12 13 14

A RESERVE AUDIENCE FOR M.O.I. BOOKS

It has already been said that the six books were shown to all subjects so that there would be as little doubt as possible about their recalling the books correctly. After the opening questions, which asked if any of the six books had been seen, all subjects were asked, with reference to the books they had not seen, “Would you have liked to see any of these?”

49% of the sample said that they would have like to see one or more of the books. 35% said they did not want to see any more and 16% gave doubtful answers. It should be noted that 7% had already seen all the books.

It must, of course, be realised that the get-up of the publications seen at close quarters is very attractive, and the figure (49%) mentioned is probably much greater than the proportion which would have, in fact, secured a copy which had been brought to their notice by the normal distribution mechanism Those who had seen some of the books were readier to see others than those who had soon none, but 35% of those who had seen no books, or 15% of the whole sample, said that they would have liked to see one or more of the books shown to them. This 15% represents a section of the public as yet completely untouched by these publications.

Some check on the value of replies to this question is provided by answers to a further question put to those who said that they would have liked to see one or more of the books. They were asked: “Why haven’t you?” 39% of those who would have liked to see one or more of the books mentioned said that they had not previously heard of or seen the publication in question. This is about 19% of the whole sample. On the other hand, 20% of those who said that they would have liked to see one or more said that they had no time to read. This is 10% of the whole sample. 10% of those wishing to see books, or only 4% of the whole sample, said that they couldn’t afford the books or had been unable to borrow a copy from a friend. This seems to indicate that the price policy followed of keeping the books under 2/- a copy has put them within reach of most people. (Exception must be made for Scotland and the North East where, as shown below, price seems to be a considerable factor).

Some people gave more than one answer so that there is a small amount of overlapping in the figures starred. However, it may be said that 24% of the sample gave reasons indicating no very great interest, such as lack of time, or gave no reason at all. This leaves about 25% of the sample who would have liked to see one or more of the books, but were unable to for more practical reasons - the books had never been brought to their notice, or were unobtainable.

Analysis by Sex and Age

As in the present audience, men out-number women in the potential audience revealed by this question.

Those age groups with the largest proportions of present readers have also the largest proportions of potential readers. It is clear that if the women aged 18 - 45 years became readers in any number the male bias in the audience noted above could be remedied.

The reasons given for not having seen books which they would have liked to see are very much the same for men and women and the different age groups.

Analysis by Region

The results for Wales are doubtful because of the high proportion answering “Don’t know”. This might indicate a low level of interest in this region.

The South, South West and Scotland show relatively high proportions saying they would like to have seen the books. The proportions giving this answer in the North, the North West and the Midlands are about average, and this is of particular interest since these regions were under-represented in the actual audience. Moreover, when asked “Why haven’t you seen them?” 59% of those in the North and 46% of those in the Midlands who would like to have seen books said that they had not heard of the books or seen them on sale, 20% of those who would like to have seen books in Wales said that they were unobtainable.

Some results for regions differing significantly from the average are shown below.

“Cannot afford” and “Unable to borrow” are similar answers, and if these are taken together there is some indication that price is a considerable factor limiting the audience in Scotland and the North East.

Analysis by Occupation

The higher proportions saying “Yes” in the case of factory workers, managerial and professional and clerical workers indicate that even in those groups with high proportions of readers still more people are potential readers, Of the groups which are under-represented in the present audience (housewives, agricultural workers, miners, retired and unoccupied) only miners show a relative higher proportion wanting to see more books than they have seen.

Few occupation groups show much difference in the reasons given for not having seen other books. Rather more of the managerial and professional workers say they haven’t time to read, and 27% of those retired and unoccupied people who would have liked to see more books say that they cannot afford them.

15

WHO BUYS THE BOOKS?

The publications investigated are distributed through the normal commercial channels. It is, therefore, relevant to ask what kind of people, in the first instance, buy the books which ultimately reach the final audience?

