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 BLOGS...... 17 3.2 ONLINE VIDEOS...... 18 3.3 RSS AND CONTENT SYNDICATION...... 19 3.4 BUYING ONLINE ...... 20 4 STRUCTURE OF COMMUNICATION...... 21 4.1 DECENTRALISATION/CENTRALISATION ...... 21 4.2 COMMUNICATION TOOLS ...... 23 5 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 2299 Romanian 224 Slovak 174 Bulgarian 76 Czech 81 Hungarian 38 Polish 29 Turkish 24 N 646 Media Survey (API) 66 Media Survey (AEJ) 43 Total N 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
0
l l g t v c n r r n g t v c n r y p c u p c b u e o e a eb a p ay u u e o e e ar p a Ju O J O A S N D J F M A M J A S N D Ja F M A M 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) Nationality AT ES 2% Other 3% BG 11% CZ 3% Other 23% NL 3% 4%
IT 4%
SK 7% EU-12 30% EU-15 DE UK 13% 59% 7%
BE 8% FR RO 11% 10%
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 Conclusion: Country of residence IT The statistics for nationality are based on the AT RO 2.0% NL 2.1% 1.7% Google Statistics for EurActiv.com. 2.8% LUX Of single countries, Belgium ranks as number one 3.7% Other (18%), but 80% of the readers live outside of 25.1% Brussels and Belgium. US 7.2% 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 UK 9.3% English, French and German shows, that 35% of respondents live in Belgium, giving us an indication that the Brussels based readers are particularly active.
BE Evolution: 18.1% DE We see that the percentage of readers living 13.5% outside Belgium is higher than in 2005. The increase in readership means that the absolute FR number of readers (in each country) has grown. 14.5%
*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
What is your mother tongue? Conclusion: DK 44% of readers have English, French or PL SE 2% 2% HU 2% FR German, the three core languages of EurActiv, GR 2% 16% as their mother tongue. ES 2% 3% Taking into account the 10 languages in which
CZ EurActiv publishes its contents, almost 75% of 3% the readers have access to information about BG European Affairs in their mother tongue. 4% IT Evolution: 4% Compared to earlier survey findings, the DE 16% proportion of readers with French or German SK as native languages has risen, while the 6% 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 Conclusions: Page Views in % EurActiv.com continues to be the single EA.com/de largest portal in the EurActiv network. 7% EA.bg Looking at how the readership is divided 22% between the three core languages, we see that EA.com/fr EA.cz EurActiv.com/fr has more readers (19% of 9% 3% EA.com total) than EurActiv.com/de (15% of EA.hu EA.com total). 2% English is the most important working EA.pl language for many readers, and the first 2% language of reading. However, EurActiv’s language strategy proves appropriate: - the proportion of near-native English EA.ro speakers has increased over time, 12% thanks to multilingualism EA.com/en - English pageviews are now in the 33% minority: “only” 33% of the total EA.sk EA.fr readership. 8% 2% Evolution: The 2005 readership survey showed that 97% of readers could read English, French or German and 87% of the network readers could *The statistics are provided by CIM. CIM does not provide a read English: translation is an advantage but differentiation between the three language versions of EA.com, therefore not a must for every detail, whereas this distinction in the graph is based on information from Google localisation is the real value added. analytics. 8 1.3.3 Working language
What is your main working language? (EN,FR,DE) What is your main working language? (Network)
60% 80% EN EN 69.11% 50.6% Mother tongue 70% My mother tongue 50% Other Other 60% 40.4% 40% 50%
30% 40%
30% 20% 18.10% 20% 9.0% 12.79% 10% 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 Conclusion: What is your age? The readers replying to the network survey are somewhat 40% 38% younger than the readers of the 35% core version. The majority of 31% readers is in the age group 25-34. 30% While as high a percentage as 51% 25% 23% of the network readers are in the 19% 20% EN,FR,DE age group 18-34, the same share is 20% 17% 16% Network 37% for the core versions. These 15% 13% findings correspond to the findings in question 1.7 concerning the 10% 8% 6% skills category of the respondents, 5% 5% 3% which shows that the skills level is higher amongst the readers of the 0% core versions – this could also 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-65 >65 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) What is your gender? (Network) Male Female 60% 55% 60% 57% Female Male 50% 45% 50% 43%
40% 40%
30% 30%
20% 20%
10% 10%
0% 0% Gender 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) Other Consulting 4% 8% EU Institutions 10% Federations 8% Politics 23% Government Business 13% 33% Corporate 17%
Education/research & think tanks Media 19% 11% NGO 10%
Multipliers 40% 1 Work sector (Network)
