Conde' Nast Buys Ars Technica is Not the Story

The news-breaking story was TechCrunch's - Condé Nast buys 10-year old Ars Technica for $25M. One blog/online publication edited with care, that delivers excellent content on a very consistent basis and with a community that has been defined by many as outstanding.  There is a lesson in there for business, and that is your customers are not merely a book you buy or sell in an acquisition, they are increasingly a community.

Condé Nast buys Ars Technica is not the story. The real story is how new media is capable of growing and retaining a passionate legion of readers, so passionate in fact that they are worthy of the term community. Let me ask you something in all confidence, when was the last time you felt you belonged to the community of print publications? The Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, how about USAToday? All reputable and well written/researched publications. All in the business of delivering news. Yet, even as they have opened their blogs to comments, I would be hard pressed to call many of the commenters members of a community.

When I read the announcement by Editor-in-Chief Ken Fisher on Ars Technica a couple of days after the news had broken, I noticed that the word community shows up in the second paragraph. The largest amount of copy in the announcement addresses the publication's community both acknowledging and thanking its members. From the post (emphasis mine):

Together, we've done more than I think any of us ever imagined. We've built a writing team that's passionate about technology and its promise, and we've seen amazing growth thanks to the diverse expertise of our team. We have an amazing community, both in terms of its size (5+ million readers, as tracked privately by Quantcast) and in terms of its contributions. Our community is unparalleled, in my not so humble opinion, and it's a big reason why this year we're serving more than 30 million page views each month. [...]

Speaking of community, I wanted to share something that I think says a great deal about who Ars Technica is: every employee of Ars Technica was a member of its community first, and had been a longtime reader. (12 million posts, thousands upon thousands of news tips, recommendations, and corrections).

Not our product is turnkey, not our service is the best - our community is amazing, unparalleled. In fact, the one promise Fisher makes for change is an improvement of the community platform. He even addresses how he would have preferred to have broken the news himself acknowledging Ars Technica got scooped by Mike Arrington's TechCrunch. All throughout, the community is front and center.

New media champions and main stream media go hand in hand. Truly. While the hottest news may indeed come from the keyboards of natives of the 24-hour, 7-day cycle, I still believe there is plenty of room for traditional media. Can we teach them and businesses in general to learn to appreciate and embrace their communities?

Comments

[gregory]

if the community shared the money, then i believe you .. if not, this is just a spin

[Valeria Maltoni]

Gregory:

In my post I say:

"The real story is how new media is capable of growing and retaining a passionate legion of readers, so passionate in fact that they are worthy of the term community."

How is that spin?

[Tiffany Monhollon]

I think it's interesting the implication that community like this one equates passion, equates power. Spending power, buzz power, valuable power. With a price tag of $25 million apparently.

What makes this similar or different in value to a social network like Facebook, MySpace etc.? It seems to me that the sense of one united community - united around the niche and content of a blog like this one - would indeed be more powerful because it is focused, whereas a community that's loosely organized merely around the idea of community like these popular social networks seem to be may be more massive in sheer size because of its generic appeal, but not as powerful because it lacks the ability to really move their members to any sort of real action - because there's no sense of real unity or common community.

Will it be these relatively smaller yet more focused communities that end up winning out in the social media arena? What's your take?

[Valeria Maltoni]

The first community an organization has is its employees. If they are not passionate about your business (managers first, please), then it will be harder to transmit that passion to customers. The same is true for publications.

Shared experience is much easier on the basis of common purpose. In the case of Ars Technica that is excellence in technical news and information. In social networks you find people who join for the most disparate reasons - to gain visibility, share information, meet friends, market self or own product, etc. It's akin to having lots of conversations all at the same time vs. everyone joining the same conversation.

Motivation, purpose, and meaning derived play a big role in making a community vibrant. Fast Company magazine had such a community, and while Heath Row was involved, it was vibrant and cohesive. Then it all sort of faded from neglect from the magazine (it was busy surviving, I cannot blame them).

Listening is a big part of a thriving community. I felt the change at FC when I wrote to the new Editor in Chief, Robert Safian, to welcome him, and his assistant replied days later. I knew then that the spirit I had joined was gone.

[Geoff Livingston]

What will be interesting to see is if Ars Technica can deploy best practices across Conde Nast...

[NW Guy]

Valeria,

You are right (again :) ) in regards to the print publications. I consider myself a loyal customer but not part of a community. The loyalty is also in question as the WSJ makes impulsive moves based on ownership changes/beliefs as opposed to the readers.

The WSJ has continuously evolved and improved but recent changes appear to go against long term directions. This may lead to higher profits/more newstand sales but not towards customer loyalty/community.

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Geoff - I think it far easier to start a company on the right track, than to change the practices of established businesses. Then again, if the subject matter is similar enough and the community is strong enough, who knows?

@Bruce - it may be part of the old way of doing business, where distance from customers meant more credibility and seriousness about one's work. Changing direction is a concern for established businesses. A product is not the future of your business, but you've got "x" customers who are buying it now. You don't want to upset things with them, esp. if margins are still good, you've got a cash cow. Then again, you don't innovate, you die. There is also the conversation around short term profit and management by quarters... you bring a good example.