Readership Data & Survey

Readership Data & Survey 2007 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................
Author: Antonia York
9 downloads 0 Views 178KB Size
Readership Data & Survey

2007

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................................................................... 4 WEB STATISTICS ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5 1

DEMOGRAPHY.................................................................................................................................................................. 6 1.1 NATIONALITY ................................................................................................................................................................ 6 1.2 COUNTRY OF RESIDENCE ............................................................................................................................................... 7 1.3 LANGUAGES ................................................................................................................................................................... 8 1.3.1 Mother tongue........................................................................................................................................................... 8 1.3.2 Readership of the different language versions of EurActiv....................................................................................... 8 1.3.3 Working language..................................................................................................................................................... 9 1.4 AGE ............................................................................................................................................................................... 9 1.5 GENDER ....................................................................................................................................................................... 10 1.6 WORK SECTOR ............................................................................................................................................................. 11 1.7 LEVEL/SKILLS .............................................................................................................................................................. 12

2

USAGE................................................................................................................................................................................ 13 2.1 USAGE FREQUENCY...................................................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 USAGE TRENDS AND REASONS ..................................................................................................................................... 13 2.3 AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST ....................................................................................................................................... 15 2.3.1 EU Funds ................................................................................................................................................................ 16

3

NEW TECHNOLOGIES .................................................................................................................................................. 17 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4

4

STRUCTURE OF COMMUNICATION......................................................................................................................... 21 4.1 4.2

5

BLOGS .......................................................................................................................................................................... 17 ONLINE VIDEOS ............................................................................................................................................................ 18 RSS AND CONTENT SYNDICATION ............................................................................................................................... 19 BUYING ONLINE ........................................................................................................................................................... 20

DECENTRALISATION/CENTRALISATION ....................................................................................................................... 21 COMMUNICATION TOOLS ............................................................................................................................................. 23

POSITIONING OF EURACTIV AS A COMMUNICATION PLATFORM............................................................... 24 5.1 VALUE OF EURACTIV’S MULTI-COUNTRY NETWORK ................................................................................................... 24 5.2 INDEPENDENCE ............................................................................................................................................................ 25 5.3 WHICH OTHER MEDIA DO READERS USE? ..................................................................................................................... 26 5.3.1 …Print .................................................................................................................................................................... 26 5.3.2 …Organisations’ websites ...................................................................................................................................... 28 5.3.3 …News sites ............................................................................................................................................................ 29 5.3.4 …Broadcast ............................................................................................................................................................ 30

2

Executive Summary EurActiv network – In-depth EU reporting in 10 languages • EurActiv has experienced a remarkable increase in readership since the last readership survey in 2005 and now (2007) reaches out to 475,000 EU Actors o Over 225,000* unique visitors using EurActiv.com in English, French and German o Over 250,000* unique visitors using one of the 8 EurActiv partner portals, in Bulgarian, Czech, French, Hungarian, Polish, Romanian, Slovak or Turkish. • Readers value EurActiv’s multi-country/multilingual approach • 70% prefer being informed about EU affairs from both a national and a Brussels perspective Readership is influential: opinion leaders in Brussels and other capitals • EurActiv readers are professionals (90%) with a high skills level. Two thirds of readers are policy makers or opinion leaders, i.e. they work on the political level, in senior or middle management (incl. journalists). • The readership in the network is younger than in the core version and the percentage of female readers is higher (57% of readers are women). • The partner portals ensure that EurActiv reaches out to national policy audiences in Central and Eastern Europe. With the opening of a French and a Turkish partner portal in 2007, the network was enriched by Western and Eastern dimensions, which will soon be further strengthened by a partner portal in Berlin. Independent and efficient media • 95% of survey respondents agree that EurActiv is an “independent and fact-based media” • 75% of EurActiv readers have access to EurActiv content in their native language. • EurActiv is a useful and unique tool: o A high percentage of readers (39%) are frequent or very frequent visitors (more than five times per month). o LinksDossiers providing in-depth policy background are EurActiv’s most appreciated feature (85%) o 44% of readers consider online advertisement in a specialised media to be “important” or “very important”. • EurActiv again confirms its position as the leading specialised media on EU affairs. • Of the top 10 news sites with substantial cross-readership with EurActiv, only a few are specialised media allowing targeted communication to European policy circles. New technologies • EurActiv has conducted one of the first extensive surveys on new technologies like blogs, online videos and content syndication. • Readers seem to already recognise the multiple opportunities for communication offered by these technologies, although they are not yet a primary source of information/communication. Notes : *) CIM certified figures January 2007 (Centre d’Information sur les medias)

