In the rapidly evolving digital media landscape, “media time” — the total time readers spend on a Web site or app — has emerged as a popular key performance indicator (KPI) in newsrooms worldwide.

The premise is simple: The more time users spend on a site, the more engaged and valuable they must be as an audience, and the more likely they are to subscribe and stay as a customer.

But is this really the case?

While media time may indicate engagement, it doesn’t necessarily reflect the real value a media house provides to its readers. In fact, value can be high even when media time is low, especially if audiences are able to quickly find what they need and gain relevant insights.

The challenge for newsrooms today is to redefine how they measure success, focusing less on how long readers stay and more on the quality and usefulness of the experience. By prioritising added value over time metrics, newsrooms can better align with their audience’s needs, fostering trust and loyalty in a digital-first world.

The rise of “media time” as a KPI

Media time became popular as a KPI in response to the fierce competition for audience attention in digital spaces.

As streaming platforms, social media, and mobile apps compete for screen time, many newsrooms have adopted media time as a benchmark to gauge their relevance and hold readers’ interest. Time spent on site is seen as a straightforward measure of engagement: more time spent equals more loyalty, or so the thinking goes.

However, this metric has limitations. Media time doesn’t account for the quality and the experience, or the specific needs, of the audience.

For instance, a reader who spends 15 minutes scrolling through a difficult-to-navigate article may not actually be more engaged than one who finds exactly what they need in two minutes. A reader who reads five articles may not be satisfied if he did get what he came for.

Time metrics risk prioritising quantity over quality, leading to content strategies that favour length over substance and risking reader frustration and disengagement.

Understanding added value over media time

If media time doesn’t necessarily equate to value, what does?

In a digital journalism context, “added value” can be defined as the direct benefit that a reader derives from consuming content. Added value can be considered intellectually, emotionally, practically, monetarily, socially, or aesthetically.

Any of these perceived added values can often be high even when the time spent is low, especially when content is concise, relevant, and immediately useful and purposeful.

For example, a news summary that provides a comprehensive update in a few key points or a visually engaging infographic that clarifies complex information can deliver high value with minimal time investment.

Added value in digital journalism is about understanding the reader’s goals and aspirations and respecting their time. Today’s audiences are often time-pressed and seek quick, efficient information. They want to stay informed, but they don’t always have five or 10 minutes to commit to a single piece of content.

In this environment, a newsroom’s ability to deliver what readers need quickly and effectively becomes a more relevant measure of success than the time spent on each page.

Measuring added value in newsrooms

How can newsrooms measure added value if not through time metrics?

The answer lies in shifting from simple “stickiness” measures to metrics that more accurately capture content quality and audience satisfaction. Some alternative metrics, which should be considered in combination, include:

• Completion rate: This measures how many readers finish a piece of content, which can be a strong indicator of engagement and relevance.
• Return rate: Tracking how often readers return to the offerings can be a powerful indicator of loyalty and perceived value. Also, measuring the regularity of the visits is a good indicator for habituation.
• Indirect audience feedback: Leaving comments or sharing is an indicator of the relevance of a piece content.
• Direct audience feedback: Post-article surveys in the form of a “like,” “more of that,” or “did you find this article helpful” button can provide insights into whether readers found the content worth the time spent.

By incorporating these metrics, newsrooms can better understand how well they are serving their audiences and adapt their content strategies to emphasise quality and relevance over time.

Success in the digital era is no longer about how long readers stay but about the depth of connection and trust they feel toward a media outlet. Added value — the relevance, usefulness, and quality of content — is what truly resonates with audiences and encourages loyalty. By redefining KPIs to emphasise quality, newsrooms can build relationships that go beyond clicks and time, connecting with readers in a meaningful way.

Ultimately, a value-driven approach is about meeting readers where they are and respecting the demands on their time. In a world of limitless content options, the most successful newsrooms will be those that deliver information concisely and reliably — building trust and loyalty by focusing on what readers need, not how long they stay.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .