Labels: Ethics, IntelliTXT, Technology, Web
Answers to Questions About CIO/LinkedIn Deal
In this blog post from Sunday, CIO editor in chief Abbie Lundberg answers most of the ethical questions put forth in this blog and others about the web site's use of pop-up windows in the text of articles.
CIO's In-Text Links: Ethical or Not?
Via a post on Paul Conley's blog, I learned that Framingham, Mass.-based CIO is putting what appear to be paid links in story text (example). Correction, 6:26 p.m.: CIO editor in chief Abbie Lundberg says that no money changed hands. I don't know for sure what the business arrangement is for these links, and according to CIO's own letter to its readers the links are part of a larger offering of social networking tools involving LinkedIn. But still, judging by that letter and this story from Reuters, it seems apparent that this is at least in part a commercial deal.
Conley considers these links to be unethical, just like the IntelliTXT in-text ads that have appeared on eWeek's site and others. He bases part of his argument on the assumption that the links were not approved by editors, though, and CIO's editor in chief says she did give her approval.
My initial thoughts on this -- and note that what I write here does not reflect an official ASBPE stance on the issue -- were that these links perhaps were a bit different from other paid links. At least they show potentially useful information and not just ad copy. My main objection was how annoying it was to have the links right in the story text. Are CIO's readers keen on networking as to warrant putting social networking information on every company name within the story? And that LinkedIn logo is a bit irritating, sort of like reading copy with a ™ trademark symbol next to every mention of a company's name. Also, there's the question of whether the links should be clearly labeled with the word "advertisement." As Paul notes, BusinessWeek's implementation of a similar feature puts the links in a separate sidebar. I don't know that that makes it more ethical, since there's no notation indicating whether the LinkedIn pop-up is part of a business deal and what role Hewlett Packard plays. But it's at least less obtrusive and more in line with how similar links (the social networking links to Digg and Del.icio.us) are handled.
The comments people have left on CIO's site so far (even discounting Paul Conley's comment) show a mixed response. Granted, since so far most of the comments are anonymous, there's no way of knowing if all the comments were left by actual CIOs and not, say, editorial consultants or competitors of LinkedIn. Still, as one commenter to the CIO announcement put it:
It would be great if this were a tool created by CIO editorial and tech staff on their own initiative, using an open application programming interface (API). But it's not. [See correction above -- this does not apply.] In fact, according to the Reuters report, LinkedIn must approve all applications created using its API. In other words, the links are not strictly based on editorial judgement, as called for in ASBPE's code of ethics. [Again, per Abbie Lundberg's correction, the stricken sentence does not seem to apply to the CIO situation.] And if you're trying to help the reader network, why not include other networking sites like Facebook, Friendster, Naymz, and Plaxo?
ASBPE will likely issue an official statement on this matter; if that happens, I'll update this post to add a link to that statement.
Update, 4/16/08: ASBPE President Steven Roll has commented on the issue over at the ASBPE National blog.
Update, 4/22/08: Abbie Lundberg clarifies most of the issues raised in here a post on CIO's Difference Engine blog.
Conley considers these links to be unethical, just like the IntelliTXT in-text ads that have appeared on eWeek's site and others. He bases part of his argument on the assumption that the links were not approved by editors, though, and CIO's editor in chief says she did give her approval.
My initial thoughts on this -- and note that what I write here does not reflect an official ASBPE stance on the issue -- were that these links perhaps were a bit different from other paid links. At least they show potentially useful information and not just ad copy. My main objection was how annoying it was to have the links right in the story text. Are CIO's readers keen on networking as to warrant putting social networking information on every company name within the story? And that LinkedIn logo is a bit irritating, sort of like reading copy with a ™ trademark symbol next to every mention of a company's name. Also, there's the question of whether the links should be clearly labeled with the word "advertisement." As Paul notes, BusinessWeek's implementation of a similar feature puts the links in a separate sidebar. I don't know that that makes it more ethical, since there's no notation indicating whether the LinkedIn pop-up is part of a business deal and what role Hewlett Packard plays. But it's at least less obtrusive and more in line with how similar links (the social networking links to Digg and Del.icio.us) are handled.