Other EU Institutions 22% 4%
Government 20% Politics Consulting 24% 5%
Federations 2%
Business 20% Corporate 13%
Education/research & think tanks 13%
Media NGO 8% 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, 2.5% EN,FR,DE spokesperson) 1.5% Network
18.8% Senior management (Dir.Gen., Sec.Gen. or similar) 15.4%
Middle management (including experts and 45.4% journalists) 38.0%
17.2% Employee/Assistant 31.6%
5.9% Student/intern 5.1%
10.1% Other 8.2%
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% 26-50 times 6.1% 39 15-25 times 5.3% % 9-14 times 5.2% 8 times 1.3% 7 times 1.5% 6 times 1.8% Number of visits of Number 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
Readership during the week (source Google, basis: week Time of day EurActiv is most used (source: Google 25 2007) analytics, basis: June 2007)
30,000 70,000
25,000 60,000 50,000 20,000 40,000
15,000 e Views
e Views 30,000 g g
10,000 Pa
Pa 20,000
5,000 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 y y y y y y y 0 0 0 :0 0 0 0 :0 ida da 00: 02: 04: 06:0 08:0 10 12: 14: 16: 18:0 20:0 22 onda Fr ur M Sunda Tuesda Thursda Sat Time of Day Wednesda
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% 30% 26.5% 20% 15.7% 10% 0% EU jobs Press links Press sources Daily EU news Daily Policy positions Policy services EU policy conferences, Analysis from other Practical: information on information Practical: consultancies, and other background/LinksDossiers
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 35% 21% Energy 28% 20% Science and research 25% 49% EU funding & structural funds 24% 9% Climate change/emissions trading 23% 14% External relations/foreign affairs 20% 14% Internal market issues 20% 17% Social and employment issues 19% EU Reform* 18% 19% 28% Education 18% 14% Trade/globalisation 16% 8% Industrial policy 16% 8% Health 15% 8% Transports 14% 10% Telecoms/eCommunication 10% 12% Financial services 9% 9% Security/defence 8% 6% Biotechnologies 8% 13% Network Agriculture 8% EN,FR,DE 6% CAP reform 4%
0% 10% 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?
I/we have applied, and are satisfied with the 24.3% implementation of our project 22.7%
I/we have applied successfully, but were not 8.2% satisfied with the implementation 6.2%
5.2% I/we have applied, but not successfully 5.2%
It could be relevant but is difficult without contacts 31.1% Network with the persons in charge of the projects/funds 18.5% EN,FR,DE
It could be relevant for my organisation but I assume 13.9% the procedures are too complex 12.8%
I do not know if this is relevant for my organisation 19.9% and how to apply 26.1%
4.5% I have not really heard about this 14.9%
0% 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 Conclusions: What is your personal experience with blogs? Blogs are not (yet) a primary source of information, but they Network 5.2% are actually growing faster I write my own blog EN,FR,DE than the “normal” web did in 4.4% the 90ies.
12.4% I frequently read them 8.3%
I occasionally read 64.4% them 52.3%
21.3% I never read them 37.6%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Conclusions: What is your professional experience with blogs? Readers seem to understand the multiple opportunities to 28.3% EN,FR,DE An opportunity to inform yourselves better engage stakeholders offered by 32.5% Network blogs.
An opportunity to engage citizens/read user-generated 29.1% content 32.9%
An opportunity to engage stakeholders/read expert- 19.5% generated content 21.9%
A risk of spreading negative/false information about 12.3% your organisation 7.2%
A risk of allowing your policy “opponents” (e.g. NGOs 6.9% versus industry) to dominate the online debate 3.4%
42.7% No opinion 33.5%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
17 Conclusions: Does your organisation plan to use blogs and/or forums as part of One fourth of readers’ its communication strategy? organisations use or will use blogs proactively, although so EN,FR,DE far only 9% are blogging We already use blogs proactively (we write 9.1% themselves: major growth ourselves a professional blog or support it) 6.5% Network potential as a professional communication tool. We monitor certain blogs regarding our 6.8% organisation/our topics 8.4%
We are planning to proactively use blogs in 2.2% 2007 2.6%
6.7% We will likely use blogs in 2008 or later 9.3%
40.8% We have no plans for blogs 39.0%
34.4% No opinion/not applicable 34.3%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
3.2 Online videos Conclusion: What is your personal experience with online videos? The percentage of readers watching online videos Network frequently or very frequently is EN,FR,DE 11.1% somewhat higher than for I frequently watch them blogs. The growing popularity 10.9% of video platforms can be one explanation for this. There is no significant difference between the readers of the core 70.2% I occasionally watch versions and the network in them 67.3% this question.