3

Methodology Sources of information: The presented statistics/charts/graphs are based on three sources of information: ♦ CIM (Centre d’Information sur les medias) ♦ Google analytics ♦ EurActiv readership survey (N= 3054) o Information collected through an online survey, running from 07 May to 13 July 2007 on the EurActiv network of policy portals. 3054 respondents filled in the questionnaire. The information was analysed objectively and not redressed for a possible sample bias. o This is the fifth time that EurActiv has published its readership survey (2001, 2002, 2004, 2005 and 2007). The main conclusions are summarised in this report. o The corporate survey includes respondents who answered that they work in “Corporate: PA, PR or government relations” and “Corporate: others” in the three core languages English, French or German. The total number of respondents is: 292 o Sub-surveys:∗ o The media survey includes respondents who chose “Media” as their work sector in the three core languages English, French and German as well as 109 respondents who answered the media survey (identical questions) via dissemination through API and AEJ. Total number of respondents: 212 o The federation’s survey includes respondents who answered that they work for federations and NGOs in one of the three core languages English, French or German. The total number of respondents is: 294. English 1432 French 483 German 384 N Romanian Slovak Bulgarian Czech Hungarian Polish Turkish N Media Survey (API) Media Survey (AEJ) Total N

2299 224 174 76 81 38 29 24 646 66 43 3054

Distribution: ♦ The survey was accessible online and was promoted via (translated) banners and pop-ups on EurActiv.com and all sites of the EurActiv network. Methods: ♦ For most questions, answers have been divided into two groups: one representing the answers of the readers of EurActiv.com (in the three core languages English, French and German – referred to as the “core versions” in the following) and the second grouping the answers of the readers of the EurActiv network (referred to as the “network” in the following). Where it made more sense to look at the whole picture, all answers were merged. In the graphs/charts in the survey, these two groups are distinguished by name. *The sub-surveys are available as separate surveys. We thank API and AEJ for their input in preparing some of the media questions and forwarding the questionnaire to their members. We thank Kellen Europe for their input in preparing some of the federation’s questions.

4

Web statistics EurActiv.com unique visitors

Network unique visitors

450,000 400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000

Ju l Au g Se p Oc t No v De c Ja n Fe b Ma r Ap r Ma y Ju n Ju l Au g Se p Oc t No v De c Ja n Fe b Ma r Ap r Ma y

0

2005

2006

2007

Conclusion: EurActiv reaches out to 475,000 readers in ten languages. Since January 2007, the network has overtaken EurActiv.com in total number of readers. With the continuing enlargement of the network, there is still enormous growth potential. Evolution: Since the last readership survey in 2005, there has been a substantial increase of more than 400% in the number of unique visitors in the network and more than 30% for EurActiv.com.

5

1 Demography 1.1 Nationality Nationality (all surveys)

CZ NL 3%

BG 3%

Nationality

AT ES 2% 3%

Other 11% Other 23%

4% IT 4%

SK 7%

EU-12 30% DE 13%

UK 7%

BE 8% RO 10%

EU-15 59%

FR 11%

Conclusion: The statistics about the nationality of the readership are based on the merged results from the whole network. To simplify, the data has been divided into the categories EU-15, EU-12 and other in the second chart. This chart shows that the majority of the readership is from the “old” EU member states, while 30% of the respondents come from one of the member states that joined the EU 2004 or 2007. Evolution: The percentage of readers from the new Member States remains stable while the percentage of Western readers has augmented somewhat since 2005. The percentage of readers from outside Europe is decreasing.

6

1.2 Country of Residence Country of residence

LUX 3.7%

RO NL 2.1% 2.8%

IT AT 2.0% 1.7% Other 25.1%

US 7.2%

Conclusion: The statistics for nationality are based on the Google Statistics for EurActiv.com. Of single countries, Belgium ranks as number one (18%), but 80% of the readers live outside of Brussels and Belgium. We have chosen to use Google data here because the results are more reliable due to the larger sample. The analysis of the survey in the core languages English, French and German shows, that 35% of respondents live in Belgium, giving us an indication that the Brussels based readers are particularly active.