The comments people have left on CIO's site so far (even discounting Paul Conley's comment) show a mixed response. Granted, since so far most of the comments are anonymous, there's no way of knowing if all the comments were left by actual CIOs and not, say, editorial consultants or competitors of LinkedIn. Still, as one commenter to the CIO announcement put it:
I'm not so sure I like this new feature … it's a bit distracting and adds an amateurish feel to the articles. … [the links] will only distract me from the content on your site. You might want to rethink this one … [second set of ellipses is mine]
ASBPE will likely issue an official statement on this matter; if that happens, I'll update this post to add a link to that statement.
Update, 4/16/08: ASBPE President Steven Roll has commented on the issue over at the ASBPE National blog.
Update, 4/22/08: Abbie Lundberg clarifies most of the issues raised in here a post on CIO's Difference Engine blog.
Labels: Ethics, IntelliTXT, New Product/Content Development, Technology, Web
Residuals for Journalists?
Should journalists be paid residuals when their writing is used to generate extra revenue for their companies? Nikki Golden of ASBPE Chicago wonders about that topic in two blog posts, Just Sour Grapes? and Follow up to Sour Grapes. It's particularly worth reading the two articles she points to in those posts. Here are the links:
- Labor Cyberwars: or, Why I'm Like a TV Writer, Except Poorer
by James Poniewozi, from Time.com, Nov. 1, 2007 - Why Don't Journalists Get Residuals?
by Albert Kim, from The Huffington Post, Nov. 14, 2007
Labels: Career Development, Copyright/Electronic Rights, Ethics, Salary/Compensation, Web
Updates on CMO, Ethics
An update (admittedly belated) on the now-defunct CMO magazine, which was based in Framingham:
Paul Conley reported last month that former CMO editor-in-chief Rob O'Regan has a blog called Magnosticism, where he blogs mainly about marketing and advertising. But the blog also houses some of the content from CMO. Since CMO's closing, the articles are is no longer available from CXO Media, but the company has given O'Regan permission to reproduce them on his blog.
You may remember that CMO won ASBPE's Magazine of the Year award in its first year in existence.
In the same post, Conley notes that Ryan Block, editor in chief of the blogazine Engadget, has posted an open letter to the industry about IntelliTXT-style pop-up ads that appear on keywords on some web sites' stories.
You can read our previous posts on the subject of IntelliTXT here.
Paul Conley reported last month that former CMO editor-in-chief Rob O'Regan has a blog called Magnosticism, where he blogs mainly about marketing and advertising. But the blog also houses some of the content from CMO. Since CMO's closing, the articles are is no longer available from CXO Media, but the company has given O'Regan permission to reproduce them on his blog.
You may remember that CMO won ASBPE's Magazine of the Year award in its first year in existence.
In the same post, Conley notes that Ryan Block, editor in chief of the blogazine Engadget, has posted an open letter to the industry about IntelliTXT-style pop-up ads that appear on keywords on some web sites' stories.
You can read our previous posts on the subject of IntelliTXT here.
Labels: Advertising, Boston/New England, Ethics, IntelliTXT, The Business of Publishing, Web
Ethics Guidelines in the Digital World
Noelle Skodzinski, the editor of Publishing Executive magazine, attended our National Editorial Conference and wrote an excellent editorial about our session on web ethics. It's called " 'Pay to Play' OK in the Digital World?"
In it, she points out that many media companies produce webinars or webcasts that are sold to a single sponsor. Sometimes that sponsor even is in charge of the content. She notes:
In it, she points out that many media companies produce webinars or webcasts that are sold to a single sponsor. Sometimes that sponsor even is in charge of the content. She notes:
Some editors (including those with high editorial standards), say, "As long as the content is useful for my audience, I'm OK with this." After all, the sponsorship enables the content to be provided to the audience free of charge.And:
As long as it is transparent to the audience that the webinar is paid for by the sponsor(s), putting that sponsor on the panel seems to be an accepted practice among many reputable companies. If the content is useful, what’s the difference? In other words, if the content is useful, then ‘pay to play’ is OK, right? A lot of editors could (and do) create some really usefulprint content based around their print advertisers, too. Does that make it OK?As Skodzinski points out, the ASBPE code of ethics doesn't address this specific issue with regard to webinars or webcasts. Section IV, Part B, item 3 of the ASBPE ethics code does say this about advertiser-sponsored sections or supplements in print:
3. The Editorial Role. The editorial staff should not assign, write, edit, design, or lay out special advertising sections or supplements. However, editors should review, revise, and approve for publication any advertising section or supplement to ensure that editorial standards are followed.Transferring those same standards to the web, as Skodzinki suggests doing, would seem to mean that editors would not appear in or help produce webcasts sponsored by a single advertiser.