All those who had seen one or more of the six books were asked, for each of the books seen, “How did you get hold of it?” 23% of the sample said that they had bought one or more of the books. A comparison of the numbers saying they had bought individual books with the actual sales figures for those books showed that more people said that they had bought books than was actually the case, according to the sales figures. The reason for this seems to be that the question did not ask sufficiently specifically “Did you, personally, hand over money for this book?" Consequently it is likely that informants said they had bought books when in fact the books had been bought by another member of the family. In the table below, the sales figures are compared with estimates, based on the results given by the sample of the number of people in the population who had seen the books and who would say they had bought them if asked.

It should be noted that the estimates “Bought” and Seen are subject to a margin of error of up to + or - about .4 million.

The numbers in brackets rank the figures from the greatest (1) to the least (6). Comparison of these rankings shows that the order is the same in the case of “Bought” and Seen, but that the positions of Costal Command and Battle of Egypt are reversed in the case of the Sales figures.

The last column, which gives the ratio of “Bought” to Sales, shows that the former are about twice as great as the latter, except in the case of Coastal Command , where the “Bought” figure is three times as great as the Sales figure.

Thus the stretching of the meaning of “Yes”, I bought it” into “Yes, someone in my family bought it” cannot altogether account for the difference between the “Bought” and the Sales figures. If the difference were entirely due to this the “Bought” figure should be in the same ratio to the Sales figure in the case of all books.

There appears, in fact, to be a closer relationship between “Bought” and Seen than between “Bought” and Sales. The proportion of those who saw the different books saying that they bought them is fairly constant, and is always in the neighbourhood of 40%.

It is possible that those who were most impressed by the books were in some cases inclined to think they had bought them, when in fact, they had borrowed them from friends, though this would not explain the peculiarity of the Coastal Command figures. It is shown in Section III that the proportion of those seeing the books who read them all through is not particularly high in the case of this book. Whatever the explanation, the “Bought” figures must be regarded as unreliable.

16 17

WHY WERE BOOKS BOUGHT?

Those who said they had bought one or more books were asked “What was your chief reason for buying?” Most people were attracted by the general interest of the subject matter, that is to say, the War in its various phases is the chief sales factor.

Some people gave more than one reason and so the percentages given above add to more than 100.

Of special interest amongst these reasons are buying the books for presents and to keep for a permanent record. 15% gave such reasons. This reflects the good production qualities of the publications. 13% specifically mention the inducement of having friends or relatives involved in the activities described, but it is not possible to say what proportion of the 68% mentioning general, interest in the subject matter had a personal interest of the same sort also.

Only 3% say specifically that the books are bought because they give more details than the press. This belief is perhaps unfounded. The books do not give more information than has been released for publication.

The detail is, however, presented in continuous narrative and illustrated with well chosen photographs or diagrams so that the impression on the reader may well be much more that of a whole picture than is the impression gained from newspaper accounts. Here again it is not possible to say what proportion of the 68% mentioning general interest in fact bought the books because of the detailed accounts they contain.

It may be noted that only six people (.1% of the sample) said they bought the books because they demonstrated the use of the weapons which they themselves were making, although a considerable proportion were making munitions.

Analysis by Sex

Three reasons are given with greater frequency by women than by men, particular interest because of friends or relatives taking part, to give as a present, and to keep for a record.

Analysis by other groups show only small differences.

Those who had “bought” one or more books were further asked “How did you get to know about it (them)?”

Some people mentioned more than one medium and therefore, the percentages add to more than 100.

More people said they came across the books in newsagents’ shops or on bookstall than became aware of them through any other medium. There is too a considerable proportion who remember chiefly hearing others talk about the books. The more usual publicity media are less frequently mentioned, although the wireless plays a substantial part. It must, of course, be said that most newspapers treated the advance and publication notices of these books as editorial matter, and since the subject matter was the same as many current news items, it is possible that many people were unaware that M.O.I. publications were being discussed. Because of this, and because the figure for bookstalls and newsagents is high, the question arises of whether enough is being done to bring the books to the public’s attention. The fact that large sections of the population either do not see the books or only see them if someone they know has a copy is, of course, bound up with this. It will be remembered that 49% of the sample said they would like to have seen one or more of the books which they had not seen, including 19% who said they were unaware of the publication of one or more of them.

