Fairfax journalists raise new complaints about advertorials
The controversial NBN supplement
Reporters at The Sydney Morning Herald have accused employer Fairfax Media of failing to set standards around separating advertorial from editorial a year on from narrowly avoiding censure over an Optus- sponsored NBN supplement.
A resolution passed at a stop work meeting at the SMH on Tuesday cited a sponsored NBN “Special Report” which ran in The Herald and The Age 13 months ago.
The motion called for the union to work with the Australian Press Council to help “develop new standards of practice” in relation to sponsored content. Last September the Press Council cleared Fairfax of breaching its rules, but warned that sponsored content needed to be properly labelled. The Press Council also called for “specific standards of practice” to be developed.
Sadly, ya gotta pay the bills these days. I think advertorial can be done right so long as it’s clearly distinguished as thus and the journalism is somehow independent. Saturday’s The Australian regularly does “defence” sections to attract advertisers. The articles are independent to the advertisers. That said, I do remember Fairfax’s NBN advertorial and it was sickening in its praise (did the advertiser have editorial control?). For example, Mercedes are a big spender in the SMH. Are they going to write-off the new Merc in their motoring section? I doubt it. The tail’s always wagged the dog.
Print advertorials? Meh! Goes to show how obsessed the SMH staff still is with print. Why hasn’t there been an outcry about those awful inline text ads that have been running on Fairfax news sites recently? That’s a clear cut case of advertising impinging on editorial space and a great way to damage online brand.
AFR has heaps. Have a look at the recent GE series.
Here is a really bad bit of advertorial on SMH for the F35 no-strike fighter:
http://www.smh.com.au/national.....2j8zp.html
Did you miss the “Advertiser-supported feature” – you probably would.
Plus the word “affordability” and F35 don’t often appear together.
Luckily the comments on the page are switched off.
Oh yes,
You’ll find this paragraph from the SMH “article”:
http://www.smh.com.au/national.....2j8zp.html
Previous supplier partnerships between the RAAF and Lockheed Martin have successfully demonstrated the potential of Australian industry to position for work on future military programs. The F-35 will not only provide military strength for the RAAF – its longevity will also generate continuing opportunities for the Air Force to work with local industry, both in support of Australia’s new air combat capability, and through exports of components and services to other F-35 program partners.
Is copied straight off the Lockheed Martin press release here:
http://www.lockheedmartin.com......ralia.html
Previous supplier partnerships between the RAAF and Lockheed Martin have successfully demonstrated the potential of Australian industry to position for work on future military programs. The F-35A will not only provide military strength for the RAAF – its longevity will also generate continuing opportunities for the Air Force to work with local industry, both in support of Australia’s new air combat capability, and through exports of components and services to other Joint Strike Fighter program partners.
It took me ages to find the “Advertiser supported feature” – would not have seen it had you not said it was there, I was about to come back and comment that it wasn’t there at all! Thanks for pointing out.
with books shrinking as print advertsing declines, more and more news becomes margina because there’s no editorial to support il, so we’ll see a progressive increase in advertorials
Pay the bills = keep journalists employed.
@Nash: try this formula:
controversial news story associated with advertiser – sponsored content from advertiser = no readers