4 ms·
"The average British woman spends about £279 on beauty and cosmetics but she spends about a third more, £394 on technology products. By comparison the magazines
by edoloughlin 13y ago
"The average British woman spends about £279 on beauty and cosmetics but she spends about a third more, £394 on technology products. By comparison the magazines she reads gives about 20 times as many column-inches to cosmetics than they do for tech. The disconnect between how the glossy mags choose to fill their pages and how British women actually spend their money suggests that traditional publishers are out of touch with their readership"
It does suggest that, but it also suggests that they're in touch with the "beauty and cosmetics" companies who spend money advertising in their magazines. Anyone got any data on how much technology companies spend advertising in women's magazines?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- tehwalrus 13y agoIt mentions later in the article: > "One of the magazines we studied, Glamour seems to recognise the value of advertising with 6.3% coming from tech companies. In this regard the publisher is somewhat ahead of the trend." (Side point: Jumping on a "problem" you found in the first paragraph, and ask a question answered a few paragraphs further in, looks rather like you're interested in confirming your bias that this article must be wrong. That isn't a good way to learn about how the world works - If you're only reading HN to feel good, no problem, but I come here to learn stuff.)