updated: the future of journali$m?
The move to monetize online journalism is forcing content publishers to experiment (and sometimes exploit). The graphic above, apparently from Dustin Steinacker, was making the rounds earlier this week and gave us a bit of a chuckle here at indieWIRE. Some of it hits close to home.
In order to keep content free, ads are being placed in new spots on sites, on multiple pages, hoping to generate more Internet eyeballs (and revenues). But, things got even murkier today in film journo circles with the publishing of a Focus Features sponsored post by respected movie site, /film. The piece, written by David Chen, looks at the filmography of “Away We Go” director Sam Mendes and the comments it’s generating are more about /film and their editorial policies than the filmmaker and his work.
UPDATE: /film explains.
Oh, snap! Love the graphic.
I hope not. As a journalist, I am offended by what /Film did. Their later editorial/explanation/mea culpa notwithstanding, the piece reads as a bought and paid for puff piece about a director with a current film and it has no place in the editorial section of a publication.
Their “explanation” reads like “oh shit, we’ve been caught” and the phrase “we agreed to support the advertiser by crafting an editorial” is selling editorial space, pure and simple.
I would say that Indiewire is walking this very fine line and in some cases falls on the overly advertised side.
How much did Focus pay you to blog about this?
Post a Comment
Syndicate this site