18.7% I never watch them 21.9%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
18 Conclusion: In the coming years does your organisation plan to use online Videos are used a little more videos as part of its communication strategy? than blogs (and probably by a similar audience). EN,FR,DE We watch some videos regarding our 6.8% organisation/our topics 4.5% Network
We already use them proactively (produce 11.9% ourselves or support) 7.6%
We are planning to proactively use them in 3.3% 2007 4.1%
10.5% We will likely use them in 2008 or later 16.2%
35.3% We have no plans for online videos 36.7%
32.2% No opinion/not applicable 30.9%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
3.3 RSS and Content Syndication
Conclusion: Does your organisation use content syndication (automated inclusion A larger percentage of readers’ of headlines or text, RSS or other technology) on its website or organisations already actively intranet? use RSS or content syndication than was the case EN,FR,DE 25.0% in the previous questions on Yes, we already use it Network 27.1% blogs and online videos.
We are planning to use it 4.4% in 2007 5.4%
We will likely use it in 12.0% 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 past 12 months, did you buy/book goods or services over the internet? (EN,FR,DE) 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 Conclusion: Concerning the global structure of your organisation, what is This question has been the level of integration between its central and national/local analysed according to core offices? versions and EurActiv network as well as for the sub-surveys EN,FR,DE on federations, media and 19.2% Fully centralised Network corporate. 23.4% While the general analysis shows that there are no big Moderately 25.5% differences between the centralised 30.6% organisation in the core versions and the network, the 15.4% analysis of the federation, Decentralised 18.8% media and corporate surveys show a higher degree of moderate centralisation for No opinion/not 39.9% corporates. applicable 41.1%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Concerning the global structure of your organisation, what is the level of integration between its central and national/local offices?
19% Federations Fully centralised 20% Media 19% Corporate 25% Moderately centralised 26% 35%
20% Decentralised 20% 18%
No opinion/not 35% 35% applicable 28%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
21 Conclusion: How does your industry organise its network of people Concerning the organisation of responsible for European press relations? European press relations we see that the statistics are practically EN,FR,DE 18.6% identical for network and core A group of persons working in Brussels Network 17.2% version readers, while there are some differences between federation’s, media and A group of persons working in the national 8.8% corporate surveys. Among the capitals 9.5% respondents from federations, 54% respond that the press A group combining persons working in 28.5% relations are handled in Brussels or national capitals 28.9% Brussels or partly in Brussels, the same percentage is 42% for 44.1% the media survey and 47% for We do not have a communication network 44.5% the corporate survey. 50% of media respondents say 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% that their employer does not have such a network
How does your industry organise its network of people responsible for European press relations?
24% Federations A group of persons working in Brussels 17% Media 20% Corporate
A group of persons working in the national 9% 8% capitals 19%
A group combining persons working in 30% 25% Brussels or national capitals 27%
37% We do not have a communication network 50% 34%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
22 4.2 Communication tools Conclusion: Rate the importance of the following tools for direct communication An updated website, meetings with different stakeholders (EN,FR,DE) and seminars are considered as the three most important Updated website 36.6% 54.9% 91% tools for direct communication Meetings 41.9% 52.2% 94% by the respondents. The percentage of respondents E-mails 40.9% 41.2% 82% in the network who rate online Phone calls 45.4% 34.4% 80% advertising in specialised EU Seminars/conferences 57.8% 30.3% 88% media as “important” or “very Position papers 50.2% 29.1% 79% important” exceeds 50% Written briefing materials 52.4% 25.4% 78% Evolution: Press releases 51.5% 24.3% 76% Compared to the 2006 survey Online advertising in specialised EU media 28.8% 6.9% 36% on communication trends Advertising in mass media 21.4% 6.4% Important 28% within European federations, Very important Print advertising in specialised EU media 25.2% 4.4% 30% online advertising in specialised media has 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100 overtaken print advertising in % importance (same level of Rate the importance of the following tools for direct communication importance in 2006). with different stakeholders (Network)
Meetings 32.9% 59.8% 93%
Updated website 33.2% 58.0% 91%
E-mails 42.2% 35.5% 84% Seminars/conferences 50.6% 33.2% 78% Position papers 46.4% 21.8% 73% Phone calls 48.6% 20.8% 71% Written briefing materials 51.4% 19.5% 69% Press releases 55.0% 18.3% 68% Online advertising in specialised EU media 36.5% 15.7% 52% Advertising in mass media 36.2% 13.0% Important 49% Print advertising in specialised EU media 35.5% 7.7% Very important 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: What is the value of EurActiv's multi-country network? - Multilingualism appreciated. - Localisation important for
EU coverage in different 60.8% national stakeholders. language 64.05%
Adaptation of the 43.0% coverage to national 57.36% needs and stakeholders
Targeted 33.6% communication 35.37% opportunities
7.1% Other EN,FR,DE 3.63% Network
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Conclusion: How do you prefer to be informed about European Affairs? Most people prefer a combination of coverage from Network Brussels and the national EN,FR,DE 26.94% From a Brussels perspectives. perspective 9.85%
From a perspective 3.30% adapted to the national context 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 Do you consider that "independent and fact-based" describes EurActiv.com? the country portal you use (BG,CZ,HU,PL,RO,SK)?
