Deals like this, the demise of Gigaom (yes, I know - but it won't work), and the general lack of runaway success of tech publications lately often get people lamenting how media is on a downward slide and the business model inherently broken. I'm starting to suspect, however, that tech media as a mass market idea is grossly overrated.
The typical "person on the street" doesn't care about "tech" as an individual topic, nor for publications like Gigaom, TechCrunch, or ReCode. They'll take tech flavored news in their stream as it comes whatever the source (and folks like the BBC, CNN, the NYT, etc, all do a good job of it anyway).
The people who work in and live and breathe "tech" (e.g. us) and who do really care aren't considered to be "enough" for a mass market site. It's ridiculous a newish site with 1.5 million uniques a month is classified as "struggled to draw significant traffic" in an industry that employs around 6.5 million Americans in all. The "genericization" of tech media as mass market media is horrid - look at how insipid the stories TechCrunch covers nowadays, for example.
I think people need to rework their assumptions about what "tech" is, how it relates to the media as a whole, and to get used to the idea that tech-specific media is (and should be) almost (but not quite) as niche as media aimed at medical professionals, lawyers, people in aviation, or similar groups.
I think you're right, in part because tech has also plateaued for many people. Things like new processors or operating system releases, etc. used to make more of a difference when there were more obvious limitations holding back the average person.
Mac users used to clamor for the latest processor news because there was no computer available which was fast enough; a 7,200 RPM drive had to be a big deal because everyone spent time waiting on their slow 5,400RPM drive. Digital photographers anxiously awaited better sensitivity, lower noise, storage speed, etc. but it's been years since a good phone camera was adequate for most people and even discerning types were more likely to be held back by skill or lenses than their DSLR.Even on HN, I'd bet most readers would take a LONG time to notice if someone secretly their Core i7 with an i5.
It's hard to trust the comScore number of 1.5M for Recode's traffic. NYT cite comScore in reporting The Verge is 12M uniques a month, but The Verge themselves confirm it's almost exactly twice that in their own story covering the acquisition:
Some publishers chose to put Quantcast's tracking pixel on their websites. These are annotated as as "directly measured". Vox Media is one of those publishers. If you don't chose to share your data with Quantcast, they measure it through toolbars and 3rd party data, so it's only a bad estimation.
Around 25-30% block Ads and probably also tracking pixel, in the US and Europe . I suspect the numbers are probably twice that high on tech news sites. So this alone could probably explain the low estimates.
There are so many more demos media start ups can be targeting, but everyone is after the same tech savy millennial demo, it's completely overloaded. You really hit the issue directly, the mass market is much larger and there is a lot more potential new media that could be created targeting them.
Well, Vox certainly isn't limiting itself to tech. It owns vox.com (politics, with a liberal bias), SB Nation (sports), and Polygon (gaming), among other sites.
It was with liberal bias when it was Wonkblog and offered serious data and analysis. Right now it is full SJW clickbait with recycled content. I have a feeling they write articles in advance and just put the name of the politician/police department/Judge/CEO in them.
Soon in tech news -"Why Western Digital Black and Red hard drives are actually increasing racism in america? See in those 48 charts that we have shown only 345 times"
Tech audience in absolute numbers has risen but as percentage of population has stayed pretty flat. Yes science and stuff is getting more attention these days but the world of startups and tech bubbles and the same few tech companies isnt what the mainstream really cares about.
The other issue is that millennials, especially technical and gaming are among the highest users of adblock which makes a material impact on ad revenue from the site. Either way, even doubling to 3M uniques per month is still a low number of overall users to sustain a single site.
It might work if part of a larger network, which is what will happen at Vox, but they seem to be hitting the saturation point too. Remember the Verge superbowl ad? It's nice to keep buying traffic and hiring writers as long as the VC money is there but it doesnt seem like they have sustainability figured out yet.
I don't know about Vox. I watched the CEO talk at a Re\Code event of all places. He was very dodgy when talking about financials. They are not afraid to spend and have strong backing but I'm not so sure they can make back the mountains of cash they spend.
In any case, it's very interesting to watch how this unfolds.
Personally there is a little bit of fatigue with the overabundance of tech news too. My mom complains that whether it's her little local print paper or Google News, it's always full of fluff articles about whatever stupid shit Apple or Tesla or whoever is up to.
I totally agree and I believe this news is great. Tech media needs consolidation as it's very oversaturated.
Elite Daily is the perfect example of what the millennial generation is looking for. Shallow advice from fellow millennials with tech news sprinkled in with as much importance as think-pieces covering what it's like to be a millennial. Quantcast shows 30 million uniques for Elite Daily last month and that makes me think that it's going to continue to be difficult for tech-centric media to grow and gain sustained advertising dollars. I won't hide my disdain for fluff sites like Elite Daily, but my point is that Elite Daily is what these tech news websites are competing against, not each other.
It is not necessarily overrated. If you had a tech blog covering what Facebook, Twitter SnapChat can do for you, or how to get more out of Linkedin, SalesForce, Mailchip, and how they can help you at work, people will read it. It's just that a very few care about the newest round of funding, or the acquisitions.
Even though there are just 6.5 million people in this industry, there is a lot of interest in technology news from young people and non-tech people of all ages.
"I'm starting to suspect, however, that tech media as a mass market idea is grossly overrated."
My thought also. You can test this idea by replacing "tech" with finance, films, radio, farm machinary, mining equipment or any other money making sector of the market.
I often think of meta tech news as "news for tech-industry analysts".
The typical "person on the street" doesn't care about "tech" as an individual topic, nor for publications like Gigaom, TechCrunch, or ReCode. They'll take tech flavored news in their stream as it comes whatever the source (and folks like the BBC, CNN, the NYT, etc, all do a good job of it anyway).
The people who work in and live and breathe "tech" (e.g. us) and who do really care aren't considered to be "enough" for a mass market site. It's ridiculous a newish site with 1.5 million uniques a month is classified as "struggled to draw significant traffic" in an industry that employs around 6.5 million Americans in all. The "genericization" of tech media as mass market media is horrid - look at how insipid the stories TechCrunch covers nowadays, for example.
I think people need to rework their assumptions about what "tech" is, how it relates to the media as a whole, and to get used to the idea that tech-specific media is (and should be) almost (but not quite) as niche as media aimed at medical professionals, lawyers, people in aviation, or similar groups.