Abstract

    Branding and brand identity may be the marketing buzzwords of the year, but they are the source of intense headaches and feverish nightmares for many publishers of small newspapers. The common perception of a branding campaign entails an expensive reader survey and series of focus groups, which lead to hiring a slick agency to develop an advertising campaign, which in turn leads to a costly series of television ads, posters and slogans. But developing a brand identity need not be daunting -- nor expensive.  Newspaper publishers can capitalize on some of the best skills of their own staffs -- the investigative and narrative prowess of the news staff and the sales savvy of the advertising staff -- to give their papers an effective brand identity. The process developed by the author entail the analysis of a newspaper in terms of its ãpersonality.ä  Managers, staff member, readers and advertisers help paint a portrait of the newspaper as an imaginary person.  Those pictures of ãwhoä the newspaper is are compared to the ideal picture of the newspaper in the publisherâs mind.  Then simple strategies are developed to realign the competing images into a ãtargetä personality.  While advertising might help at this point, the author explains how organizational management tactics can have stronger and longer-lasting impact without destroying the existing culture of the newspaper.
 

Who is my paper, anyway?
"Personality profiling" to assess newspaper brand identity

    Branding may be the most misunderstood marketing concept on the table today.  The very mention of the term tends to start arguments in newsrooms and publisherâs offices.  Nevertheless, our friends on Wall Street have assured us that branding is the hottest road to success since "cyber" entered the vocabulary, making it well worth our while to sort through the branding puzzle.

    Back in the days when I kept my sleeves rolled up at the newsdesk of a small-town daily, I chanted a catchy axiom to my reporters:  Keep It Simple, Stupid.  Later, in graduate school, I learned that the sophisticated version of K.I.S.S. is an axiom known as Occamâs Razor: "It is vain to do with more what can be done with fewer" (Jones and Wilson 1987, p. 328).  In deference to both those working journalists of my younger years and the Franciscan scholar who taught us cut to the chase, this paper will try to simplify to an extreme the concept of branding and will outline a program any publisher can use to take stock of his or her brand equity.

     I have a somewhat unique background for looking at the concept of newspaper branding.  Like most of us, I started as an avid newspaper reader. Then I became a reporter and editor.  I later jumped the aisle to become a newspaper advertising manager and then eventually the general manager of a daily.  And now Iâve changed perspectives again ? this time to that of an academic working on my Ph.D. at the University of Oregon.

     I tell you that just so I can legitimately remind you what branding is not .  Itâs not the point of view of one department of the newspaper.  Branding is not just the type of stories a paper runs, nor is it just the effectiveness of its advertising, nor the color of its ink and the shape of type it uses in its flag and headlines.  It isnât even the promotions the paper runs to get its name out there.

     Branding isnât any one of those things.  Itâs all of them --  and more.  Itâs the development of the overall personality of any specific product or service -- newspapers included.  This is hardly an original observation. Psychologists and communications researchers have long known that human characteristics are often associated inanimate objects (Aaker 1999a).  And, of course, we can all cite examples from our own lives where we have anthropomorphized (by talking to, praising or cursing) such things as cars, computers ? and newspapers.

     Most of us associate the term "brand" with corporate logos, and certainly brand managers go to great extremes to burn the image of their logos into our cultural memory.  Golden arches, the  swoosh  and the unblinking TV eye are so recognizable one need not even mention the companies for which they stand.
But sometimes branding is more closely tied to a slogan than a logo.  If I said, "Good to the last drop" most of you would think immediately of Maxwell House Coffee.  In the newspaper business, "All the news thatâs fit to print," is easily identified with the New York Times.

     One can then take it another step up the step and look at more abstract concepts tied to brand names.  "Englandâs luxury automobile" can be little else but Rolls Royce. "The software giant" conjures up images of Bill Gates and Microsoft.

    The point is that the name of almost every product or service leaves some sort of abstract image in the minds of consumers.  The examples above primarily focus on a single aspect of a product to create brand identity. But the best branding creates an overall "good feeling" about the product.

John McManus referred to this practice when Folio magazine explored the role of branding in the print media.  He said that a brand is first and foremost a promise of predictable quality.  But he also noted that no one buys just a catchy jingle and bright logo with a Coke, nor merely a familiar yellow box with Kodak film.  Instead, we buy the emotional experience of refreshment or we buy the warmth and connection of family and friends.