It could be argued that this directive, from Part A of that same section, should govern webcasts:
A. Single-Sponsored IssuesBut in Section VII, the code has this to say about web site content:
1. Labeling and Appearance. In the case of an advertiser sponsoring an entire issue, full disclosure must be made of the relationship in a prominent part of a publication’s pages, e.g. the cover, table of contents, or in a special introduction by the editor or publisher. Special care and explanation must be given to readers to avoid the appearance of editorial content being affected by the sponsorship.
2. Use of the Logo. In a single-sponsored issue, the publication’s logo may be used, but the editorial content must be held to the same standards that apply for a non-single-sponsored issue.
The editorial department should control all editorial content on a publication’s digital publication, including Web site, blogs, e-newsletters, digital magazines, and others. Standards such as accuracy, attribution, fairness, and balance applying to a publication’s printed editorial material also apply to a publication’s Internet or digital presence.And later on in the same section:
Special advertising sections online should also be clearly identified.It seems clear to me that any given piece of web content -- including an audio podcast, webinar, or video -- should either follow the rules for web content cited immediately above, or else follow the rules set forth for an advertiser-sponsored section in a print publication. The guidelines for a single-sponsored issue would not apply, because the advertiser is not sponsoring the entire web site, but an individual piece of content on the site -- in essence, it's the same thing as if an advertiser were to sponsor an individual story in the print magazine in which it is also quoted.
Skodzinki has also posted on her blog about this issue. And in reading it, to my embarrassment, I realize that we have failed to comply with our own code of ethics in this blog. Specifically:
G. Blogs and Other Online Features or PublicationsWe have not posted a specific policy here. The ASBPE bloggers are working with the national officers and members of the ethics committee to come up with a formal policy. But in the meantime, here are the general guidelines I've been operating under:
These should be ... have easily understood user guidelines, includingn general rules, etiquette, privacy issues, and related policies. Statements concerning expected decorum and the control of an editorial moderator or supervisor over the blogs or other online discussion forums should be explained.
1. All views expressed are the individual author's and may not reflect those of ASBPE.
2. All comments submitted to the blog by users are moderated by the blog editor (for the ASBPE Boston blog, that's me). Commenters are allowed to post anonymously, without signing up for a Blogger ID, but the blog's authors reserve the right not to publish those or any other comments that don't meet certain criteria. For instance, comments containing personal attacks will not be posted. In addition, spam or advertisements will not be posted, nor will comments whose main purpose seems to be to plug a particular product or service (at the discretion of the blog's editor).
3. As for privacy, ASBPE will not collect your contact information from this blog. Privacy for those who subscribe to this blog via email is governed by the policies of FeedBlitz, the third party that provides that functionality.
Please post any comments or questions here, or direct them to me at mspizziri at rcn dot com.
Update, 9/25/07: I forgot to add that Publishing Executive has sent an e-mail survey to its readers on some of the issues brought up in Noelle Skodzinki's editorial, and the results will be published in the next issue and posted on PubExec.com, too.
Labels: Advertising, ASBPE Conferences, Ethics, The Business of Publishing, Web
IntelliTXT Ads Back at ZD
After removing paid links from within stories on some of its sites, Ziff Davis is again using the IntelliTXT service on at least one site. This time it's PC Magazine's site. (For me, at least, it took a few seconds after the page loaded for the links to show up. They're the green links within the story text.)
I'll let Paul Conley tell the story.
The backstory is here and here.
I'll let Paul Conley tell the story.
The backstory is here and here.
Labels: Advertising, Ethics, IntelliTXT, The Business of Publishing, Web
Was PC World Editor's Resignation Another Instance of Fuzzy Edit/Sales Standards On the Web?
According to this Folio: magazine article, Harry McCracken's temporary resignation as editor-in-chief of IDG's PC World is more evidence of the uncertainty in some quarters over who controls editorial.
According to the Folio: article, McCracken resigned after PC World CEO Colin Crawford pulled a column titled “Ten Things We Hate About Apple.” According to a report on Wired, Crawford also told editors PC World's product reviews were too critical of vendors, especially advertisers, although IDG disputes that claim; Wired later excerpted a forum post by a PC World staffer who said the issue was that Crawford killed the article without even consulting McCracken. The article has now been published, and McCracken is back in his old position. Crawford, who was just promoted to the CEO position in March, has now been moved to a position as executive vice president, online (before becoming CEO, Crawford was senior VP- online). IDG announced that it is searching for a new CEO for PC World and Macworld.
Folio: likens the episode to the controversies over IntelliTXT paid links appearing within editorial copy (see here and here). A quote from Matt Kinsman's article:
Updated May 14, 9:21 p.m.
According to the Folio: article, McCracken resigned after PC World CEO Colin Crawford pulled a column titled “Ten Things We Hate About Apple.” According to a report on Wired, Crawford also told editors PC World's product reviews were too critical of vendors, especially advertisers, although IDG disputes that claim; Wired later excerpted a forum post by a PC World staffer who said the issue was that Crawford killed the article without even consulting McCracken. The article has now been published, and McCracken is back in his old position. Crawford, who was just promoted to the CEO position in March, has now been moved to a position as executive vice president, online (before becoming CEO, Crawford was senior VP- online). IDG announced that it is searching for a new CEO for PC World and Macworld.
Folio: likens the episode to the controversies over IntelliTXT paid links appearing within editorial copy (see here and here). A quote from Matt Kinsman's article:
It’s a situation that is in danger of becoming common. Unlike print, where content is physically managed by the editorial team, online just about everyone has access to content and a perspective—inappropriate or not—of what to do with it.Related articles:
- "PC World Editor Resigns Over Dispute" (Folio:, May 3, 2007)
- "It's Hard To Know Who To Trust When PC World Is Afraid Of Steve Jobs And A 'Sad Mac' " (Jossip, May 3, 2007)
- "Editor in Chief Harry McCracken Returns to PCW" (PC World, May 9, 2007)
- "PC World Invites Harry Back to Fill Their Crack In" (Jossip, May 10, 2007)
- "A Nod to Journalistic Integrity Is Seen in an Editor’s Return" (The New York Times, May 14, 2007)
Updated May 14, 9:21 p.m.
Labels: Ethics, The Business of Publishing, Web
Update on IntelliTXT
Sorry to be slow getting to this, but anyone who hasn't been reading Paul Conley's blog might not have heard that Ziff pulled the IntelliTXT paid links that were appearing in some of its properties' online articles.
Meanwhile, CMP started using the links, but then stopped.
For more on what IntelliTXT links are, see previous post.
Meanwhile, CMP started using the links, but then stopped.
For more on what IntelliTXT links are, see previous post.
Labels: Advertising, Ethics, IntelliTXT, The Business of Publishing, Web
Are Magazines, Web Sites Just "Ad Platforms"?
An update on this week's earlier post:
- Internet marketing expert Prescott Shibles is against the use of paid links in edit copy, but is open to the idea that there might be a different implementation for InTelliTXT and similar services that would not be unethical.
- Wooden Horse Publishing's Meg Weaver wonders if magazines will be replaced by "ad platforms." She cites an article on AdAge.com, "Publishers Move Into Agency Territory and Marketers Take Notice" (registration required to read article abstract; subscription or pay-per-article access required to read entire article). Weaver notes that consumer publisher Hachette Filipacchi Media US has purchased Internet ad company Jumpstart Automotive Media, while Meredith has purchased two interactive ad agencies and a marketing firm.)
Here's a paragraph grabbed from Weaver's article:Meredith's president of its publishing group, Jack Griffin, summed up the new direction of today's large magazine publishers when talking about his own company: "What we're doing is equipping Meredith to be a robust marketing-communications provider."
Labels: Advertising, Ethics, IntelliTXT, The Business of Publishing, Web
Ziff Davis, eWeek, Again Subject of Ethics Controversy
The same day I posted about a recent Folio: profile of Ziff Davis Media, B2B publishing consultant Paul Conley published a blog post titled "Ziff Davis crosses the ethics line again."
