Re: How Many People Read Newsletters?

I have gleamed some interesting and helpful ideas on improving readership and response to E newsletters and sites from www.constantcontact.com.

Barbara Plummer
Portland Office of Transportation
Transportation Options

I used to run a global online newsletter for one division of a large company. When we did a brief online survey of all staff of the division we found: *17% of staff replied *of those (a biased sample no doubt) readership levels for most sections were high. For the 3 most read sections, the 'always' and 'sometimes' figures were each around 50%, while the other 3 sections rate around 30% for always and around 60% for sometimes. The survey also included various other questions, eg 'Can you give an example of how you have used information obtained from the newsletter' - the replies to that were the most interesting (and affirming) from my point of view.

Regards
Pam

Pam Maitland (Freelance writer and editor)

According to Anne Holland of MarketingSherpa.com, recent study data shows email recipients spend 10-20 seconds -- at most -- reading a typical newsletter. MarketingSherpa's research team wondered, what do people really look at in those few seconds? How many words do they read? Do they skim words in order or dart around the screen? Will they read more if there's text-only and no distracting images? Or vice versa? So, this fall they conducted a series of eyetracking laboratory tests. The goal: to discover rules about the way human eyes "see" email, so email designers and copywriters can get the highest message readership scientifically, which in turn should lead to higher response rates. Results -- HTML Emails with Graphics Get Higher Per-Word Readership In one of the lab tests, they asked consumers to view a single-article email newsletter. The tests took place in San Francisco, so they invented a newsletter to look at that they hoped would be of interest to locals -- 'Housing Deals in San Francisco: Hidden real Estate Bargains'. At the top of one version they put clip art of some typical San Francisco homes. The top of the other had no graphics, just a bold headline leading to body copy. The textual copy for each version was identical. They were startled by the results. You'd think that textual emails would win the number-of-words-read sweepstakes, if only because there are no distractions from the text. MarketingSherpa's new eyetracking laboratory tests proved the reverse is true. The presence of an image -- even a fairly dull one such as the clip art they used for the test -- can have a huge impact in how much time people's eyes spend reading the copy of an ad. What's interesting is most people looking at this email didn't actually spend a lot of that time on the picture itself. The picture was such a frequently-seen image they could register it in almost peripheral attention mode. However, its presence raised their engagement level with the email, and willingness to read much more of the copy. That said, our other eyetracking email tests (they conducted seven in all) showed that the design and layout of the email -- including the size of the image, the number of images, the use of human, where the image lay in relation to the fold, and what copy was closest to that image -- was as important to results as the mere fact of an image being present. It seems that social marketers might be better served worrying about how the email design works as a whole in relation to the monitor screen, rather than being 'creative' or pretty. These aren't broadcast or print magazine ads where people like their eyes to be entertained, email recipients assume there will be copy to read and a decision presented that they need consider acting on. They've made an open decision based on your 'from" and "subject" lines. Now you're on step two of the process. Recipients want to know quickly that they've made the right decision to view your email - that it's relevant to them. And next they want to know what the reply request is. Sometimes high design can interfere with that. The recommendation? Let your email design team know about this new lab data before they create your next campaign or before they revamp your current email templates. In marketing, data should always inform and influence creative decisions. No email creative should be make in a vacuum or "because we've always done it that way", or "because it matches our Web site." You can improve email campaign results. Your house list of opt-ins is one of the most valuable media you'll ever send messaging to. These consumers are *more* interested in reading what you have to say than any outside group. If you can only invest in one creative test this next quarter, let it be dedicated to improving house email creative.

-- Anne Holland is President of MarketingSherpa Inc, a research firm publishing Case Studies and Benchmark Data for its 173,000 marketing and advertising executive subscribers. For more results data on the seven email eyetracking tests MarketingSherpa conducted this fall, go to: http://New-Email-Data.MarketingSherpa.com Winthrop Morgan, MPH, CeM

Communications & Marketing Consultant
[email protected]
Tel. 301.807-2731

I can share one experience of newsletter impact. We have held Household Toxic Roundups for over a decade and have the participation well gauged based on standard advertising. The garbage hauler placed a notice in their newsletter, a direct mail piece they send out quarterly independent of their bills, which happened to be perfectly timed. The event had a 30% increase in participation (total participation was 1,323). This hauler had provided notices in their newsletter before without creating this increase, but this newsletter arrived the same week as the event. One of the keys to hazardous waste collection participation, in my experience, is advertising the same day as the event.

Lesli

Lesli Daniel
HHW Program Manager
Sonoma County Waste Management Agency
2300 County Center Dr., Suite B100 Santa Rosa, CA 95403
(707) 565-3687 p
(707) 565-3701 f
[email protected]
www.recyclenow.org

Dear Pamela:

It depends on the quality of the information, the quality of the writing, the frequency of distribution, how creative visualization is used, the manner in which it is received (email or snail mail), whether it is a highlights document (only showing me the 'sound bite' and then if I want more I read in depth on the topic by the click of a button). I am also EXTREMELY pressed for time - and I am awaiting the day when I can plug my brain in at night to be activated in non-deep sleep periods to download information so that when I wake up in the morning I could assimilate the data and apply as I choose. Of course I am also a person who wants a yellow spot on the floor where Scottie could beam me over to meetings across either of the ponds and bring me home every night.... and yes I still believe in Santa Claus and the tooth faery. Some I have to read, not as they meet my criteria for good writing, but because they are may on occasion act as advance warning for a client on an issue where stupidity reigns over intelligence. Welcome the growth of limits.....time is the real non-renewable resource. I like Leanne's hierarchy summary too.