Among groups who bought books a smaller proportion of women than of men (12% against 24%) mentioned newspaper publicity, whilst rather more women than men mentioned the wireless and the personal publicity of book displays and public conversation. This may reflect the fact that a larger proportion of men than of women read newspapers. It indicates as well that since the audience is under weighted so far as women are concerned it might be wise to pay rather more attention to other media than newspapers in future publicity for these books.

Analysis by Education

It should be noted that the sample of those educated at Universities is small so the figures are, therefore, subject to a wide margin of error. More answers per person were given by this group than by other education groups and the proportions mentioning wireless, newspapers and bookshops are relatively high. However, the proportion saying they heard other people talking about the books is lowest in this group.

Newspapers and bookshops are mentioned rather less and conversation rather more frequently by those with elementary education only

The results suggest that other advertising media besides wireless and newspapers should be used if the books are meant to reach all sections of the public. Perhaps displays in other shops besides bookshops and in factories would serve the purpose of attracting those sections of the public which are at present under-represented in the audience.

18 19 20 21 22

IS A NEW TYPE OF PUBLIC BEING REACHED BY M.O.I. PUBLICATIONS?

In order to answer this question it was necessary to find out what sections of the public most frequently buy books or periodicals of a sort that can be compared with M.O.I. books. The two types of publication chosen for this purpose were (a) “weekly or monthly magazines or papers about matters of public interest”, and (b) “small books (of the Penguin Special or Pelican type) sold at up to 2/- about matters of public interest”.

For convenience these are referred to as “(a) magazines” and “(b) books” in the tables below.

It should be noted that the interpretation of the word “buying” is open to the. same doubts in the case of (a) and (b) as in the case of M.O.I. books, (See page 14)

About the same proportion said they bought M.O.I. books as small books of the Penguin Special type on subjects of general interest. Magazines are bought more frequently.

Table 23 shows the proportions of those who bought magazines “often”, “occasionally” and “never” who said they had bought one or more M.O.I. books, who had seen one or more of the M.O.I. books but not bought any, and who had not seen any of the M.O.I. books.

36% of those saying they “often” bought weekly or monthly illustrated magazines said they had bought one or more of the M.O.I. books. Only 16% of those who never bought such magazines said they had bought M.O.I. books.

Of those “often” buying magazines altogether 74% had seen one or more of the books, but of those who never bought magazines only 45% had seen any of the books.

It appears therefore, that the audience created by this type of magazine had to a considerable extent bought or seen the M.O.I. books. However, reversing the table above, and basing the percentages on those who “bought” , saw but did not buy and did not see the M.O.I. books, shows these results in a different light.

Table 24

“Bought” (a) magazines

Thus 42% of those who said they had bought one or more of the M.O.I. books never bought such magazines and a further 26% only bought them occasionally. The greater part of the buying public for M.O.I. books, therefore, were not regular buyers of magazines. This would indicate that M.O.I. books are reaching sections of the public that the magazines do not reach, although both are distributed through are same channels. On the other hand, it is interesting to note from Table 23 that about a quarter of those who buy magazines “often” have neither bought nor seen any of the M.O.I. books.

The M.O.I. books may be said to occupy a middle position between (a) magazines and (b) books. Like the former they are illustrated and topical, but like the latter they are occasional publications and each is devoted entirely to one subject.

Table 25 shows the proportions of those who buy (b) books (small books on matters of public interest) “often”, “occasionally” and “never”, who have “bought”, seen but not bought, and not seen M.O.I. books.

These results contrast with those in Table 23. 52% of those who bought these books “often” had bought M.O.I. publications against only 31% of those who bought the illustrated magazines “often”. Similarly 43% of those who bought these books “occasionally” had bought M.O.I. publications, against only 28% of those who bought illustrated magazines. It is clear from this that M.O.I. publications have a bigger appeal for the more serious reading public than for the more popular audience to whom the illustrated magazines appeal. It was noted earlier that the present audience for the books is weighted against those sections of the population with elementary education only. This conclusion prompts, once again, the question raised earlier, but from a different angle - “Is the editorial policy behind the books such that they are making the right kind of appeal to those sections of the population at which the books are aiming?” In considering this question it must be remembered that although larger proportions of same sections of the population than of others are buying the books, the sections who are buying them most do not form a large part of the population.