UK 9.3%

BE 18.1%

DE 13.5%

FR 14.5%

Evolution: We see that the percentage of readers living outside Belgium is higher than in 2005. The increase in readership means that the absolute number of readers (in each country) has grown.

*The statistics only take the readers of EurActiv.com into account. This explains the dominance of Western European countries.

7

1.3 Languages 1.3.1 Mother tongue Conclusion: 44% of readers have English, French or German, the three core languages of EurActiv, as their mother tongue. Taking into account the 10 languages in which EurActiv publishes its contents, almost 75% of the readers have access to information about European Affairs in their mother tongue.

What is your mother tongue?

ES 3%

HU 2%

GR 2%

PL SE 2% 2%

DK 2%

FR 16%

CZ 3% BG 4% IT 4% DE 16% SK 6%

Evolution: Compared to earlier survey findings, the proportion of readers with French or German as native languages has risen, while the percentage of English native speakers has decreased slightly.

NL 7% EN 12% RO 10% Other 10%

1.3.2 Readership of the different language versions of EurActiv Page Views in % EA.com/de 7%

EA.bg 22%

EA.com/fr 9%

EA.cz 3% EA.hu 2% EA.pl 2%

EA.ro 12% EA.com/en 33% EA.fr 2%

EA.sk 8%

*The statistics are provided by CIM. CIM does not provide a differentiation between the three language versions of EA.com, therefore this distinction in the graph is based on information from Google analytics.

Conclusions: EurActiv.com continues to be the single largest portal in the EurActiv network. Looking at how the readership is divided between the three core languages, we see that EurActiv.com/fr has more readers (19% of EA.com total) than EurActiv.com/de (15% of EA.com total). English is the most important working language for many readers, and the first language of reading. However, EurActiv’s language strategy proves appropriate: - the proportion of near-native English speakers has increased over time, thanks to multilingualism - English pageviews are now in the minority: “only” 33% of the total readership. Evolution: The 2005 readership survey showed that 97% of readers could read English, French or German and 87% of the network readers could read English: translation is an advantage but not a must for every detail, whereas localisation is the real value added. 8

1.3.3 Working language What is your main working language? (Network)

What is your main working language? (EN,FR,DE) 80%

60%

EN Mother tongue Other

50.6% 50%

69.11%

70%

EN My mother tongue Other

60%

40.4% 40%

50%

30%

40% 30%

20%

20%

9.0%

10%

18.10% 12.79%

10% 0%

0% Working language

Working language

Conclusion: We see that in the network many more readers work in their own mother tongue. Taking into account the fact that the 2005 survey showed that a lower percentage of readers in the network read English, German or French, the added value of the concept of localisation is further highlighted.

1.4 Age What is your age? 40%

38%

35% 31% 30% 23%

25%

19%

20%

20%

EN,FR,DE 17%

Network

16%

13%

15%

8%

10% 6%

5%

5%

3%

0% 18-24

25-34

35-44

45-54

55-65

>65

Conclusion: The readers replying to the network survey are somewhat younger than the readers of the core version. The majority of readers is in the age group 25-34. While as high a percentage as 51% of the network readers are in the age group 18-34, the same share is 37% for the core versions. These findings correspond to the findings in question 1.7 concerning the skills category of the respondents, which shows that the skills level is higher amongst the readers of the core versions – this could also explain the higher age. Evolution: Overall there are few changes compared to previous surveys.

9

1.5 Gender What is your gender? (EN,FR,DE) Male 55%

60% 50%

Female 45%

60%

Male 43%

50%

40%

40%

30%

30%

20%

20%

10%

10%

0%

0%

Gender

What is your gender? (Network) Female 57%

Gender

Conclusion: The percentage of female readers is considerably higher in the network than for the core versions. Especially in Bulgaria (64%), Romania (61%) and Slovakia (60%), the proportion of female readers is very high. Considering that the readers in the network are younger on average, this seems to indicate that women grow in importance in the younger generations. Evolution: The proportion between female and male readers remains stable in the core versions compared to the readership survey 2005.