Cheers
L L. E. Johannson
B.E.S., (Hons) M.Sc.

FRSA President E2 Management Corporation (E2M)
113 Mountainview Road South Georgetown,
Ontario CANADA L7G 4K2
Tel: 905-873-9484
Fax: 905-873-3054
Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected]
www.14000registry.com
www.e2management.com
www.glassworks.org

It is worthwhile to remember in the production of any information product that is not the "information" per se (or the method of delivery) which is important, but rather what people do with that information. The problem is not getting information to your public but providing it in ways which generate responsiveness, hence your question Pamela. People are more likely to use information which they seek, rather than information which is delivered. There is also considerable difference in the use of information with a language for "special purposes" (ie. professional language, language related to special interests and hobbies, etc.) and use of information which contains language for the everyday. One of the problems in the distribution of information to the public (largely using language of the everyday) is that it is created by professionals who are using a language for special purposes (many who are online all day). So in that way, a peer to peer newsletter should look and sound different from a newsletter for your public. This will have huge impact on the perceived accessibility and use of the information within the newsletter - what ever it's form. It is worth remembering that most people function in the world of the everyday at about Grade 5 literacy (age 10). We look at pictures, read the bold words and remember little! Over time a knowledge base develops but it a slow process given our capacity (and willingness) to take new information into the world of the everyday. It sobering to know that we now receive more information in one edition of a weekend newspaper than someone in the 17th century received in their entire life!!! So with all that in mind what to do? With new computer technologies it is possible to offer targeted newsletters which are personally addressed and contain information which has been requested by the recipient. This information is usually gathered through online or telephone interviews which are time consuming and expensive, but seem to have considerable benefits down the track as far as sustained behaviour change. (Surveys at workshops and information stalls are also an option for gathering information about what people want to know) The health promotion sector is doing a lot of work in the area of targeted interventions. Have a look at the work of Ken Resnicow. He is a Professor in the Department of Health Behavior and Health Education at University of Michigan School of Public Health and is doing large studies into the design and evaluation of health promotion programs for special populations using targeted interventions. I think this work has particular application to the environment sector. Human information behaviour is a complex thing and needs to be understood more by those developing information products for behaviour change, what ever the mode of delivery of that information. Sadly we don't have the reach we think we do, and there are ways to do it a whole lot better.

Kind regards
Peta Wellstead

Freelance Information Services
PO Box 368 GUILDFORD WESTERN AUSTRALIA 6935
[email protected]

Dear Pamela,

Probably it depends on the specific newsletter and readership, I'm not sure there is a normative answer to your question. In a previous job I was responsible for the weekly newsletter for the Australian National University Institute for Environment, and was similarly frustrated with the difficulty of evaluating the value and impact of our publication. One idea I never got to implement but which may help you is distributing the newsletter electronically via an email with a link to the newsletter web page, in the manner of http://www.uneptie.org/pc/sustain/sc-net/sc-net.htm. Using easily available web hosting software you could then monitor the hits on different individual pages (one page per newsletter item for instance), plus if you linked access to the newsletter pages to a registration system you could also correlate that information to reader's organisation's and reported interests when they signed on. The beauty of such a system is that it is the everyday use of the newsletter that generates your evaluation data, once you've set it up you'll have a steady stream of information. One disadvantage is that this relies on your readership having access to the inter-net and being willing to read on-line, but you could work around that with things like a 'build your own newsletter' function where readers select items to be compiled into a print-friendly document, in which case you'd still know what they were looking at on the web page. (Reduces unnecessary printing as well).

hope that helps,
Stefan Kaufman

PhD Scholar Human Ecology Program http://sres.anu.edu.au/programs/human-ecology/
School of Resources, Environment & Society
The Australian National University
P) 02 6125
M) 0423 149 185
F) 02 612 53770
(attention: Stefan Kaufman) Building 48
The Australian National University ACTON ACT 0200 

I wonder if the folks on this listserv could pool some quick information or point me to a reliable source of information about norms regarding newsletter reading. In my experience, active program participants are far more likely to read a newsletter or mailing of any kind than the general public. Having a stake in any activity or program should motivate people to keep informed. For program participants, what would you estimate the distribution of responses would be for a question like: How often do you read the newsletter? Always, Often, Sometimes, Rarely, Never Or, for those who read it: Do you read it... Thoroughly from cover to cover, Read Selected items that interest you thoroughly, Skim it, or something else? I'm guestimating that about 1/3 of recipients read their newsletters and about 1/10 read it thoroughly. I'll appreciate your input.

Pamela M. M. Jull, PhD

Manager & Co-owner Applied Research Northwest, LLC
220 West Champion Street Suite 280 Bellingham, WA 98225
phone: 360-647-6067
fax: 360-752-3374
cell: 360-393-9763
www.arnorthwest.com