E-mail this post
Recently I wrote a column for Editor & Publisher Online espousing the idea of enhancing classifieds sections in printed newspapers by turning them into high-quality editorial sections integrated with classified ads. (”Print Classifieds for the Internet Age.”) It profiled a couple of new attempts (St. Petersburg Times and Baltimore Sun) to have their printed classifieds sections (general classifieds and a recruitment section, respectively) not only serve goal-oriented searchers, but also to bring in non-searchers who might happen on interesting ads while perusing editorial content. (A message of those experiments: Go beyond advertorial content and get serious about the content.)
In the monthly print edition of Editor & Publisher (which landed in my physical mail box today) Dale Pearson expressed this countervailing view:
“Steve, pu-leeze! The same old tired solution of sprinkling classifieds with quality editorial content ship has sailed and sunk … in main news, sports, business, every section! Just like classifieds across the country.
“Newspapers already know that the bees don’t always flock to the flowers. The sexiest design won’t sell one more line. How about: frequent flyer-ish discounts for classifieds, for subscribers — the longer, the bigger the discount? Why should I pay the same as a non-subscriber? No matter what they do, it all revolves around price, period. Perception is: daily classifieds are way too expensive, non-productive. That’s like GM trying to sell me quality — it’s not going to happen.
“Stop trying to re-think or reinvent classifieds. Start with re-doing your rates, to a point where the average reader can afford it over FREE Craigslist listings and many others. Now, you’re just rearranging the chairs on the Titanic. Why does a five-line ad in garage sale cost $20 and same space (five lines) in real estate $125? Ink cost more? Give me a break. It’s the price, stupid! I’ve got the guts to say, you don’t!”
My response: Dale, I don’t think we’re that far apart in our thinking. You, however, cite failed attempts at incorporating classifieds into various other sections of the print edition. That’s not what St. Pete or Baltimore are doing; they see the value in having stand-alone sections (easier to sell), but significantly improving them with quality content and better usability through redesigning the print ads themselves.
Neither St. Pete nor Baltimore are doing it at this point, but I would also recommend upselling contextual classified-ad blocks for other (editorial) sections, where ads are repeated in those positions and in the main classifieds section.
In terms of pricing and re-doing your rates, I’m with you. They need to compete with Craigslist, if there’s one in their market, and they need to be simplified; get rid of newspapers’ historically complex set of classified ad rates. In markets and categories where Craigslist, et al are a major factor, consider following the model that the Houston Chronicle recently adopted, offering base-level free ads online and selling various upsell options, covering print and online.
So you’re right, Dale. Newspapers need to start competing intelligently on rates, in cases where market conditions and competition dictate it.
RECENT COMMENTS