Absolutely, maybe, sometimes
People who are adamant about the separation of church and state, advertising and editorial, in print, are less resolute about online and the more they talk about it, the more "nuanced" their views become. Consider two statements made during a conversation in New York in a panel discussion hosted by a media firm MediaVest. It was reported by MediaDaily News.
Conde Nast executive Sarah Chubb, president of CondeNet, was emphatic about defending the "editorial authority" developed over many years by the company: "In a relationship like that with the reader, the divide between church and state has got to be sacrosanct, I think--because they're coming to an authority. There can never be a question what your motives are when you're suggesting something--whether it's clothing or a hotel or a trip or whatever."
Later in the panel, referring to online, she had a different view: ""Things are different on the Internet... when you're not in a top-down relationship with the consumer, we think there are some opportunities for advertising involvement that are actually quite interesting. As long as you're clear about what's going on... you're probably okay." Here Chubb cited social networks like Facebook with heavy user participation as suitable arenas for "advertorial" content."
Conde Nast executive Sarah Chubb, president of CondeNet, was emphatic about defending the "editorial authority" developed over many years by the company: "In a relationship like that with the reader, the divide between church and state has got to be sacrosanct, I think--because they're coming to an authority. There can never be a question what your motives are when you're suggesting something--whether it's clothing or a hotel or a trip or whatever."
Later in the panel, referring to online, she had a different view: ""Things are different on the Internet... when you're not in a top-down relationship with the consumer, we think there are some opportunities for advertising involvement that are actually quite interesting. As long as you're clear about what's going on... you're probably okay." Here Chubb cited social networks like Facebook with heavy user participation as suitable arenas for "advertorial" content."
posted by D. B. Scott at
8:13 am
2 Comments:
Making it clear can (or can't) happen in either print or online. I think there's a feeling credibility is more important in print than on the internet. How many web sites fact check? And the pay for freelancers is so much lower. This seems part of the same trend.
Web readers come to a publication's website through a lot of different channels -- the magazine is just one. The relationship is more precarious -- it relies on technology and the speed of a whole bunch of servers and so on, and it takes a millisecond for an online reader to jump to a different online world, and forget your magazine's site forever. Why tick readers off with intrusive ads or trade on your brand by aligning it with advertising? Every page should load quickly, offer useful info, have opportunities to interact and make it easy to navigate directly to the next thing the reader wants. I'm sure advertisers are in line with those goals.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home