    "The individual buys brands because they speak trust," McManus said.  "Only the brand fits the emotion of those experiences like a glove, and delivers on the promise" (McManus 1998)

     Campbellâs isnât just aiming for your taste buds when it says "Mmm-mmm good."  Itâs hoping to give you the warm and pleasant feeling of Momâs home-cooked meals.  And Prudentialâs "Piece of the Rock" campaign drives home the need for security in every aspect of its customersâ lives.
     So we get ever closer to an every-day understanding of "brand."

     Technical definitions of branding abound, but one of the best was written by Earl Wilkinson of the International Newspaper Marketing Association.  Wilkinson calls branding "the quantifiable, long-term, strategic marketing process of building and overseeing the perceived value of an asset" (Wilkinson 1998, p. 22).

     But as Occam suggested, letâs again slice way to the simple: Most of us just need to know that branding is the process of identifying and promoting our newspaperâs personality  and the reputation that personality has in our community.   It is what people think of the paper when someone mentionâs its name.
Like any good brand, the name of a newspaper should bring to mind some sort of picture or emotion.

     You can get a better grasp of that idea by looking at how we describe people in performance reviews or job recommendations.  The descriptions of people in news stories usually stick to quantifiable physical attributes ? like tall, or dark-haired, or well-dressed.  But are those the terms a manager would use if someone asked "Whatâs Joe really like?" or "Why should Emily get this promotion?"  Of course not.  Any legitimate, in-depth analysis of a person requires more incisive and abstract descriptions.  The manager might say, "Joeâs a loyal team-player who can be counted on to get the job done." Or, "Emily is a natural leader who is not afraid to take risks for what she feels is right."

     It is sometimes easy to forget ? or frightening to remember ? that readers mentally perform a similar performance review of the newspaper every time they put a coin into a news box.

     This brings us to one of the key concepts of consumer behavior ? and one of the reasons newspaper publishers simply must take branding seriously:  People buy with their hearts as well as their heads, and that puts the print media in a special branding role (Oliver, Rust and Varki 1997).

     There is a very, very strong emotional link between the reader and a periodical such as a newspaper or magazine.  The newspaper, in particular, is one of the few consumer products left that most people imbue with personal "ownership."

     Hereâs an easy test to prove that assertion.  Gather a dozen folks from different cities and ask them to describe the newspapers they read.  Youâll find the conversation will quickly become laced with "my newspaper" or "our paper."

    That doesnât happen with cereal or toothpaste.  Newspapers generate very personal brand identity.

     Studies of newspaper circulation problems emphasize the emotional link readers create with newspapers.  One reader said she looks forward to her daily paper because, "itâs kind of like a friend or neighbor coming in"  (Bentley 1998, p. 14).

     That emotional link, , more than anything, is the factor that puts the dollar signs in advertising rates.  Advertisers pay dearly for that emotional tie.  For them, it is a measure of the breadth of our readership. More importantly, it is the signpost to the hearts and minds of the consumers those advertisers most desire.

     In that light, branding is closely tied to the concept of reader loyalty.  And new research shows that the readerâs loyalty to a paper ? brand loyalty -- is more important than we ever imagined. William Pollack, vice president of circulation for the New York Times, quotes research that shows that loyal readers shop more, buy more and follow the cues of advertisers more than "churn" readers.  Janet Robinson of the Times added that brand loyalty goes beyond repeat sales.  She had a great line on this at the Audit Bureau of Circulation conference on branding:

     "Repetitive behavior can be bribed,  brand loyalty must be earned" (ABC 1996)

     If that were not enough to get your attention, there is a huge new challenge for newspapers that absolutely force publishers to think in terms of brand identity.  Iâm talking about the Internet, the fascinating new medium that ? depending on what expert you listen to ? is either the Grim Reaper for print media or a whole new world of opportunity.

     Weâve all seen the Web grow by leaps and bounds ? and with it the on-line presence of newspapers:  In 1995, there were fewer than 60 daily newspapers "online" in the United States.  The number tripled in the next year.  By 1999, the Newspaper Association of America "Hotlinks" web site listed 961 daily newspaper sites and 393 weekly newspaper sites.