Conley's post centers around Ziff Davis' decision to once again use Vibrant Media's IntelliTXT in-context ads on some of its sites, after pulling them from eWeek earlier this year. (See earlier post on this blog, "eWeek/IntelliTXT Flap," and two earlier posts on Paul Conley's blog, "eWeek crosses an ethical line" and " eWeek retreats in ads-within-edit scandal" for background.) The ads are back in eWeek and also appear on the company's CIO Insights web site.
Folio: published a story about the controversy on May 3. The article quotes Ziff Davis editorial director and senior VP Michael Vizard as saying "The IntelliTXT ads are clearly labeled as advertisements in compliance with existing ASME and ASBPE guidelines as we understand them. Should these officially recognized bodies adopt specific policies related to IntelliTXT ads, we would welcome that clarification and would also be inclined to comply with those guidelines."
ASBPE's ethics guidelines do, in fact, state that links within editorial content should be under editorial control. But in response to Vizard's statement, the ASBPE ethics committee has attempted to clarify the issue. The last sentence of the relevant portion of our Code of Preferred Editorial Practices, Section VII, Paragraph D, previously read:
A short news item about the whole matter will soon be issued by ASBPE national and posted on the ASBPE web site. I'll post an update when it appears. In the meantime, here are other posts on the topic:
From ASBPE ethics committee member Jeff Seglin:
From Paul Conley's blog:
From custom publisher Rex Hammock's blog:
For a contrarian view, see this post on Eric Shanfelt's personal blog:
(Shanfelt is a former senior VP of emedia at Penton Media Inc.)
Update, 5/16/07: Also see "ASBPE Speaks Out on Hypertext Link Issue," on the news section of ASBPE's web site.
Conley's post centers around Ziff Davis' decision to once again use Vibrant Media's IntelliTXT in-context ads on some of its sites, after pulling them from eWeek earlier this year. (See earlier post on this blog, "eWeek/IntelliTXT Flap," and two earlier posts on Paul Conley's blog, "eWeek crosses an ethical line" and " eWeek retreats in ads-within-edit scandal" for background.) The ads are back in eWeek and also appear on the company's CIO Insights web site.
Folio: published a story about the controversy on May 3. The article quotes Ziff Davis editorial director and senior VP Michael Vizard as saying "The IntelliTXT ads are clearly labeled as advertisements in compliance with existing ASME and ASBPE guidelines as we understand them. Should these officially recognized bodies adopt specific policies related to IntelliTXT ads, we would welcome that clarification and would also be inclined to comply with those guidelines."
ASBPE's ethics guidelines do, in fact, state that links within editorial content should be under editorial control. But in response to Vizard's statement, the ASBPE ethics committee has attempted to clarify the issue. The last sentence of the relevant portion of our Code of Preferred Editorial Practices, Section VII, Paragraph D, previously read:
Contextual links within editorial content should not be sold, and generally should not link to a vendor’s Web site, unless it is pertinent to the editorial content or helpful to the reader.It now reads:
Contextual links within editorial content should not be sold. If an editor allows a link, it generally should not link to a vendor’s Web site, unless it is pertinent to the editorial content or helpful to the reader.ASBPE national president Roy Harris relayed this change to Folio: and it was posted as an addendum to the May 3 article. As Roy says in an accompanying statement to Folio:, "We feel the code offers a clear guideline: Editors, not publishers or ad-sales folks, should make the final decisions on ALL uses of links within edit copy. Also, ad links within editorial text should NOT be sold under any condition."
A short news item about the whole matter will soon be issued by ASBPE national and posted on the ASBPE web site. I'll post an update when it appears. In the meantime, here are other posts on the topic:
From ASBPE ethics committee member Jeff Seglin:
From Paul Conley's blog:
From custom publisher Rex Hammock's blog:
For a contrarian view, see this post on Eric Shanfelt's personal blog:
(Shanfelt is a former senior VP of emedia at Penton Media Inc.)
Update, 5/16/07: Also see "ASBPE Speaks Out on Hypertext Link Issue," on the news section of ASBPE's web site.
Labels: Advertising, Boston/New England, Ethics, IntelliTXT, The Business of Publishing, Web
ASBPE National Editorial Conference Sessions Focus on Web, Career Enhancement
This year, ASBPE's National Editorial Conference is a hop, skip, and jump away (or an easy drive, train ride, or flight, if you prefer) in New York City. The dates are Thursday and Friday, Aug. 2-3, so you can easily make a long weekend out of it.
