Paying the piper and editorial independence

I've only just caught up with the December editor's column of Briarpatch, Dave Mitchell, who thoughtfully explores the magazine's obligations when it comes to advertisers. One advertiser, mentioned in a less-than-flattering light, cancelled his subscription and his advertising. When you've got a total budget of $100,000 and two staff, these things can make a big difference.

This incident got us thinking, though, about the perennially delicate relationship between editorial content and advertising in the alternative press. How could we have handled the situation differently? Is the fact that we sell advertising to like-minded organizations at odds with our frequently proclaimed independence? We recognize the investment that organizations make when they place an ad, and we particularly appreciate and value the commitment of our regular advertisers. But how can we ensure that the magazine’s editorial integrity—the point, surely, of the whole endeavour—remains intact? There are no easy answers to these questions.

That’s why we decided it would be best to bring you, our readers and supporters, into the discussion. It’s your magazine, after all.

It will be interesting to see what kind of response he gets to this invitation for reader feedback.

As one very experienced editor of my acquaintance said: "Advertisers who say 'I support you and I expect you to support me' fundamentally do not understand the contract that exists between a magazine and its advertiser. We are not selling our editorial or influence over it. We are renting access to our readers and,in principle, there is no connection between an ad in one place and editorial comment in another."