One of my clients is a multinational manufacturing firm that has published its own “glossy” company magazine for years now. The multi-page periodical is published several times a year, in several regional editions including one for the North American market.
It’s a magazine that’s full of interesting customer “case histories” accompanied by large, eye-catching photos. The stories are well-written and sufficiently “breezy” in character to read quickly and without strenuous effort. The North American edition is direct-mailed to a sizable target audience of mid-five figures.
And I wonder how many people actually read it.
The reason for my suspicion stems from the time we were asked to produce a survey asking about readers’ topic preferences for the magazine. The questionnaire was bound into one of the North American issues, including a postage-paid return envelope. The survey was simple and brief (tick-boxes with no open-ended questions). And there was an incentive offered to participate.
In short, it was the kind of survey that anyone who engaged with the publication even marginally would find worthwhile and easy to complete.
… Except that (practically) no one did so.
The unavoidable conclusion: people were so unengaged with the publication that they weren’t even opening the magazine to discover that there was a survey to fill out.
In the world of company e-mail newsletters, is the same dynamic is at work? One might think not. After all, readers must opt-in to receive them – suggesting that their engagement level would tend to be higher.
Well … no.
A just-published study titled How Audiences View Content Marketing, finds that company e-newsletters are just as “disengaging” as the printed pieces of yesteryear.
The study’s results are based on a survey conducted by digital web design firm Blue Fountain Media. Among the findings outlined in the report are these interesting nuggets:
- One in five respondents completely ignore the e-newsletters they receive, while more than half scan headlines before deciding to read anything.
- Two-thirds of respondents admitted that the main reason for opting in to receive e-newsletters is to take advantage of special offers or discounts, while only around 20% expressed any interest at all in receiving information about the company.
- More than half of respondents (~52%) feel that newsletter content is too “commercial” (as in “too sales-y”). Other complaints are that the e-newsletters are “too long” (~21%) or “boring” (~19%).
Even more alarming is this finding: Approximately one-third of the respondents felt that e-newsletter content is so lame, it actually leads them to question using the product or service.
That seems like marketing going in reverse!
What Blue Fountain has uncovered may be indicative of another challenge as well: the diminishing allure of content marketing. Over time, readers have become cautious about accepting online content as the gospel truth; this research pegs it at two-thirds of respondents feeling this way.
At the same time, only about one-third of the respondents think that they can distinguish well between fact-based content versus content with an “agenda” behind it. And therein lies the basis for suspicion or distrust.
On the plus side, the research found that readers are more apt to engage with video content, so that may be a way for e-newsletters to fight back in the battle for relevance. But it still seems a pretty tall order.
I address the topic of company e-newsletters in a second blog post to follow. Stay tuned …
2 thoughts on “Company e-newsletters: Much ado about … what?”
As bad as glossies intended for customers or prospects are the infamous newsletters for employees. Employees *may* read company newsletters when people they know are mentioned personally. Somebody’s new baby or pictures from the office party may be worth a glance, but a glossy layout featuring articles about plumbing valves or sulfur extraction fools no one into thinking it is Forbes Magazine.
If there is an eccentric CEO editing it, cynical employees will page through the newsletter for snickers. I know of one international firm where the owner’s terrier died after 8 years. That month the company newsletter contained 8 pages of identical “annual portraits” of the dog staring blankly into the camera. No warm and fuzzy text. Just the pictures.
This is the same company which would post an annual holiday portrait of the owner’s family. One year, disapproving of the expression on his wife’s face, this CEO had the photographer replace her head with the portrait from the year before.
Company newsletters, I conclude, are looked upon — and tolerated — as byproducts of managerial ego trips.
[…] post is a continuation of a topic I wrote about several days ago. That column focused on the (lack of) reader engagement with customer e-newsletters and what may be the root […]