10

1.6 Work sector Work sector (EN,FR,DE) Consulting 8%

Other 4%

EU Institutions 10%

Federations 8%

Business 33%

Government 13%

Corporate 17%

Politics 23%

Education/research & think tanks 19%

Media 11%

NGO 10%

Multipliers 40%

1

Work sector (Network) Other 22%

EU Institutions 4% Government 20%

Politics 24%

Consulting 5% Federations 2%

Business 20%

Corporate 13% Education/research & think tanks 13% Media 8%

NGO 13%

Multipliers 34%

2

1

66% of the journalists answering the survey came through the general survey and special mailing from EurActiv. 33% came through a targeted mailing from API and AEJ (some of these respondents may not readers of EurActiv, although it is less likely that people not using EurActiv would respond). 2 The results from the Hungarian study had to be omitted as the categories where divided differently from the other surveys.

11

Conclusion: The findings of the survey concerning the work sector have been categorised in nine categories to facilitate the understanding. We see that the number of readers from the EU institutions is significantly lower in the network than in the core versions. On the other hand we identify a significantly higher number of readers who work in national administrations. Evolution: Compared with previous surveys, most categories remain stable. The fact that there is little evolution in the sectoral breakdown, combined with growing readership in the capitals, means EurActiv penetrates the same national policy circles in the network as in Brussels. Media: stable percentage (increase from 9% to ca. 10%) Corporate: stable EU institutions: stable percentage (this still means that the absolute numbers have increased) NGOs: some increase Federations and consultancies: some increase Education: some decrease percentage wise (stronger decrease of students/interns – more academic/teaching readers: shows that the skills level of the readership is rising)

1.7 Level/skills What is your level/skills category? Political (Commissioner, MEP, MP, minister, cabinet, spokesperson)

EN,FR,DE

2.5% 1.5%

Network 18.8% 15.4%

Senior management (Dir.Gen., Sec.Gen. or similar) Middle management (including experts and journalists)

45.4% 38.0% 17.2%

Employee/Assistant

31.6% 5.9% 5.1%

Student/intern

10.1% 8.2%

Other

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Conclusion: More than one fifth of the readers of the core versions have a political function or work in senior management. Two thirds of readers work at management level (including journalists). In the network, the skills level is generally somewhat lower, a finding which corresponds with the fact, that the readers are also younger. Evolution: The percentage of readers working in senior management has increased. The fact that the readership has increased quite considerably since the Readership Survey 2005 allows the conclusion that the absolute number of people within each category has augmented. The number of students has further decreased. While the percentage was 18% in 2002 and 10% in 2005, the proportion of students amongst the readers is now down to 5.9%. If we look at the chart above, we see that ca. 20% of the readers are from academia – this means that the number of researchers and teachers who use EurActiv is substantial. 12

2 Usage 2.1 Usage frequency Visitors' loyalty (source Google analytics, basis: June 2007) 201+ times

5.7%

101-200 times

4.2%

51-100 times

5.5%

Number of visits

26-50 times

6.1%

15-25 times

39 %

5.3%

9-14 times

5.2%

8 times

1.3%

7 times

1.5%

6 times

1.8%

5 times

2.2%

4 times

3.0%

3 times

4.4%

2 times

8.8%

1 time

45.1% 0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Conclusion: A high proportion of EurActiv.com readers (39%) are frequent or very frequent users (five times per month or more).

2.2 Usage trends and reasons Time of day EurActiv is most used (source: Google analytics, basis: June 2007)

30,000

70,000

25,000

60,000 P a g e V ie w s

20,000 15,000 10,000

50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000

5,000

0

0

:0 22

0

:0 20

0

:0 18

0

:0 16

0

:0 14

0

12

:0

0

:0 10

0

:0 08

0

:0 06

:0

0

:0

:0

02

00

ay nd Su

tu

rd

ay

ay Sa

id Fr

ay sd ur Th

ne ed W

Tu

es

sd

da

ay

y

y da on M

0

0

0

04

P a g e V ie w s

Readership during the week (source Google, basis: week 25 2007)

Time of Day

Conclusion: EurActiv.com is used essentially during office hours, by professionals.