The percentages shown in table 25 are reversed in the table below, which shows the proportions of those who “bought”, saw but did not buy, and did not see the M.O.I. books, saying they bought (b) books “often”, “occasionally” and “never”.

Of those who said they bought one or more of the M.O.I. books more than half never bought books of the Penguin Special type, although, as shown in Table 25, the M.O.I. publications made a bigger appeal to the small section of the public that does buy them.

Only 21% of the population ever buy this type of book as against 41% who buy illustrated magazines. This explains why members of the “magazine public” form a larger part of the public for the M.O.I. books, although the books appeal more strongly to those who buy the Penguin Special type. However, a substantial part of the audience for M.O.I. books consists of people who never, or only occasionally, buy the other types of publication. This suggests that the books are, in fact, creating a new reading public. On the other hand, the public for M.O.I. books is by no means at an optimum, for many of those who buy similar sorts of books have not bought (or seen) M.O.I. books.

This is summed up in the following table:

It should be noted again that “buy” is not to be interpreted literally as handing over money in a shop, but probably means having access to a book at home which may have been bought by another member of the family, or which was perhaps, “permanently borrowed” from a friend. It should also be emphasised that many more saw M.O.I. books than “bought” them.

Analysis by Sex and Age

The table below shows the proportions of men and women in different age groups

who “bought” one or more of the M.O.I. books and who bought (either often or occasionally) (a) magazines and (b) books.

The proportions of men aged from 18 to 45 who said they bought all three types of publication are well above the average. Women in these age groups show average proportions buying (a) magazines and (b) books, but relatively low proportions buying M.O.I. books. From this it can be said that there has been a failure to attract women in these age groups who are a potential market.

Both men and women aged over 65 show relatively low proportions buying all types of publications. Girls show low proportions buying M.O.I. books and (b) books, but an average proportion buying (a) magazines. Boys, on the other hand show average or over-average proportions buying all types.

Analysis by Region

The proportions in different regions saying that they bought M.O.I. books are fairly constant. Exceptions are London and the Midlands where these proportions were slightly higher than average, and the North and North Midlands where they were slightly lower.

In London and the Midlands the proportions buying (a) magazines were also high and the proportions buying (b) books average. The North and the North Midlands show low proportions buying all types of publications

Of the other regions, which show about average proportions buying M.O.I. books, the East and South West show low and Scotland a high proportion buying (a) magazines, and the North East and South show low and the South West and Wales high proportions buying (b) books.

Analysis by Economic Group

This table shows a very clear trend. The lower economic groups buy all types of publication less frequently and the upper economic groups buy all types more frequently. However, in the lower groups only half as many buy M.O.I. books as (a) magazines, whereas in the upper groups this proportion is three-quarters. This suggests that more potential buyers are not being reached in the lower group.

Analysis by Education

The greatest difference is in the proportions buying (b) books. In the Elementary and Secondary groups about the same proportions buy M.O.I, books as (b) books, but many more buy (a) magazines than M.O.I. books. The ratio of those buying M.O. I. books to (a) magazines is highest in the Elementary group and lowest in the University group. This suggests that M.O.I, books are reaching bigger proportions of their potential buyers amongst those with higher education than amongst those with elementary education only.

Analysis by Occupation

In general the groups which are the best buyers of M.O.I. books are also the best buyers of the other two types of publication.

The managerial and professional groups and clerical workers show high proportions buying all three types of publication, and the retired and unoccupied groups and agricultural workers show low proportions buying all three.

Exceptions are miners who show average proportions buying M.O.I. and (b) bocks although the proportion buying (a) magazines is low, and housewives who buy (a) magazines in average proportions but M.O.I. and (b) books in low proportions.