The myth of scale: why bigger isn’t always better in publishing

In digital publishing, the pursuit of scale has been something of a guiding obsession. Growth is routinely measured by reach, impressions, and audience size. But what if the relentless drive to become bigger was missing the real opportunity: becoming more valuable?

The truth is, bigger isn’t necessarily better. It may sound counterintuitive in an industry where advertisers, investors, and even editorial teams have historically equated growth with sheer audience size. But scale for its own sake often comes with hidden costs—costs that dilute brand strength, strain editorial resources, and weaken audience relationships.

It’s time for publishers to rethink what they mean by growth and why smaller, more targeted, deeply engaged audiences are often far more valuable than sprawling, superficial reach.

When reach becomes a liability

Scale is seductive because it feels like progress. A publisher reaching millions of monthly visitors must be doing something right, surely? But often, inflated audience metrics hide underlying vulnerabilities.

Large-scale traffic often comes from volatile sources such as social media, search, or third-party aggregators. Algorithms can shift overnight, evaporating your carefully-built audience. Publishers learned this the hard way when Facebook’s news feed adjustments cut referral traffic dramatically, devastating outlets that had built entire models around social reach.

Beyond algorithmic risk, the drive for scale frequently forces editorial teams to chase broader, less focused topics—often at the expense of brand identity. A niche publisher known for high-quality, specialist content can quickly dilute their credibility when trying to chase mass-market attention.

The deeper risk? Becoming generic. With size, you risk losing your unique voice—the very thing that likely made readers care in the first place.

The overlooked strength of smaller audiences

A smaller, more engaged audience offers something infinitely valuable: clarity. Knowing exactly who your readers are, what interests them, and what motivates them allows you to tailor content, products, and subscription models with precision.

Take industry-focused publishers like The Information or Digiday. They operate on significantly smaller audiences compared to mass-market sites, yet command premium subscription prices because of their clearly-defined value proposition. Readers willingly pay hundreds of pounds per year because the content feels bespoke, authoritative, and directly relevant to their professional lives.

This strategy isn’t limited to professional niches. Passion-based publications—covering topics such as culture, sport, or lifestyle—can cultivate intensely loyal communities who drive consistent revenue. Rather than constantly chasing new readers, these publishers focus energy on nurturing relationships, deepening engagement, and steadily increasing lifetime value.

Profitability in depth, not breadth

Financially, scale can also be deceptive. High volumes of low-engagement traffic offer limited monetisation potential—particularly as CPMs remain stubbornly low. Advertisers increasingly value engagement metrics over reach alone. They want readers who pay attention, click, subscribe, and act—not just readers who skim and leave.

Publishers relying heavily on advertising to monetise scale find themselves on a treadmill: forever running harder just to stay in place. By contrast, those focused on deeper relationships are building more sustainable revenue streams, including paid memberships, sponsored communities, events, and premium ad products. Smaller-scale publications like Tortoise Media or individual Substack newsletters achieve strong revenue per user precisely because they prioritise depth over breadth.

In this scenario, audience size isn’t the critical metric—audience value is. Small but engaged audiences are not only easier to monetise, they’re also cheaper to retain. This reduces churn and allows editorial teams to invest in content quality, rather than volume.

Growth, redefined

Let’s be clear: advocating against mindless pursuit of scale isn’t the same as advocating stagnation. Growth matters—but it must be sustainable, intentional, and focused.

Publishers must shift their definition of success from scale alone towards audience quality, loyalty, and lifetime value. This means smarter segmentation, better data analysis, and a deeper understanding of what makes their readers truly engaged.

As an industry, we need to move away from asking “how many?” and towards asking “how much?” How much do readers care? How much time do they spend? How much revenue do they generate? The future belongs to publishers who can answer those questions—not those who merely chase larger numbers.

Ultimately, the myth of scale is fading. Bigger isn’t always better. Sometimes, better is simply better.