When it comes to audience management, one thing we at Glide see with so many publishers we speak with is that they are caught in a “Goldilocks problem” with their audience and content technology.
At one end of the scale, they have built up a web of ill-fitting, generic tools that lean on one another to do basic things the publisher wants. On the other hand, they have expensive enterprise systems that need major investment in staff and resources and are often financially out of reach for small and medium-sized publishers.
Too often, news and media publishers end up stuck with an assembly of tools that “sort of” work, but not well enough to give them the edge they need, and at a hidden cost to the business in lost revenue.
The “first-party data” wake-up call
We’ve known for years that first-party data is key to the future of digital publishing: every publisher or news media business that uses Glide Headless CMS is on that journey.
With the uncertainty around the future of third-party cookies, Google search, and declining referral traffic from social platforms, publishers are prioritising direct audience relationships. Yet, many are still scrambling to make sense of the data they already have.
A major reason? Their systems don’t talk to each other.
Nearly 78% of publishers are investing in first-party data strategies, but if they don’t integrate the systems that do what they actually need well, I think this masks a lot of wasted effort.
In the problem scenario, publishers need actionable data to create and accurately send content to audiences. This data is often scattered across multiple tools, such as CDPs, CRMs, CMS platforms, paywalls, newsletter platforms and marketing automation systems.
This may have been sustainable when audiences were happy to come directly and reliably to the publisher’s site or app, but habits have changed. Publishers now have to be much more on the front foot, engaging audiences in new ways, and the patchwork quilt approach to tech is perilously out of date.
Today’s audiences expect to bookmark content within their accounts, follow authors or topics, comment on or interact with other readers, sample premium content and purchase subscriptions, and access content in different formats on an expanding number of channels.
Having a mix-and-match of disparate systems becomes a constant game of whack-a-mole to make it work, and the result is a frustrating experience for both publishers and audiences who want content in new formats and channels.
To simply keep up is a challenge; to innovate is even harder.
A publishing tech crisis: we’ve been here before
The shape of the problem isn’t new. Over the years, working with publishers of varying sizes, I have seen firsthand how they have been forced to adapt to various tech solutions, some custom-built, others off-the-shelf.
It mirrors our experience at Glide Publishing Platform in the CMS space—we built Glide CMS to remove whole layers of mismatched tech—but it can also be seen echoed in other things like hosting and infrastructure, and now very clearly in audience management.
Over time, these systems pile up to create a patchwork of tools that require excessive maintenance and put the brakes on understanding and monetising their audience.
For years, media companies were forced to take one of two approaches:
- Build everything in-house, leading to expensive, overly complex systems that become impossible to maintain.
- Buy generic solutions that don’t fit the specific needs of publishers and require endless workarounds and bespoking.
The result? Bloated tech stacks, which cost too much, slow down operations and lead to disjointed audience experiences.
Fixing the mess: what needs to change
I think the publishing industry needs to rethink its approach to technology again, as it did with its CMS.
Rather than adding more tools to an already bloated stack, publishers should focus on unifying their audience engagement, identity, and access management systems.
Platforms like Glide Nexa, our Audience Management and Actionable Customer Data Platform, aim to do just that. They provide a single, flexible SaaS platform that integrates identity, subscriptions, entitlements, and audience data without forcing publishers into a multitude of high-cost systems.
Critically, it allows easier experimentation with other dedicated systems when the business’s needs grow and demand larger enterprise options.
I think the key priorities for publishers here are:
- Simplifying identity and access management – Targeting the almost mythical “seamless user experience” across platforms is achievable.
- Making first-party data actionable – Collecting data isn’t enough: publishers need systems that allow them actually to use it to do special things.
- Avoid vendor lock-in – The future of publishing tech lies in flexibility to pivot to new ideas and audience habits, not monolithic platforms that dictate every move.
- Focus on audience engagement – Direct relationships with readers are more valuable than ever through personalised content, newsletters, subscriptions, or targeted features.
Is AI the answer? Not yet
Some see AI as the solution to publishing’s tech struggles, but while it has promise, it won’t fix broken basics.
Machine Learning can help with engagement and personalisation, but it still relies on being in control of your data and having the right data collected with intent.
Privacy concerns will keep AI adoption slow and cautious in identity management. For now, publishers should focus on getting their core technology in order before relying on AI to pick up the slack.
The clock is ticking
Publishing is a fast-moving industry where standing still means falling behind. While many publishers acknowledge the tech issues they face, the cost and complexity of fixing them often lead to hesitation.
But waiting for the “perfect” moment to act is a mistake. Decluttering tech in this area isn’t just a nice-to-have; it’s a necessity.
Publishers that simplify their systems, unify their audience data, and prioritise direct reader relationships will thrive.
Those who continue patching together outdated tools will find themselves falling further behind.
The best time for a fresh approach to the audience management tech problem is now.
