IRIN readership survey results 2006

Every year, IRIN commissions an annual survey of its readership to review progress and to find out if its products and services are continuing to meet client needs. An important element of the survey is to glean readers' views on content and services, as well as new products and geographical areas that IRIN should consider introducing.

More than 3,500 e-mail subscribers and web users responded to the 2006 readership survey conducted in November-December 2006. Although the number of respondents focused on Asia and the Middle East was less than those following Africa, we consider the sample size big enough to be representative.

IRIN wishes to thank those respondents for taking the time to take part in the survey and assures them that their views will be taken into account.

The following is a summary of the main conclusions of the survey and its recommendations. More details are available if you contact us at [email protected].

MAIN FINDINGS:

WHO USES IRIN?
The main respondents to the IRIN survey said they were involved in some way with the humanitarian sector. More than 57 percent were directly involved (UN, NGOs, or donors). Another 14 percent were academics, many acting as advisers to the humanitarian community. Most of the balance were consultants, government officials or media, which use IRIN to inform their humanitarian reporting. About 20 percent of respondents said they had been IRIN readers for five years or more; 33 percent for three to four years and 45 percent for the past two years. Given the high turnover of humanitarian staff in many countries covered by IRIN, this suggests IRIN continues to attract new readers on a regular basis, and that reader loyalty is firm.

While the bulk of respondents said they used IRIN for work and research, a growing number used IRIN for information on their home countries.

WHY USE IRIN?
Almost 80 percent of respondents rated IRIN as their first or second-most important source of humanitarian news. Sixty-nine percent of these described themselves as 'dynamic or regular' IRIN readers, reading more than 60 percent of IRIN reporting on their areas of interest. Most said they regularly consulted mainstream news sources such as the BBC and CNN, while 32 percent also consulted ReliefWeb and 19 percent Alertnet, two other important humanitarian websites. This would indicate that IRIN continues to fill a unique niche in the information it provides. Web tracking also reveals that IRIN reports are re-published on more than 500 news sites, in addition to many more specialised humanitarian websites, blogs, country portals and discussion groups.

IRIN's impact is considered high. About 64 percent of respondents said an IRIN report had raised an issue of which they were not aware within the previous two weeks. In the same timeframe, 80 percent of respondents had shared IRIN information with others; 86 percent said IRIN had enhanced or influenced their work. About 56 percent of respondents said they or their agencies regularly redistributed IRIN reports through internal and public mail lists, hardcopy publications and agency web sites - confirming IRIN's extended reach and the high value placed on its reports.

Overall, 75 percent believed IRIN's most significant influence was in keeping them up to date, followed by 46 percent who felt IRIN's role was bringing attention to underreported or previously unknown issues.

Globally, 95 percent of respondents believed IRIN's reporting was objective. More than 78 percent - an increase from 61 percent in 2005 -of respondents felt IRIN represented the views of the broader humanitarian community rather than any one organisation, underlining IRIN's editorial impartiality. About 37 percent also felt that IRIN represented the views of affected populations, attesting to IRIN's commitment to provide a platform for those affected by crises. Only 6 percent (compared with 12 percent in the 2005 survey) felt that IRIN represented the views of the UN alone.

QUALITY
As in previous years, IRIN's reporting products (dailies, features, interviews and weekly reports) continued to be highly rated, with 86 percent saying these were 'good to excellent'. In terms of regional services, Africa's rating remained the highest, with 74 percent approval. Fourteen percent subscribed to IRIN's Africa French service and PlusNews (the IRIN HIV/AIDS reporting service). Readers' perception of the quality of Middle East coverage had increased by 5 percent. Asia's overall rating remained the same as in 2005 but its 'excellent' rating dropped by 8 percent, a cause for concern.

The survey confirmed the importance of the weekly round-up to readers. About 77 percent of respondents said they read one or more. Most respondents rated these as 'good to excellent'. Responses also indicated that readership of the weeklies was increasing: 86 percent of Africa and Middle East respondents - an increase of 9 percent from 2005 - said they read the weeklies. However, regular readers of the Asia weekly dropped by 10 percent, again a concern that needs to be addressed.

All respondents reported that they used a mix of service delivery options - headline, full text and weekly - in various combinations. Email respondents showed a greater preference - more than 95 percent - for the full text over headline services.

OTHER SERVICES
In 2004, in response to the previous year's reader survey, IRIN took steps to improve the quality of its photographs and create an online photo library. This led to some improvements in 2005, most of the work being done in 2006. Some respondents noticed a slight improvement in IRIN photos. However, the majority - 75 percent of e-mail users and 69 percent of web users - were unaware that IRIN had an online photo service, indicating the pressing need for better web placement and enhanced marketing.

IRIN's film services scored highly among those few respondents who had viewed a film over the website - 98 percent finding them useful. However, given the limited number who had downloaded IRIN films, it was clear that the web component of the film service was still largely unknown. Recommendations for addressing this are included in this summary.

WEBSITE
In the 2004 survey, readers pointed out the urgent need to redo part of the IRIN website. Although eager to keep up with modern technology, financial and staffing constraints meant that only limited work could be done on this in the early part of 2005. Progress was made in the second part of the year and the new website, incorporating many of the features recommended by readers, should be launched early in 2007.

In 2006, opinions were more favourable compared with 2005 about the IRIN website. More than 80 percent who rated the website found the speed of access, home page presentation and ease of navigation to be good or excellent.

As in 2005, the website search engine received the lowest rating. Ratings of web graphics and photographs also remained low. Similarly, although IRIN offers a range of film and audio clips on its present site, these were generally not known about by most of IRIN's readership, neither were its photo services. Respondents to questions in this section of the survey clearly indicated that they would like to be offered web-based TV and audio newscasts in the future. About 31 percent also said they wanted the option of receiving photographs with their email services.

DELIVERY
However, despite new technology and greater access to internet services, most survey respondents continue to receive their reports by email. Email services were used equally by those based in and outside IRIN regions in the developing world and email continues to draw the highest percentage of humanitarian users. Some email respondents said they used the IRIN website occasionally but preferred to access IRIN via email. Email users based outside an IRIN region generally used email services to save time, while those in an IRIN region preferred the plain text element of the service because of limited IT capacities. Both email and web users in a developing country covered by IRIN were concerned with issues of access.

About 67 percent of web respondents indicated they also used the IRIN email services and 44 percent of web users said they preferred email to web access. The higher reliance on, and preference for, email services - at least among respondents - suggests that any changes to the IRIN email service must include the needs of web users and vice versa.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. Given a high and increasing number of humanitarian readers from all walks of life and growing indications of information overload (increased weekly report readership), IRIN must undertake an immediate review of its content and geographical priorities with a view to focusing on humanitarian crises and in particular those that are underreported or neglected, while avoiding overload;

2. Immediate attention must be paid to IRIN Asia's falling popularity and appropriate action taken to address any gaps in coverage and content;

3. Review of all weekly round-ups and new formula to be developed for enhanced and, where necessary, more comprehensive stand-alone summary reports and digests;

4. Consider options for improving IRIN's ability to keep readers up to date, particularly with breaking news;

5. Review services to bring forgotten issues or emergencies to the attention of readers;

6. Devise and implement an aggressive marketing strategy to ensure all IRIN services and products are brought to the attention of readers;

7. Review and enhance IRIN's email service to tailor it to readers' needs;

8. Ensure low bandwidth options are incorporated into the planned website upgrade.

see also: About IRIN