13

For what reasons do you use EurActiv? 90%

85.2%

80%

72.3%

70%

59.2%

60% 50%

41.4%

40%

32.6% 26.5%

30% 15.7%

20% 10%

Practical: information on conferences, consultancies, and other services

EU jobs

Press links

Analysis from other sources

Policy positions

Daily EU news

EU policy background/LinksDossiers

0%

Conclusion: EU policy background (as provided by LinksDossiers) and daily EU news are the primary reasons for readers to use EurActiv. The proportions of readers using EurActiv for EU policy background has increased from 65,3& to 85,2% since 2005. Access to policy positions, links to other relevant material and analysis from other sources are also considered relevant by many readers. Evolution: The 2007 survey is the first which takes the relatively new and very successful EurActiv jobsite into account. 15.7% of readers already mention the jobsite as one reason to visit the EurActiv portals.

14

2.3 Areas of special interest Priority areas 25%

Environment 21%

Energy

20%

Science and research

35%

28% 25%

EU funding & structural funds

49%

24% 9%

Climate change/emissions trading

23% 14%

External relations/foreign affairs

14%

Internal market issues Social and employment issues EU Reform* Education

20%

20% 17% 19% 18% 19%

18% 14% 16%

Trade/globalisation Industrial policy

8%

Health

8%

28%

16% 15%

8%

Transports

14% 10% 10% 12% 9% 9% 8%

Telecoms/eCommunication Financial services Security/defence Biotechnologies

6% 8%

Agriculture

8% 6% 4%

CAP reform 0%

10%

Network EN,FR,DE

13%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

* Data missing for French version of survey Conclusion: The survey respondents were asked to indicate their three top priority areas. Looking at the responses from the readers of EurActiv.com and the network we see that their priorities differ substantially in some areas. Top 3 for EurActiv.com readers are: environment, energy and science and research Top 3 for network readers: EU funds, education, environment Half of the respondents in the network mention EU funding as one of their priority areas and this is reflected by the fact that most network portals have a section on EU funds. While EurActiv.com already has very strong coverage in areas such as environment and energy, there are still possibilities to further expand in-depth coverage to some other areas (like external relations).

15

2.3.1 EU Funds You may have read in the press about EU subsidies/structural funds such as regional and social projects. What is your level of information and involvement?

24.3% 22.7%

I/we have applied, and are satisfied with the implementation of our project I/we have applied successfully, but were not satisfied with the implementation

I/we have applied, but not successfully

8.2% 6.2% 5.2% 5.2% Network

31.1%

It could be relevant but is difficult without contacts with the persons in charge of the projects/funds

18.5%

EN,FR,DE

13.9% 12.8%

It could be relevant for my organisation but I assume the procedures are too complex

19.9%

I do not know if this is relevant for my organisation and how to apply

I have not really heard about this

0%

26.1% 4.5% 14.9% 10%

20%

30%

40%

Conclusions: Many respondents feel they don’t have enough information about the available funds; others are intimidated by the notion that “personal connections” are required. This is especially the case in the network, where 31% of the respondents fear that such contacts are essential in order to be successful when applying for funds. The chart also shows that only 4.5% of respondents in the network have not heard about EU funds, while the same number is 14.9% amongst EurActiv.com readers.

16

3 New Technologies 3.1 Blogs What is your personal experience with blogs? Network 5.2%

I write my own blog

EN,FR,DE

4.4%

Conclusions: Blogs are not (yet) a primary source of information, but they are actually growing faster than the “normal” web did in the 90ies.

12.4%

I frequently read them

8.3%

64.4%

I occasionally read them

52.3%

21.3%

I never read them

37.6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

What is your professional experience with blogs?

An opportunity to inform yourselves better

28.3% 32.5%

An opportunity to engage citizens/read user-generated content

29.1% 32.9% 19.5% 21.9%

An opportunity to engage stakeholders/read expertgenerated content

A risk of spreading negative/false information about your organisation

A risk of allowing your policy “opponents” (e.g. NGOs versus industry) to dominate the online debate

12.3% 7.2% 6.9% 3.4% 42.7%

No opinion

0%

EN,FR,DE Network

Conclusions: Readers seem to understand the multiple opportunities to engage stakeholders offered by blogs.