Day One of the conference will focus on the shift to online. Day Two will concentrate mainly on achieving editorial excellence and enhancing your career. There will also be some optional networking events.
Highlights of the conference:
- A special Day-One session on Web ethics will include topical scenarios — much like our successful ethics program at last year’s conference — and will include a “tips & tactics” discussion, with open Q&A time.
- On Day Two, one highlight will be an Azbee Excellence Clinic, an interactive, roundtable session that will examine publications. The discussion will be divided into categories, with an expert assigned to each.
Read about all the conference sessions scheduled so far.
Labels: ASBPE Conferences, ASBPE Educational Programs, Azbee Awards, Career Development, Editing, Ethics, Technology, The Business of Publishing, Web
eWeek/IntelliTXT Flap
In case you missed it: Woburn-based Ziff Davis publication eWeek has been the subject of some Internet controversy for its use of IntelliTXT contextual ads, which are hotlinked from within the text of editorial content. The IntelliTXT service was developed by the company Vibrant Media.
Rather than repeat what's already been said, I'll direct you to some of what's been written about it:
- "eWeek crosses an ethical line" from Paul Conley's blog
- "eWeek doesn’t want me to visit eweek.com" from Matt McAlister's Inside Online Media blog
One thing I will repeat that's mentioned in Paul Conley's post: ASBPE's ethics guidelines state
The editorial department should control all editorial content on a publication’s digital publication, including Web site, blogs, e-newsletters, digital magazines, and others. Standards such as accuracy, attribution, fairness, and balance applying to a publication’s printed editorial material also apply to a publication’s Internet or digital presence.
Care should be used online, as with printed material, to avoid placement of advertisements in or near editorial content in a way that could compromise editorial integrity or confuse the reader.
And I do have a few comments about this 2004 post from John Battelle's Searchblog, which Matt McAlister's post above also links to: "IntelliTXT: Your Advertising Peanut Butter Is In My Editorial Chocolate..." Although the piece is almost three years old, Battelle makes an interesting devil's-advocate argument that contextual ads within articles might not be so bad after all. Battelle's reasoning, in brief:
... [M]agazines that are essentially catalog magazines ('magalogs'), or most of the Seven Sisters (Glamour, Vogue, etc) ... pretty much exist to move product, and they don't pretend otherwise. A system like this would work quite well for the online kin to these kind of publications. ...
Second, there are an entire classes of content-driven sites which claim absolutely no pretense of editorial objectivity. Whether they are fan sites, directories, blogs, corporate advertorials, for-profit domain-specific portals, you name it, the tradition of sites which carry their biases proudly or are baldly commercial in nature is rich and growing, and IntelliTXT may well give these kind of sites a new monetization model.
Leaving aside whether directories, blogs, and fan sites are, or ought to be, commercial in nature, I'd say that at best the IntelliTXT model is annoying--in the same way that even editorial links can be annoying when the text is vague. In both cases, you aren't really sure what kind of information you'll get if you click.
IntelliTXT links are distinguished from editorial links by a green double-underline format. Vibrant Media CEO Doug Stevenson tells Battelle that the links are a service, and that the reader won't see the ad unless she makes a conscious choice to click an IntelliTXT link. But the format is not enough to distinguish them as ads to the casual user, at least at this point in IntelliTXT's life. And -- in the 2007 iteration, at least--you don't have to click on the link for the ad to appear. Just rolling over it does the trick.
It's also interesting that, according to Battelle, Stevenson basically argues that the links don't inherently represent a conflict because the publisher decides what words to link, so that if the links aren't appropriate, it's the publisher's responsibility. Battelle doesn't quote Stevenson's exact words, but if Stevenson did in fact mention only the publisher, I wonder why he doesn't think the editor should be the decision maker when it comes to links.Labels: Advertising, Boston/New England, Ethics, IntelliTXT, Technology, The Business of Publishing, Web
Airing Problems in Science, Industry, and Reporting
The PBS show AIR: America's Investigative Reports is always fascinating viewing. Each episode looks at the reporting behind a specific investigative story. Last week's episode, "Science Fiction," was of particular interest for professional, industry, and association publications, though. It centered on reporting done by Environmental Science & Technology, which is published by the American Chemical Society.