5.49% 12.37%
Yes Yes No No
87.63% 94.51%
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)
Other national newspaper 61.5%
Financial Times 47.8%
The Economist 42.0%
European Voice 34.4%
Le Monde (France) 31.0%
Agence Europe 20.2%
International Herald Tribune 16.5%
Der Spiegel (Germany) 15.8%
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (Germany) 15.2%
Wall Street Journal Europe 12.1%
Europolitique/Europolitics/ EIS 12.0%
EU Reporter 10.3%
The Parliament Magazine/Region Magazine 9.7%
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: Which other media than EurActiv do you use? …print (only French survey) For French-speaking readers, Le Monde and other national newspapers remain the most Le Monde (France) 76.8% important newspapers.
Autre journal 51.8% national
Financial Times 30.8%
Agence Europe 30.8%
European Voice 28.4%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Conclusion: Which other media than EurActiv do you use? …print (only German survey) As in France, German readers prefer German daily and weekly Frankfurter newspapers. Allgemeine Zeitung 61.8% (Deutschland)
Der Spiegel 59.5% (Deutschland)
Andere nationale 59.5% Zeitungen
Financial Times 48.3%
European Voice 34.4%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Conclusion: Which other media than EurActiv do you use? …print (Network) In the Network the national newspapers dominate clearly.
Other national 72.7% newspaper
Financial Times 34.9%
The Economist 30.8%
European Voice 18.0%
Le Monde 18.0% (France)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
27 5.3.2 …Organisations’ websites Conclusion: ...Organisations' websites (concerning EU policies) (EN,FR,DE) It is important to note that the overall europa.eu/DG websites 87.9% importance of the europa.eu site does not mean that each DG European Parliament website 58.8% website is this much used. NGO & think tank websites 51.9%
European Council/Presidency website 48.4%
National government website 45.6%
Commission delegation/press office website 29.7% in my country
Federation websites 29.2%
0% 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % % % % % % % % % % Conclusion: ...Organisations' websites (concerning EU policies) (Network) The websites of the national governments are much more used in europa.eu/DG websites 74.47% the network than by readers of the core National government website 53.90% versions.
European Parliament website 44.33%
NGO & think tank websites 44.33%
Commission delegation/press office website 41.13% in my country
European Council/Presidency website 28.72%
Federation websites 17.38%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
28 5.3.3 …News sites Conclusion: ...News sites (concerning EU policies) (EN,FR,DE) Of the top 10 media with substantial cross- EurActiv* readership with EurActiv, 2 Website of national media 47.9% ** only a few are specialised 3 BBC Online 47.1% media allowing targeted 4 EUObserver 35.5% communication to policy 5 Google News 34.9% circles: - 3 in English (between 1/3 6 Financial Times Online 29.6% and 1/10 of cross- European Voice Online 20.4% 7 readership) 8 EUPolitix/The Parliament.com 15.0% - typically none in other 9 EUBusiness 9.2% languages. 10 Financial Times Deutschland Online 7.6% 11 Europa Digital 5.8% Evolution: 12 xpats.com 5.2% Compared to the 2003 Burson Marsteller Media 13 Expatica.com 3.0% Ranking, national media Aqui Europa 2.6% 14 and BBC online as well as 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Financial times online have lost in importance, while ** The read trend lines compare the results to the April 2003 Burson Marsteller EU Observer has gained Commission Media Ranking. readers. ...News sites (concerning EU policies) (Network)
EurActiv* Website of national media 68.44% BBC Online 39.72% Google News 34.40% EUObserver 29.79% Financial Times Online 20.57% EUBusiness 13.12% European Voice Online 10.99% EUPolitix/The Parliament.com 9.22% Financial Times Deutschland Online 3.55% 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 Conclusion: ... Broadcast (concerning EU policies) (EN,FR,DE) Both amongst the readers of the core versions and National TV from my country 54.2% the network (particularly the latter) national EuroNews 49.3% television. In the network, BBC television 45.7% the national radio rates higher than EuroNews, National radio from my country 39.6% while national radio only CNN 29.9% rates as number four for the core versions. Arte 25.8%
TV5 (France) 19.4%
BBC radio 19.1%
Deutsche Welle 9.0%
Radio France International 7.4%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
... Broadcast (concerning EU policies) (Network)
National TV from my country 80.2%
National radio from my country 56.3%
EuroNews 53.1%
CNN 40.6%
BBC television 32.6%
BBC radio 13.9%
TV5 (France) 13.9%
Radio France International 9.4%
Arte 8.0%
Deutsche Welle 7.6%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
30