33.5% 10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

17

Does your organisation plan to use blogs and/or forums as part of its communication strategy? EN,FR,DE Network

9.1% 6.5%

We already use blogs proactively (we write ourselves a professional blog or support it)

6.8% 8.4%

We monitor certain blogs regarding our organisation/our topics

Conclusions: One fourth of readers’ organisations use or will use blogs proactively, although so far only 9% are blogging themselves: major growth potential as a professional communication tool.

2.2% 2.6%

We are planning to proactively use blogs in 2007

6.7% 9.3%

We will likely use blogs in 2008 or later

40.8% 39.0%

We have no plans for blogs

34.4% 34.3%

No opinion/not applicable

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

3.2 Online videos What is your personal experience with online videos? Network EN,FR,DE

11.1%

I frequently watch them

10.9%

70.2%

I occasionally watch them

67.3%

Conclusion: The percentage of readers watching online videos frequently or very frequently is somewhat higher than for blogs. The growing popularity of video platforms can be one explanation for this. There is no significant difference between the readers of the core versions and the network in this question.

18.7% I never watch them 21.9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

18

Conclusion: Videos are used a little more than blogs (and probably by a similar audience).

In the coming years does your organisation plan to use online videos as part of its communication strategy?

EN,FR,DE

6.8% 4.5%

We watch some videos regarding our organisation/our topics

Network

11.9%

We already use them proactively (produce ourselves or support)

7.6%

3.3% 4.1%

We are planning to proactively use them in 2007

10.5%

We will likely use them in 2008 or later

16.2%

35.3% 36.7%

We have no plans for online videos

32.2% 30.9%

No opinion/not applicable

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

3.3 RSS and Content Syndication Does your organisation use content syndication (automated inclusion of headlines or text, RSS or other technology) on its website or intranet? EN,FR,DE Network

25.0%

Yes, we already use it

27.1%

Conclusion: A larger percentage of readers’ organisations already actively use RSS or content syndication than was the case in the previous questions on blogs and online videos.

4.4%

We are planning to use it in 2007

5.4%

12.0%

We will likely use it in 2008 or later

22.1%

58.7%

We have no plans for it

45.4% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

19

3.4 Buying online Over the past 12 months, did you buy/book goods or services over the internet? (EN,FR,DE)

Over the past 12 months, did you buy/book goods or services over the internet? (Network)

No 25.7%

No 43.8% Yes 56.2%

Yes 74.3%

Conclusion: A large majority of readers are using the internet to purchase goods. The percentage of online shoppers is somewhat higher amongst the readers of EurActiv.com than in the network. Evolution: Compared to previous surveys the high proportion of online shoppers remains stable.

20

4 Structure of Communication 4.1 Decentralisation/Centralisation Concerning the global structure of your organisation, what is the level of integration between its central and national/local offices? EN,FR,DE

19.2% 23.4%

Fully centralised

Network

25.5%

Moderately centralised

30.6%

15.4% 18.8%

Decentralised

39.9% 41.1%

No opinion/not applicable 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Conclusion: This question has been analysed according to core versions and EurActiv network as well as for the sub-surveys on federations, media and corporate. While the general analysis shows that there are no big differences between the organisation in the core versions and the network, the analysis of the federation, media and corporate surveys show a higher degree of moderate centralisation for corporates.

50%

Concerning the global structure of your organisation, what is the level of integration between its central and national/local offices? Federations

19% 20% 19%

Fully centralised

Media Corporate 25% 26%

Moderately centralised

35% 20% 20% 18%

Decentralised

35% 35%

No opinion/not applicable

28% 0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

21

How does your industry organise its network of people responsible for European press relations? EN,FR,DE

18.6%

A group of persons working in Brussels

Network

17.2%

8.8%

A group of persons working in the national capitals

9.5%

28.5%

A group combining persons working in Brussels or national capitals

28.9%

44.1%

We do not have a communication network

44.5% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Conclusion: Concerning the organisation of European press relations we see that the statistics are practically identical for network and core version readers, while there are some differences between federation’s, media and corporate surveys. Among the respondents from federations, 54% respond that the press relations are handled in Brussels or partly in Brussels, the same percentage is 42% for the media survey and 47% for the corporate survey. 50% of media respondents say that their employer does not have such a network

How does your industry organise its network of people responsible for European press relations? 24% 17% 20%

