iPad will destroy ... err, save print media

Over the weekend the much-awaited, much-hyped Apple iPad was released, and all of the speculation and rumour-mongering of the last few months has been put to bed as the first reviews and reports flow in.

Much of the analysis has focused on how the publishing industry will make use of this new platform. By virtue of its versatility it is being touted as a game changer in many sectors, from film to gaming, but Apple’s entry into the e-reader market is being seen in some quarters as a serious threat to traditional print.

At influential blog Boing Boing, reviewer Xeni Jardin delighted over the interactivity of Apple’s iBooks and text-based iPad apps: “This is what we wanted e-books to be all along. Rich, nimble, and dense with image and sound and navigability, right there inside the flow of the story.” The ABC’s review also celebrates the iPad as a reading device. In fact, writes Joshua Gans, “the killer app of the iPad is reading.”

Does it mean that the iPad will spell the end of the printed page? Not quite. The iPad won’t kill print, but it won’t save it either. Many publishers are hoping that full-colour, interactive digital editions of their newspapers and magazines will open up a new consumer segment that will pay for these enhanced “print-plus” versions and create new advertising opportunities. Most publishers are simply selling iPad ads as extensions of print bookings, but some are trialling iPad-only ad packages. According to AdAge, some publishers say that ads in iPad newspapers and magazines should cost more, because it is “print but better.”

Book publishers are thinking the same way. “We have all struggled in this industry to find an online model that works successfully in terms of content and the consumer’s propensity to pay,” Penguin Books Chief Executive John Makinson told a recent media conference in London. “I think myself that the iPad represents the first real opportunity to create a paid model that will be attractive to consumers. And I think the psychology around payment on tablet is different from the psychology around payment on PCs.”

Boing Boing’s Cory Doctorow argues that the iPad hype is driven by journalists looking for someone to save their business model: “everyone in journalism-land is looking for a daddy figure who’ll promise them that their audience will go back to paying for their stuff.” Old media is hoping that devices like the iPad will help keep audiences in the “walled gardens” of professional, paid-for content and somehow protect that content from the rampant re-publishing, pilfering and repurposing of the wild web. “But the real economics of iPad publishing tell a different story: even a stellar iPad sales performance isn’t going to do much to stanch the bleeding from traditional publishing,” he writes. “Wishful thinking and a nostalgia for the good old days of lockdown won’t bring customers back through the door.”

TBI Research has crunched the numbers to prove that the iPad won’t save the magazine industry, even if sales figures far exceed projected numbers. Rory Maher suggests that even in a best-case scenario, iPad subscription revenue will only count for around 10 percent of total industry revenue. “The revenue opportunity for magazines on the iPad will likely not be enough to counter near-term revenue declines from print operations for the vast majority of titles even if the iPad is a huge success,” he writes.

So, as ever, the future of print media seems uncertain. Consensus seems to be that the iPad offers a better newspaper and magazine reading experience than the plain old web; whether it will conquer the printed page too is yet to be determined.

This article orginally appeared onDIRECT online.