Justin Bieber, this generation’s David Cassidy, has a large and devoted fan base. He has 10 million followers on Twitter and has hit songs on iTunes and the Billboard charts. He is also all over YouTube and the Internet at large. Google AdWords iterations with his name are some of the most expensive to buy and any rumors or news stories with his name attached to it generate large online traffic numbers. In short, this kid is a big deal.
That is why I was so perplexed to hear that a recent Vanity Fair cover with the teen icon was the lowest selling in 12 years. This got me thinking about platform. On one platform (anything online for example) the kid is a superstar. It would seem that he can’t do anything wrong, yet when he enters a more traditional medium he actually, and arguably, hurts the Vanity Fair platform.
The answer for why JB does so well online and with music sales but so terribly with Vanity Fair readers is fairly obvious: Bieber’s target audience, young girls, are all over the Internet and buying music; however, they aren’t heavy subscribers of Vanity Fair. Conversely, readers of Vanity Fair are probably not likely Bieber acolytes. As researchers, I think this a good reminder that audience and platform are everything. Sometimes the research can fail (“get Vanity Fair-ed”) not because the idea or message is incorrect but because the platform and the audience miss the mark.
Some food for thought.
Honestly, I thought putting Justin Bieber in the title of this article might generate some more views for this blog. J
Thoughts? Please comment below.
Kyle Nel is Head of International and Multicultural Research for Lowe’s Home Improvement in USA
