Advertiser Influence

Most of the income of for-profit media outlets comes not from their audiences, but from commercial advertisers who are interested in selling products to that audience. Although people sometimes defend commercial media by arguing that the market gives people what they want, the fact is that the most important transaction in the media marketplace--the only transaction, in the case of broadcast television and radio--does not involve media companies selling content to audiences, but rather media companies selling audiences to sponsors.

This gives corporate sponsors a disproportionate influence over what people get to see or read. Most obviously, they don't want to support media that regularly criticizes their products or discusses corporate wrongdoing. More generally, they would rather support media that puts audiences in a passive, non-critical state of mind-making them easier to sell things to. Advertisers typically find affluent audiences more attractive than poorer ones, and pay a premium for young, white, male consumers-factors that end up skewing the range of content offered to the public.

It is becoming harder and harder to escape from the propagandistic effects of advertising. Many students are now forced to watch commercials in school on Channel One. Even supposedly "noncommercial" outlets like PBS and NPR run ads-euphemistically known as "underwriter announcements." FAIR believes that commercial advertising should be taxed, with the proceeds earmarked to fund truly noncommercial media.

Censorship

Since governments almost always have an interest in controlling the free flow of information, official censorship is something that must be constantly guarded against. In our society, however, large corporations are a more common source of censorship than governments: Media outlets killing stories because they undermine corporate interests; advertisers using their financial clout to squelch negative reports; powerful businesses using the threat of expensive lawsuits to discourage legitimate investigations. The most frequent form of censorship is self-censorship: Journalists deciding not to pursue certain stories that they know will be unpopular with the boss.

The Commercialization of Children's Public Television

At the end of Sesame Street, the show traditionally announces that the episode has been brought to you by, say, "the letter Z and the number 2"--a daily reminder of the show's commitment to non-commercial educational programming. But these days, the tradition has been co-opted for profit: Today after the show, you might hear an announcement that "Pfizer brings parents the letter Z--as in Zithromax."

Zithromax is the antibiotic promoted by pharmaceutical giant Pfizer for treating ear infections and other ailments. "More information about Zithromax is just a click away," the spot promises, ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

The Commercialization of Children's Public Television

Zithromax is the antibiotic promoted by pharmaceutical giant Pfizer for treating ear infections and other ailments. "More information about Zithromax is just a click away," the spot promises, accompanied by images of a zebra and children playing with a giant toy block.

Similarly, another Sesame Street underwriter credit featuring the shopping website Toysmart.com calls on parents to "Click on your child's potential," touting the benefits of the product while actively urging parents to use it.

Some of the more insidious commercials on PBS masquerade as announcements in support of educational values, portraying corporate underwriters in a positive light as advocates of children's welfare--what's known as "image advertising." This practice is illustrated by spots for Wishbone underwriters, who incorporate their well-known slogans into messages of support for education.

In another Wishbone announcement, we hear from "Kellogg's Frosted Flakes, reminding you that thinking and creating are more than good, they're great!" The familiar catchphrase calls to mind Frosted Flakes' cartoon mascot Tony the Tiger--linking the sugary cereal to educational and creative play.

Some underwriters go even further, blatantly featuring their products as encouraging kids to learn. In a commercial for another Arthur sponsor, a child's excited voice tells us about "Post Alpha-Bits Cereal: 26 little letters that make up a million words, that tell billions of stories--and it all starts with ABC." It's hard to miss the implication that Alpha-Bits must be a great way to get kids excited about reading.

This pseudo-educational theme can be seen in a McDonald's ad that underwrites New York's Channel 13 (WNET). An animated Ronald McDonald opens a book--and out flies a red Happy Meal box with familiar golden arches, transforming the bare surroundings into an animated wonderland. A voiceover tells viewers that McDonald's is "happy" to support children's television. This commercial blatantly uses the cartoon Ronald McDonald to create an animated visual link between McDonald's Happy Meals and fun.

Muscling Magazines

Testifying before the Federal Communications Commission in 1965, an executive of Procter & Gamble, the nation’s largest advertiser, made it clear that his company had strict standards about where it put its ad dollars: "There will be no material in any of our programs which could in any way further the concept of business as cold, ruthless, and lacking all sentiment or spiritual motivation," P&G’s man testified (Ben Bagdikian, Media Monopoly). "Special attention shall be given to any mention, however innocuous, of the grocery and drug business as well as any other group of customers of the company."

Procter & Gamble’s policy of determining what was acceptable media content might have been an exception to the rule 30 years ago, but it isn’t today, according to a report by G. Bruce Knecht in the Wall Street Journal (4/30/97). Many large advertisers, including Chrysler Corp., Ford Motor Co., Ameritech and Bell South, now demand that magazine publishers provide them with prior notice when an issue in which they are advertising contains "controversial" stories or opinions. To assure that publishers comply with advertisers’ demands concerning story content, the companies’ advertising agencies send notices to publishers telling them about their rules concerning content.

A letter sent to publishers by PentaCom, Chrysler’s advertising agency, stated, "In an effort to avoid potential conflicts, it is required that Chrysler Corporation be alerted in advance of any and all editorial content that encompasses sexual, political, social issues or any editorial that might be construed as provocative or offensive." The Young & Rubicam advertising agency also admitted that it warned publishers about producing stories it "considers antisocial or in bad taste," while an Ameritech spokesperson said the company steered clear of "anything controversial."

Advertisers are not bluffing about pulling advertisements, the Journal’s Knecht noted. Sports Illustrated lost more than $1 million in golf ball ads after doing a story on lesbian golf fans at the Dinah Shore tournament in Palm Springs. Ford pulled six months’ worth of car ads from The New Yorker after a full-page pitch for Mercury ran next to a story that quoted Nine Inch Nails’ explicit rock lyrics.

As a result, publishers are more and more responsive to the demands of their advertisers, Knecht reported. A recent casualty was a short story in Esquire about a gay man who writes college term papers in exchange for sex. The story was killed out of fear that it would violate Chrysler’s rules about controversial content. What will get the ax next? Perhaps a positive profile of Ralph Nader, or an expose about Chrysler’s lobbying efforts against safety and environmental legislation?

The Online Threat to Independent Journalism

On the Web, Where Does News End and Ads Begin?

Journalists pushing their newspapers and broadcast companies to move into online publishing say the Internet promises an exciting new type of medianteractive, democratic, instantaneous, multi-modal and many-layered.

Yet there is new evidence that the very qualities that make online publishing so intriguing to journalists are spawning subtle new approaches to advertising that may threaten the fragile journalistic tradition of independence from advertiser influence. In this new digital environment, advertisersho have always itched to have a say in the content of news coveragere finding fertile ground for blending marketing and news. Some journalists are beginning to fear that on the World Wide Web, opinion, marketing, advertising, information and news may soon weave together so seamlessly the public will no longer be able to distinguish between journalism and promotional messages.

As consumers have grown more sophisticated over the past several decades, mass market advertising has become increasingly subtle and indirect. This trend has brought us such innovations as product placements in movies and TV shows, infomercials, video news releases that can be spliced into news reports, and ads masquerading as journalism through the use of news-like formats, sets and former news personalities.

On the Web, a world that so far has resisted traditional advertising, ad companies are finding they have to be even more subtle to find any niche at allnd the more they can blend advertising with useful information, the more consumers will accept it. Through focus group studies, advertisers have found that online consumers are irritated by visual display ads that take precious screen space, or demand that readers answer questions or give personal information before they can continue with their Internet search (Advertising Age, 7/22/96). So online advertisers are looking for alternative niches for ads--one of which takes advantage of consumers' need for a guide through the often bewildering array of offerings on the Web.