Welcome back to our conversation with Windy City Media Group publisher and executive editor Tracy Baim. In today’s conclusion to our two-part Q&A, Tracy shares her thoughts on the differences between LGBT media and so-called “mainstream” media and talks about the future of LGBT media.
Given my strongly held views about the importance of LGBT media – and appreciation for the important role they play in reporting all of the news – I was particularly interested in Tracy’s comments. I think you will be too.
Tracy’s comments on marketing to our community should be highlighted in every public relations, marketing and communications class and used as the primer for how and what to do by anyone in our industry planning outreach to our community. I could not have said it better myself, and am thrilled to be able to share Tracy’s insight with you here.
Ben Finzel: You cover our community 365 days a year where your so-called “mainstream” counterparts generally only pay attention to us a few times a year (including during Pride). Have you noticed an increase in “mainstream” media following LGBT media on key stories?
Tracy Baim: There are some stories that get universal coverage by all; marriage in Iowa is an example. The mainstream covered that as it happened, as it should. The LGBT media cover that kind of story in much deeper ways. That gives our readers a context for why things happen, and why they continue to happen. Someone reading just the mainstream may have been shocked to learn about that happening, but our readers would have had years of coverage related to marriage that set the stage for the recent successes (and setbacks). We will have many more follow-up stories on marriage, and explore it on a deeper level.
There are hundreds of stories the mainstream does not cover within the LGBT community. Maybe once every few years they cover LGBTs in sport, for example, but every week in Windy City Times you see LGBT athletes in our community, whether in gay leagues or in mainstream sports. Same with entertainment, the bars, culture, etc. The mainstream will do some coverage, and more frequently now does include gays in coverage of, for example, a home and design issue. But they just do not have the space or access to do the kind of depth a weekly gay newspaper, with a Web site updated daily, can do. This is no different than any "niche," for example African-American, Latino, Asian, women's etc.
Also, I would say as a whole the mainstream media has not done a good job of covering the diversity of the LGBT community: it's still mostly white gay men. Even most LGBT media are not very diverse, but we pride ourselves at Windy City Times in trying to cover all aspects of the community.
Ben Finzel: We’ve seen a real consolidation of ownership in many LGBT media properties with the emergence of larger owners of several iconic media properties. At the same time, several well-known brands are really struggling. What do you think is the future of LGBT media?
Tracy Baim: Consolidation, at least at the regional LGBT media level, has not been widespread. The one major attempt at this is failing. Because most LGBT media are so regional, trying to create a top-down model just did not work. This happened for a wide range of reasons, and maybe partly because of management issues.
But a very large reason consolidation has yet to be successful is that the mainstream marketing community, and mainstream businesses, are still extremely unsophisticated in their approach to this market. I am dumbfounded at how painstakingly slow it has been watching mainstream companies as they notice how valuable the LGBT market is … and yet have put so little into capitalizing on it. The fear is drowning a smart business decision. [What I mean is fear of a backlash; there are numerous studies proving that anti-gay attacks don't hurt companies, and those companies who have stood firm have seen a growth in support. Two examples are Kraft and Walgreens, who were threatened for their support of Gay Games VII in Chicago; they did not pull their support and they did not suffer any economic impact.]
We all know how many LGBT people work in advertising and marketing, including at major brands. Two things happen: One, just because they are LGBT, does not mean they know how to reach LGBTs. Second, people do not want to be seen as only being an expert in the LGBT area, so they fail to push their companies to move into this community.
I could give a lot of examples of companies that have been very slow in this area, but I don't want to name names, in part because there are so many. But I put them into two categories. One, those who already do have a significant LGBT following, and take it for granted. They do absolutely nothing to earn this loyalty, and are at risk of losing it if another brand comes along with a better widget. The second are those who have very few LGBT customers, and their brand suffers from this in part because they are not seen as a leader in diversity and reaching out to all consumers.
Part of the problem is that many companies have a split personality on LGBTs. We have seen a tremendous growth in companies working internally to create a great atmosphere for LGBT employees. The HRC Corporate Equality Index is an example of activism pushing companies to get better and better each year, and the bar is going to be raised again because so many hit 100%. That is terrific.
But how does that really help the LGBT community outside of the company? Well, it does have some societal effect, especially when those companies reach out and lobby for legislation like ENDA. But if all they do externally is throw a few dollars to buy a table at a gay gala, or one ad a year in a pride guide, or a float in a few parades, they are basically just placating their employees. What they need to do, if they want to shore up their LGBT market and grow it, or start it, is to take a comprehensive marketing approach just as they do with any community.
What does this mean? It means taking a significant portion of their marketing and advertising budget and doing as they might do with any segment: National and local targeted geographic outreach through event sponsorship; legislative support; company internal events and workshops; solid company employee policies and health coverage; advertising in local and national LGBT media–print, Web, email, podcasts, video, etc.; advertising in areas that have strong LGBT presence in the mainstream; using LGBT "spokesmodels" for their brand; using LGBT-specific images in their ads (as opposed to same generic ads used in mainstream); use those ads in both LGBT and mainstream marketing; partnering at a major level with LGBT charities, not just at galas, but in national feel-good marketing and advertising campaigns; and I could go on with a whole course in this area.
The bottom line is really the bottom line. If a company that spends $100 million on marketing in a year in the U.S. spends $100,000 in the LGBT market, they get what they pay for. But a bold and innovative company that takes even 5% of their budget, or $5 million in this example, and uses that in a wide range of marketing and advertising, will find a tremendous loyalty that has an amazing multiplier through the myriad channels of the LGBT movement.
Now that would change the face of LGBT media, and mainstream media, for years to come.
Ben Finzel: Tracy, thank you for sharing your insight and for giving us a practical “how-to” about LGBT marketing and communications that we can, and will, forward, share and promote to anyone and anyone who will listen. Keep up the great work and we’ll keep reading what you have to say.
SUBSCRIBE
A very good post! Indeed! I really liked this one. I just wonder if this is a continuous blog. I mean, is this a part by part blog or what? I saw that in the article says that: “Welcome ‘back’ to our conversation with Windy City Media Group publisher and executive editor Tracy Baim.” So i assumed that there would be another part in it.