     Obviously, Internet versions of the daily newspaper are a fact of life in America, even if their readership and impact has yet to be documented.  While newspaper publishers struggle with questions of design, content, staffing and ad revenue; a more basic branding question threatens their efforts:

     Does an on-line edition of Motown Daily News have the same brand attributes of the printed edition?  Will readers find it just as credible, advertisers find it just as effective and historians find it just as accurate?

     This is an area where the research is just now being done.  But early results indicate readers sometimes perceive a difference between the Web version and the printed version of newspapers.  It appears that casual newspaper brand expansion -- just slapping the flag on a web page -- is not be effective.

     So if we can agree for a moment that establishing a brand identity is important for newspapers, how do we do it?  You canât just go out and place an order for brand equity at a trade show, can you?

     You can certainly buy plenty of advice and promotional help from any number of sources. But building brand equity starts in the mind of the publisher, not in his or her pocketbook.  The brand identity of a newspaper is an idea, not a thing.

     Remember what I said earlier about branding being a lot like personality identification?  Thatâs probably the simplest and most effective way to jump on the "brand wagon."

     The place to start is in the publisherâs office, with this simple question:  "If my newspaper was a person, who would it be?"

 Write a description of the person who best represents your newspaper.  Remember that a personality seldom has just  one "side."  We may be wise, but we may also be boring...OR we could be entertaining, but also dishonest.  Are we a good neighbor?  A reliable old friend?  The town gossip?

     Be as detailed as you comfortably can, describing physical traits, characteristic habits and even political views.  Use the detail you would invoke if you were describing your new love interest in a letter to a close friend.

     When you have a personality description that satisfies you, write it down, then stick it in a drawer.   And donât tell anyone.  No one.

     Next ask the same question to your top managers or a dozen or so other key people in your organization.  It sometimes helps to give them a simple form with the basic question and a few instructions at the top (See Appendix A).

     Finally, ask that same question  of a dozen or so readers ? either picked at random from your subscriber list or buttonholed as they come to your front desk to place an ad or pay a bill.

     This kind of "survey" is not at all scientific and wonât stand up to academic scrutiny, but it will give you an idea of the challenges you face.  As a plus,  you donât need complex statistics to analyze it, just a common-sense comparison of answers.  On a sheet of paper, you can easily consolidate several personality descriptions into one term.  For instance, a recent brand personality audit I performed included the following descriptions by different readers:  "timid," "tries not to offend," "a little boring," "doesnât bug you, but never funny," and "cautious."  I tallied them under a category I called "Mr. Bland."

     Now go dig your own description out of that drawer.  If the answers you get from staff and customers agree with the personal description you hid away ? and if that is the image you really want for your paper ? go back to work with a smile on your face.

     But if the descriptions vary wildly, you need more research and a lot of work. Such variance may indicate that you are delivering a mixed message about who you are or who you want to be.  It may be time for a more formal survey of readers and staff, along with a strong dose of "visioning" with your managers to paint a clear picture of what you really want to be.

     If the three sets of descriptions are basically consistent but paint a picture you donât like, you have another problem.  It means you have the right tools to create a brand identity, but that the identity you created needs an overhaul.

     The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has used this technique as part of a long-term and sophisticated brand research program.  The initial research launched the  biggest promotional campaign in the paperâs history.

     Why the high-powered campaign?  Well, according to Tom Pierce, the Journal Sentinelâs vice president of marketing, the research showed that if the Journal Sentinel were a person, the readers said it would be a white, suburban pro-choice Republican male, rather large of stature and intelligent ? but also arrogant, opinionated, self-centered and self-absorbed.

     While that in itself might not have been bad for the right audience, the description said that Mr. Journal Sentinel "would be respected by his neighbors, but not well-liked" (Fitzgerald 1997).

     The Journal Sentinel reacted with an intensive campaign that showcased the diversity of both the city and the paper, while emphasizing the relationship between the two.  The theme:  "If it happens.  Itâs here."

     Pierce said the branding campaign is still a work in progress.   Although the ads have not resulted in an immediate turnaround in opinion about the paper, follow-up research shows they have had a positive impact.

     And perhaps that is the important lesson from the Journal Sentinel:  Just knowing that you have a brand problem wonât fix it.  But it does give you a fighting chance to address the problem ? or opportunity.

