." This theory is not only supported by other publishing professionals, but also by experts such as Josef Trappel from Prognos and Professor Gabriele Siegert (see page 38).
Daniel Sommer, publishing director of Basler Zeitung, on the other hand, states clearly: "Circulation and readership surveys produce two values that are not directly dependent on each other."
Wemf Head of Research Harald Amschler takes a similar view. It can happen that circulation and reach show opposing trends, at least in the short term: "In a long-term comparison, however, both factors generally point in the same direction." He also points out that circulation fluctuations of plus/minus three percent can certainly be described as stable. Last spring, the majority of print circulations were within this range. On average, Swiss-German newspapers with 40000 or more copies only deviated by 2.6 percent from last year's circulation figures. The deviation was only 1.3 percent for smaller newspapers, one percent for advertisers and 3.1 percent for magazines.
Hardly any significant movement
The Wemf researcher also noticed nothing unusual in the readership figures. "Of the 271 titles and combinations that we surveyed in German-speaking Switzerland, only 28 or 10 percent showed significant changes compared to last year's Mach Basic; all the others are in the confidence range and can therefore also be described as stable." In French-speaking Switzerland and Ticino, there was even only one title each with significant changes. Incidentally, Amschler receives support here from Uli Rubner, publishing director of Weltwoche and Bilanz: she came to the same conclusion through her own checks.
Is it all just a storm in a teacup? Amschler doesn't want to go that far, but he speaks of a "Zurich phenomenon": because of Tamedia's new circulation policy, the gap between circulation and reach has widened particularly markedly at first glance. And because some other titles - albeit to a lesser extent - showed similar tendencies, the phenomenon was confirmed, but the relations were lost sight of. In reality, however, "even a SonntagsZeitung can still be described as stable", says Amschler.
However, he admits that this year's figures appear "special" on the surface in that many circulations have moved downwards together and many reach figures have moved upwards in corpore. But that is pure coincidence, said Amschler.
Circulation and reach do not necessarily have to develop in parallel, says Wemf.
Markus Knöpfli
Hands off, say the professionals, because the picture only seems more confusing. The only constant here: A title that loses a lot of circulation usually also loses a lot of top leaders - or vice versa. Gains and losses among the leaders, on the other hand, show no correlation with circulation fluctuations.
Own newspaper as a luxury...
The explanation from NZZ publishing director Tobias Trevisan may be more helpful. He recalls that newspapers had increased in circulation for many years without increasing their reach to the same extent. This was primarily due to the individualization of households. Trevisan deduces from this that "in good years, people have the 'luxury' of subscribing to their own newspaper, while in years when they have to save money, they share the newspaper or read it elsewhere." This theory is not only supported by other publishing professionals, but also by experts such as Josef Trappel from Prognos and Professor Gabriele Siegert (see page 38).
Daniel Sommer, publishing director of Basler Zeitung, on the other hand, states clearly: "Circulation and readership surveys produce two values that are not directly dependent on each other."
Wemf Head of Research Harald Amschler takes a similar view. It can happen that circulation and reach show opposing trends, at least in the short term: "In a long-term comparison, however, both factors generally point in the same direction." He also points out that circulation fluctuations of plus/minus three percent can certainly be described as stable. Last spring, the majority of print circulations were within this range. On average, Swiss-German newspapers with 40000 or more copies only deviated by 2.6 percent from last year's circulation figures. The deviation was only 1.3 percent for smaller newspapers, one percent for advertisers and 3.1 percent for magazines.
Hardly any significant movement
The Wemf researcher also noticed nothing unusual in the readership figures. "Of the 271 titles and combinations that we surveyed in German-speaking Switzerland, only 28 or 10 percent showed significant changes compared to last year's Mach Basic; all the others are in the confidence range and can therefore also be described as stable." In French-speaking Switzerland and Ticino, there was even only one title each with significant changes. Incidentally, Amschler receives support here from Uli Rubner, publishing director of Weltwoche and Bilanz: she came to the same conclusion through her own checks.
Is it all just a storm in a teacup? Amschler doesn't want to go that far, but he speaks of a "Zurich phenomenon": because of Tamedia's new circulation policy, the gap between circulation and reach has widened particularly markedly at first glance. And because some other titles - albeit to a lesser extent - showed similar tendencies, the phenomenon was confirmed, but the relations were lost sight of. In reality, however, "even a SonntagsZeitung can still be described as stable", says Amschler.
However, he admits that this year's figures appear "special" on the surface in that many circulations have moved downwards together and many reach figures have moved upwards in corpore. But that is pure coincidence, said Amschler.
Circulation and reach do not necessarily have to develop in parallel, says Wemf.
Markus Knöpfli