A group of persons working in Brussels

Federations Media Corporate

9% 8%

A group of persons working in the national capitals

19% 30% 25% 27%

A group combining persons working in Brussels or national capitals

37% 50%

We do not have a communication network 34% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

22

4.2 Communication tools Rate the importance of the following tools for direct communication with different stakeholders (EN,FR,DE)

Updated website

36.6%

Meetings

41.9%

E-mails

40.9%

54.9%

94%

41.2%

45.4%

Phone calls

82%

34.4%

57.8%

Seminars/conferences

91%

52.2%

80%

30.3%

88%

Position papers

50.2%

29.1%

79%

Written briefing materials

52.4%

25.4%

78%

Press releases

51.5%

Online advertising in specialised EU media Advertising in mass media Print advertising in specialised EU media

28.8% 21.4%

76%

24.3%

36%

6.9% Important Very important

6.4%

25.2%

4.4%

28% 30%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100 %

Rate the importance of the following tools for direct communication with different stakeholders (Network) Meetings

32.9%

59.8%

93%

Updated website

33.2%

58.0%

91%

E-mails Seminars/conferences

42.2%

Position papers

46.4%

Phone calls

48.6%

Written briefing materials Press releases Online advertising in specialised EU media Advertising in mass media

36.2%

Print advertising in specialised EU media

35.5%

73%

21.8%

71%

20.8%

69%

19.5%

55.0% 36.5%

78%

33.2%

51.4%

68%

18.3%

52%

15.7% 13.0% 7.7%

Evolution: Compared to the 2006 survey on communication trends within European federations, online advertising in specialised media has overtaken print advertising in importance (same level of importance in 2006).

84%

35.5%

50.6%

Conclusion: An updated website, meetings and seminars are considered as the three most important tools for direct communication by the respondents. The percentage of respondents in the network who rate online advertising in specialised EU media as “important” or “very important” exceeds 50%

Important Very important

49% 43%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100 %

23

5 Positioning of EurActiv as a communication platform 5.1 Value of EurActiv’s multi-country network Conclusion: - Multilingualism appreciated. - Localisation important for national stakeholders.

What is the value of EurActiv's multi-country network?

60.8%

EU coverage in different language

64.05%

Adaptation of the coverage to national needs and stakeholders

43.0% 57.36%

Targeted communication opportunities

33.6% 35.37%

7.1%

Other

EN,FR,DE

3.63%

0%

10%

Network 20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

How do you prefer to be informed about European Affairs? Network EN,FR,DE

26.94%

From a Brussels perspective

Conclusion: Most people prefer a combination of coverage from Brussels and the national perspectives.

9.85%

From a perspective adapted to the national context

3.30% 19.32%

69.76% Both 70.83%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

24

5.2 Independence Do you consider that "independent and fact-based" describes EurActiv.com? 5.49%

Do you consider that "independent and fact-based" describes the country portal you use (BG,CZ,HU,PL,RO,SK)? 12.37%

Yes No

Yes No

94.51%

87.63%

Conclusion: Compared to previous years the trend shows that an even higher percentage of readers consider EurActiv to be “independent and fact-based” (2007: 94.5%; 2005: 92.8%; 2004: 92.1%)

25

5.3 Which other media do readers use? 5.3.1 …Print Which other media than EurActiv do you use? …print (all surveys)

61.5%

Other national newspaper

47.8%

Financial Times

42.0%

The Economist

34.4%

European Voice

31.0%

Le Monde (France)

20.2%

Agence Europe

16.5%

International Herald Tribune

15.8%

Der Spiegel (Germany)

15.2%

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (Germany) Wall Street Journal Europe

12.1%

Europolitique/Europolitics/ EIS

12.0% 10.3%

EU Reporter

9.7%

The Parliament Magazine/Region Magazine Dnevnik (Bulgaria)

2.7%

Rzeczpospolita (Poland)

2.2%

Hürriyet (Turkey)

1.2%

Referans (Turkey)

0.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Conclusion: While national newspapers are still most read, the Financial Times and The Economist remain important information providers for many readers. It is interesting to note that when breaking down the results according to language, one sees that the changes are quite substantial.

26

Conclusion: For French-speaking readers, Le Monde and other national newspapers remain the most important newspapers.