     The other important lesson from the Journal Sentinel study that you will could find in any newspaper branding study is that the publication may already have a powerful "personality" or "reputation."  The key question here is whether that personality matches the one in your mind (or the one of that slip of paper in your desk.)  Managers have to ask themselves whether the image already burned into the readersâ mind is wrong, or whether the idealized version in the publisherâs mind is what needs to change.  Sometimes "the peopleâs choice" is your most powerful ally.

     That scenario came up when I help the student managers of the independent Oregon Daily Emerald review the brand personality of the paper.  Despite the worse fears of the editors and managers, we found that both staff and readers pictured the Emerald pretty much like the typical University of Oregon student:  Striving hard to be grown up while still making youthful mistakes; enthusiastic and at the same time too laid back to be stylish.

     But the Emerald learned a hard lesson about the two-edged nature of branding when it tried to introduce a weekly entertainment section.  "Pulse," the new section, featured bright graphics, was printed on high quality paper and carried only a microscopic notation that it was produced by the Emerald.

     Advertisers loved it.  Student readers, however, assumed it was "just another ad insert" and dumped it out of the paper in or next to the news racks.  It took a full term to strike a balance between the art of newspapering and the reality of branding.  Eventually, editors added a larger "Emerald" logo and dropped back to the same newsprint used for the rest of the paper.

     There was nothing wrong with "Pulse."  It served a viable market with quality content, and used the same format well-established entertainment publications used.  But in terms of personality, it clashed with its older sibling.  Readers comfortable with the "Emerald" didnât recognize the brash little sister as a member of the family.

     Identity is the very soul of branding.  Much to the chagrin of some publishers, however, the identity of a brand is what it is perceived to be, not just what you wish it to be.  As Terrie Robbins of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch wrote in a recent "debate" with Leo Bogart, "If you donât brand your newspaper, the consumer will"  (Robbins and Bogart 1999).

     The simple personality audit I described above will go a long way toward putting a recognizable brand face on your newspaper.  You can fine-tune that picture using the concepts that UCLAâs Jennifer Aaker adapted from personality psychology.

     Aaker was impressed that psychologists had boiled the gamut of human personality traits down to a "Big Five" for clinical purposes: agreeableness, extroversion, conscientiousness, culture and neuroticism (Aaker 1999a).  Through a complicated set of interviews, surveys and historical research, she identified a huge selection of human personality traits that people commonly put on products.  Then she used a series of factor analyses to winnow that list down to five basic dimensions of brand personality: sincerity, excitement, competence, sophistication and ruggedness (Aaker 1997).

     Much of Aakerâs work has to do with probing the linkages between an individualâs personality and product brands that score high on one or more of her five dimensions.  However, I have found Aakerâs Five extremely useful when a publisher is trying to grasp what management actions he or she must take to modify the newspaperâs brand.

     As there is no right or wrong to Aakerâs Five, they can be used as no-fault analytical tools.  They are perhaps best seen as labels for descriptive scales, similar to those in the popular Myers-Briggs Personality Index.  A conservative business journal may want to be seen as a rock of sincerity and competence, but bask in its low level of excitement.

     Some newspaper executives have trouble with the term "ruggedness."   Aaker adopted it as a construct of such terms as "strong" or "masculine."  For general discussion, "durability" also helps explain the dimension, although it does not fit her criteria as well (Aaker 1999b).

     Using the dimensions in a staff brainstorming session is quite easy.  Think of your newspaper as a job applicant.  Simply pick a dimension -- say, "sophistication," ? and ask both "How do we rate on sophistication?" and "How do our readers and advertisers think we rate on this?"  Then the harder questions:  "What makes us rate high (or low) on sophistication?" and "Is this where we want to be?"

     The management actions necessary to modify your brand should become fairly obvious in such a discussion.  And because you must demonstrate your preferred personality to more than just the newspaperâs staff, promotion will likely be necessary.

     Slick ad campaigns are the easiest items to point to when we look for newspaper efforts at branding.  But they certainly are not the only technique, and may not even be the best technique.  Keep in mind my original advice to look at a newspaperâs "brand" as its personality ? as what readers and advertisers think of it.  If we simplify the process once again, we find that newspaper branding has just two steps:

     Step One in a basic branding campaign is to identify -- realistically -- what you want that personality to be.