Paul D. Thacker, who was a reporter at ES&T, starting finding evidence of deliberate attempts to slant science news to benefit certain industries. Among Thacker 's findings:
Thacker's story especially resonated because of the recent publication of ASBPE's book Journalism That Matters, which tells how B2B writers reported articles that brought about positive change in their industries. But Thacker's reporting didn't result in quite such a happy outcome as those in the book.
Paul D. Thacker, who was a reporter at ES&T, starting finding evidence of deliberate attempts to slant science news to benefit certain industries. Among Thacker 's findings:
- Steven J. Milloy, the publisher of JunkScience.com, which criticizes scientific research findings on topics like global climate change and health issues, was a science consultant for Philip Morris at the same time he was debunking the risks of second-hand smoke on Fox New's web site. (At this writing, JunkScience.com has posted no statement about the AIR episode.)
- A purportedly grassroots activist group in Oregon called Project Protect was connected to the timber industry. The group advocated for cutting down trees as means of preventing forest fires, a position also espoused by the industry.
- The consulting firm The Weinberg Group submitted a proposal to DuPont detailing ways to defend an allegedly carcinogenic chemical used in Teflon.
Thacker's story especially resonated because of the recent publication of ASBPE's book Journalism That Matters, which tells how B2B writers reported articles that brought about positive change in their industries. But Thacker's reporting didn't result in quite such a happy outcome as those in the book.
An American Chemical Society board member questioned the value of Thacker's reporting on the Weinberg group, and Thacker says he was soon asked to stop doing investigative pieces. When he found evidence that the Bush administration had tried to stop scientists from discussing connections between climate change and hurricanes, ES&T wasn't interested in publishing the story, he says; in September his climate change story was published on Salon.com. Thacker says he was later fired by ES&T. (The magazine has released a statement about the AIR report and Thacker's departure from the magazine, saying among other things that American Chemical Society rules prohibit board members from interfering with publication editors' activities. Thacker now works for the web site Inside Higher Ed.)
If you get a chance to catch a repeat of the episode, or any installation of AIR, I highly recommend it. And for a look at techniques business press reporters used to get key information for controversial articles, see this report from the ASBPE Washington, D.C., blog.
Related links:
If you get a chance to catch a repeat of the episode, or any installation of AIR, I highly recommend it. And for a look at techniques business press reporters used to get key information for controversial articles, see this report from the ASBPE Washington, D.C., blog.
Related links:
- Articles by Paul Thacker:
- "Hidden Ties," ES&T magazine, March 8, 2006
- "The Weinberg Proposal," ES&T, Feb. 22, 2006
- "How the Wall Street Journal and Rep. Barton celebrated a global-warming skeptic," ES&T, Aug. 31, 2005
- "Skeptics get a journal," ES&T, Aug. 31, 2005
Commentary on the two articles above from JunkScience.com - "Congressman unmoved by peer review, asks to see raw data"
Commentary on above article from JunkScience.com - A short interview with Paul Thacker from the web site of WNET, the PBS affiliate that produces AIR.
Computerworld Steps Up to the Plate
Current ASBPE Magazine of the Year Computerworld recently discovered that some of the material in its Geek's Garden section had been lifted word for word from online sources. To their credit, they announced the lapse to readers on the front page of last week's issue. This week's editorial from editor-in-chief Don Tennant is devoted to the subject, offering a further apology to readers.
Labels: Boston/New England, Ethics
Mediaweek controversy
This post is from: ASBPE KC Blog: Breaking news:
In Paul Conley's latest blog post, he writes about the links to advertisers in article text on Mediaweek's website. This is where the story started this morning, but it continues to unfold. You can read all about it in "Mediaweek blurs the lines between ads, editorial."
In Paul Conley's latest blog post, he writes about the links to advertisers in article text on Mediaweek's website. This is where the story started this morning, but it continues to unfold. You can read all about it in "Mediaweek blurs the lines between ads, editorial."
Labels: Ethics
Editorial Ethics: Taking Transparency to Heart
At this year's national conference, ethical issues were discussed at a session with lots of audience participation. ASBPE's Code of Preferred Editorial Practices and our research on ethics formed the basis of the discussion.
