We put a lot of value on landing a mention or story in a big newspaper like USA Today. Once we make it into a big newspaper, we have hit the jackpot. Everyone will hear about us. Millions read that paper everyday, which translates to lots of exposure for our brand or product. There has been a lot of talk about the ROI of social media lately and yes, it is hard to measure, but is it harder to measure than that of traditional media?Consider the following funnel: I subscribe to the newspaper > I actually read the article with your brand name > I actually remember the brand name > I use the info in the article to make a purchasing decision.
My argument is this: it is just as hard to measure true ROI in traditional media as it is with online or social media. Sure, lots of people subscribe to USA Today, but everyone does not read and soak in every single article or advertisement. They skim. They pick and chose. They filter. A newspaper readership with 100,000 subscribers does not mean that 100,000 people saw your brand name, let alone used the info to make a decision that effects your profit.
Are we too comfortable accepting the ROI measurements for traditional media?