     Step Two -- and all the steps that come after it ? is making sure that everything you do as a newspaper conforms with your expectations of that personality.
 Perhaps the strong argument for thinking of a newspaper in terms of human personality came from Terrence Quinn of Thomson Newspapers
     In branding, as in human personality, consistency packs wallop.  When people lack a consistent personality, therapists say their behavior is unpredictable and their neighbors mutter that they are untrustworthy.   It is much the same with newspapers:

     "Unless we reinvent papers as living, breathing things with a pulse, it will only be more of the bland leading the bland" (Aregood 1999. p 41)
 A firm brand strategy does not mean that a newspaper can no longer be flexible and experiment with new ways of connecting to readers.   In fact, that might be the major aspect of a publicationâs brand personality.  But the job of the manager charged with stewarding the paperâs brand is to insist that everyone ask how the result of a change "fits" with the paperâs personality.

     For instance, if a newspaper positions itself as "Your hometown friend," here are some non-advertising areas to consider:

     ð  Size of type and readability of pages
     ð  The speed at which your receptionist answers the phone.
     ð  The number of hometown photos played on the front page.
     ð  The reliability of your delivery service.
     ð  The amount of family coverage in the paper.
     ð  Your participation in community events, such as sponsoring a Little League team.
     ð  How you promote hometown activities, such as a community calendar.
     ð  Low-tech ways of using your paper, including classified ad "drop boxes" at supermarkets.

 On the other hand, if the brand strategy pictures the paper as "The essential guide to the city for the upwardly mobile young professional," one could look at:

     ð  High-tech connections -- from the Internet to 24-hour voice mail to circulation boxes that take credit cards.
     ð  Color graphics and news from around the world.
     ð  Career advice and investment columns.
     ð  Alternate delivery methods ? such as the Web or fax.
     ð A non-traditional run time that fits the lifestyle of your readers.
     ð  An expanded Saturday paper with a summary of the weekâs local news.

     Also remember to keep track of what the paperâs brand-- its personality and reputation ? means outside the newsstand.  A well-developed and well-accepted brand can have huge financial value in the form of ancillary products.  Just be careful, as the Oregon Daily Emerald learned, to make sure that the "personality" of the new product is compatible with that of the core product.

 Branding is far more than a gimmick for corn flake companies and car makers.  And it need not be a major project that requires of small herd of MBAs.  Just keep these simple steps in mind:

 1.  Figure out who you are.
 2.  Determine who you want to be.
 3.  Test all your management actions against that goal.
 4.  Be consistent in expressing your brand personality.
 

 Appendix A:  Sample Brand Personality Questionnaire

Please describe the Mytown Daily News as if it was a person.
Describe how that person would look, what kind of personality she or he would have, what kind of things he or she might say or do.
What would the people who you know think of him or her?
What kind of role might that person play in your life?

Is there a single word you could use to describe the Mytown Daily News?
 

Bibliography

Aaker, Jennifer L. 1997. "Dimensions of brand personality." Journal of Marketing Research 34:347-356.
Aaker, Jennifer L. 1999a. "The malleable self:  the role of self expression in persuasion." Journal of Marketing Research 36:45(1).
Aaker, Jennifer L. 1999b. "Personal e-mail." .
ABC. 1996. "Expert Panel Offers Brand-Building Advice." Audit Bureau of Circulations News Bulletin 47:6-7.
Aregood, Richard. 1999. "10 Tactics to Grow Readership." Pp. 39(4) in Presstime.
Bentley, Clyde. 1998. "50 years later: "What it means to miss the newspaper"." Pp. 22 in AEJMC Annual Conference. Baltimore, Maryland.
Fitzgerald, Mark. 1997. "Newspaper Branding." Pp. 19(2) in Editor & Publisher.
Jones, Judy, and William Wilson. 1987. An Incomplete Education. New York: Ballantine.
McManus, John. 1998. "Brand Spells Opportunity." Pp. 19 in Folio.
Oliver, Richard L., Roland T. Rust, and Sajeev Varki. 1997. "Customer delight:  foundations, findings and managerial insight." Journal of Retailing 73:311(26).
Robbins, Terrie, and Leo Bogart. 1999. "Branding:  Pro and Con." Pp. 60(2) in Presstime.
Wilkinson, Earl J. 1998. Branding and the newspaper consumer. Dallas, Texas: International Newspaper Marketing Association.