One of the points the new code stresses is the importance of transparency. If you work by a set of ethical standards, not only your staff, but advertisers and readers, should know what those standards are. Although to us as journalists, the idea that we should adhere to certain principles might seem so obvious that we don't have to state it, to our audience and others in our market it may not be clear what rules we play by--or even whether we have any rules at all.
Maury Wright, editor in chief of Reed Business Information's EDN magazine, took this message home with him from the conference. His Aug. 17 editorial lays out for readers the magazine's operating principles and invites feedback. He also points out an area in which EDN has to fine-tune its policy.
I hope Maury's readers take him up on his invitation and tell him how well they think EDN is handling ethical issues, and what their perceptions of the magazine have been thus far. That's the kind of information we all could use.
And all this, of course, begs a question: How is ASBPE doing?
Whether you're a member or just occasionally attend ASBPE events, or even if your participation is limited to reading this blog, we'd like to know where you think ASBPE's doing a good job--ethically or otherwise--and where it's lacking. I'm already thinking that ASBPE could make its own operating guidelines more explicit. Leave a comment here or send me an email and let me know what you think.
One of the points the new code stresses is the importance of transparency. If you work by a set of ethical standards, not only your staff, but advertisers and readers, should know what those standards are. Although to us as journalists, the idea that we should adhere to certain principles might seem so obvious that we don't have to state it, to our audience and others in our market it may not be clear what rules we play by--or even whether we have any rules at all.
Maury Wright, editor in chief of Reed Business Information's EDN magazine, took this message home with him from the conference. His Aug. 17 editorial lays out for readers the magazine's operating principles and invites feedback. He also points out an area in which EDN has to fine-tune its policy.
I hope Maury's readers take him up on his invitation and tell him how well they think EDN is handling ethical issues, and what their perceptions of the magazine have been thus far. That's the kind of information we all could use.
And all this, of course, begs a question: How is ASBPE doing?
Whether you're a member or just occasionally attend ASBPE events, or even if your participation is limited to reading this blog, we'd like to know where you think ASBPE's doing a good job--ethically or otherwise--and where it's lacking. I'm already thinking that ASBPE could make its own operating guidelines more explicit. Leave a comment here or send me an email and let me know what you think.
Labels: ASBPE Conferences, ASBPE Educational Programs, Ethics
Some Controversy About B2B Ethics
On American Business Media's MediaPace blog, Steve Ennen had this to say about ethics, and, more specifically, ASBPE's plans to update its ethics code. National ASBPE treasurer Ira Pilchen responded to Ennen's post via a comment.
I'd second what Ira says about the volunteer structure of ASBPE affecting our ability to respond quickly to emerging issues in B2B publishing. But it never hurts to be challenged to take a more active role in our industry. In fact, ASBPE is looking at ways to increase our support of B2B journalists when it comes to dealing with ethical issues, and Steve Ennen's post on MediaPace has stimulated some discussion on the topic within ASBPE.
Here's what blogger and editorial consultant Paul Conley had to say about ethics, and ASBPE's and ABM's role.
When it comes to ethics, do you need more help from ASBPE than you're getting? What would be the best way for ASBPE to help you with ethical problems? Does your publisher support participation in editorial organizations?
I heartily agree with Ira on one point in particular: The more editors participate in ASBPE, the more our organization will be able develop the human infrastructure to respond quickly to issues like the ethical pressures Ennen mentions.
I'd second what Ira says about the volunteer structure of ASBPE affecting our ability to respond quickly to emerging issues in B2B publishing. But it never hurts to be challenged to take a more active role in our industry. In fact, ASBPE is looking at ways to increase our support of B2B journalists when it comes to dealing with ethical issues, and Steve Ennen's post on MediaPace has stimulated some discussion on the topic within ASBPE.
Here's what blogger and editorial consultant Paul Conley had to say about ethics, and ASBPE's and ABM's role.
When it comes to ethics, do you need more help from ASBPE than you're getting? What would be the best way for ASBPE to help you with ethical problems? Does your publisher support participation in editorial organizations?
I heartily agree with Ira on one point in particular: The more editors participate in ASBPE, the more our organization will be able develop the human infrastructure to respond quickly to issues like the ethical pressures Ennen mentions.
Labels: Ethics
