-
I don't think execs think like media Twitter people. I think strategies like what we're seeing at NYT reflect an attempt to increase audiences by appealing to different, add'l, people. Not saying it'll work or is a good idea, but it sounds a lot more like the executive mindset Chronotope/964142736424275968
-
People need a lot of motivation to cancel a subscription. What is the NYT believes it has liberal subscribers maxed out, and is looking for conservatives subscribers.
-
It could believe that a conservative opinion page and assumed liberal newsroom would allow them to have their cake and eat it too.
-
Also, in my previous experience, there are way more advertisers out there who implicitly target the right, specifically; but few who do so for the left.
-
The left continues to trend anti capitalist (not criticizing, just observing) which means explicitly or implicitly targeting them as a user segment is going to be less useful.
-
Also, looking to Infowars' marketplace, the right seems more likely to click on a sketchy ad, and perhaps buy some random enhancements pill. That means they likely pair with more valuable remnant fill.
-
That said, to chase that strategy at a significantly liberal publication is more likely to dilute a concentrated audience that can bring high value ads in other ways, but that's harder to see from a C suite birds eye view
-
Indeed, chasing this would be mistaking one offs for a trend. It's harder to maintain a business model off of Drudge Bumps than is immediately obvious in the traffic numbers
-
Arguably the value of these pieces to the right derives in their out of character placement. If this sentiment becomes the character, traffic will not be sustained.