Which other media than EurActiv do you use? …print (only French survey)

76.8%

Le Monde (France)

Autre journal national

51.8%

Financial Times

30.8%

Agence Europe

30.8%

28.4%

European Voice

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Conclusion: As in France, German readers prefer German daily and weekly newspapers.

Which other media than EurActiv do you use? …print (only German survey) Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (Deutschland)

61.8%

Der Spiegel (Deutschland)

59.5%

Andere nationale Zeitungen

59.5%

48.3%

Financial Times

34.4%

European Voice

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Conclusion: In the Network the national newspapers dominate clearly.

Which other media than EurActiv do you use? …print (Network) Other national newspaper

90%

72.7%

34.9%

Financial Times

30.8%

The Economist

European Voice

18.0%

Le Monde (France)

18.0% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

27

5.3.2 …Organisations’ websites ...Organisations' websites (concerning EU policies) (EN,FR,DE) europa.eu/DG websites

87.9%

European Parliament website

58.8%

NGO & think tank websites

51.9%

European Council/Presidency website

Conclusion: It is important to note that the overall importance of the europa.eu site does not mean that each DG website is this much used.

48.4%

National government website

45.6%

Commission delegation/press office website in my country

29.7%

Federation websites

29.2% 0% 10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %

70 %

80 %

90 100 % %

...Organisations' websites (concerning EU policies) (Network) 74.47%

europa.eu/DG websites 53.90%

National government website European Parliament website

44.33%

NGO & think tank websites

44.33%

Commission delegation/press office website in my country European Council/Presidency website Federation websites

Conclusion: The websites of the national governments are much more used in the network than by readers of the core versions.

41.13% 28.72% 17.38% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

28

5.3.3 …News sites Conclusion: Of the top 10 media with substantial crossreadership with EurActiv, only a few are specialised media allowing targeted communication to policy circles: - 3 in English (between 1/3 and 1/10 of crossreadership) - typically none in other languages.

...News sites (concerning EU policies) (EN,FR,DE) EurActiv*

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Website of national media

47.9%

BBC Online

47.1%

EUObserver

35.5%

Google News

34.9%

**

29.6%

Financial Times Online 20.4%

European Voice Online

15.0%

EUPolitix/The Parliament.com

9.2%

EUBusiness

7.6%

Financial Times Deutschland Online Europa Digital

5.8%

xpats.com

5.2%

Expatica.com

3.0%

Aqui Europa

2.6% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90% 100%

** The read trend lines compare the results to the April 2003 Burson Marsteller Commission Media Ranking.

Evolution: Compared to the 2003 Burson Marsteller Media Ranking, national media and BBC online as well as Financial times online have lost in importance, while EU Observer has gained readers.

...News sites (concerning EU policies) (Network) EurActiv* 68.44%

Website of national media 39.72%

BBC Online

34.40%

Google News

29.79%

EUObserver

20.57%

Financial Times Online

13.12%

EUBusiness

10.99%

European Voice Online

9.22%

EUPolitix/The Parliament.com

3.55%

Financial Times Deutschland Online Europa Digital

2.84%

Aqui Europa

2.48%

Expatica.com

2.13%

xpats.com

1.77% 0%

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

* EurActiv assumed close to 100% considering it is a readership survey and only 109 survey responses came from other channels than EurActiv, out of 3054 total, i.e. 3.5%.

29

5.3.4 …Broadcast ... Broadcast (concerning EU policies) (EN,FR,DE) National TV from my country

54.2%

EuroNews

49.3%

BBC television

45.7%

National radio from my country

39.6%

CNN

29.9%

Arte

25.8%

TV5 (France)

19.4%

BBC radio

19.1%

Deutsche Welle

Conclusion: Both amongst the readers of the core versions and the network (particularly the latter) national television. In the network, the national radio rates higher than EuroNews, while national radio only rates as number four for the core versions.

9.0%

Radio France International

7.4% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

... Broadcast (concerning EU policies) (Network) 80.2%

National TV from my country National radio from my country

56.3% 53.1%

EuroNews 40.6%

CNN

32.6%

BBC television BBC radio

13.9%

TV5 (France)

13.9% 9.4%

Radio France International Arte

8.0%

Deutsche Welle

7.6% 0%

10% 20%

30% 40%

50% 60%

70% 80%

90%

30