"Readerscan clears the fog"
Carlo Imboden, publishing consultant and developer of the new measuring device, on quota thinking and competitive newspapers.
Carlo Imboden, publishing consultant and developer of the new measuring device, on quota thinking and competitive newspapersMr. Imboden, you are from Bern. However, the market launch of your Readerscan took place in Germany. No, I used to work for the Berner Zeitung and currently have a few Swiss inquiries. On the other side of the Rhine, however, the decline in readership and loss of reach of the print media is even more drastic than here in Switzerland and the pressure to act is correspondingly greater. In addition, the Holtzbrinck Group, to which Mainpost belongs, was an ideal partner because it is also extremely progressive in other areas.
What's new about Readerscan is not the technology, but its application. How did you come up with the idea of collecting usage rates for newspapers and magazines?
As a publishing consultant, two things always irritated me: firstly, that everyone thought they knew their readers. And secondly, the basic assumption that this reader knows what he or she is doing.
As a board member of the market research institute IHA-GfK, I was also involved in tele- and radiocontrol. The press also needs similarly precise and reliable instruments in order to be able to hold its own against the electronic media: I was already thinking this at the end of the 1990s. Readerscan emerged from this vision in three stages.
Competitiveness in honor, but doesn't your tool also promote
editorial quota thinking?
Only insofar as "quota" is understood as the measurability of a change. Up to now, publishers have only more or less elegantly poked around in the fog when it came to the use of their products in terms of content. Readerscan finally clears this fog and enables editorial teams to make optimum use of their limited resources.
The pen-armed advisor will soon replace the paper maker and the editor-in-chief.
(laughs) Don't worry! Experienced journalists are needed to interpret and implement the data. However, they must be able and willing to engage in continuous self-criticism. We simply show the editorial team the target. Each individual journalist has to shoot for themselves.
Interview: Oliver Classen
What's new about Readerscan is not the technology, but its application. How did you come up with the idea of collecting usage rates for newspapers and magazines?
As a publishing consultant, two things always irritated me: firstly, that everyone thought they knew their readers. And secondly, the basic assumption that this reader knows what he or she is doing.
As a board member of the market research institute IHA-GfK, I was also involved in tele- and radiocontrol. The press also needs similarly precise and reliable instruments in order to be able to hold its own against the electronic media: I was already thinking this at the end of the 1990s. Readerscan emerged from this vision in three stages.
Competitiveness in honor, but doesn't your tool also promote
editorial quota thinking?
Only insofar as "quota" is understood as the measurability of a change. Up to now, publishers have only more or less elegantly poked around in the fog when it came to the use of their products in terms of content. Readerscan finally clears this fog and enables editorial teams to make optimum use of their limited resources.
The pen-armed advisor will soon replace the paper maker and the editor-in-chief.
(laughs) Don't worry! Experienced journalists are needed to interpret and implement the data. However, they must be able and willing to engage in continuous self-criticism. We simply show the editorial team the target. Each individual journalist has to shoot for themselves.
Interview: Oliver Classen
