PressEthic

This week’s issue of Entertainment Weekly boasts an advertisement consisting of trading cards from the hit TV show “Lost.” Interestingly, last week they ran a fold-out piece on the show, and also featured Lost on the cover. This synergy happens so often in publications that people have come to expect it (or have perhaps become immune to it), especially when the content is of the entertainment or fashion industry. When content is dictated by advertiser relationships, a dangerous precedent is set; it is no longer about the “truth,” it is rather about making money, and editorial is created to sell something rather than to inform.

A couple of weeks ago, The New Yorker found itself under some scrutiny for running an entire issue with only one advertiser: Target. The Target ads have raised quite a few eyebrows, for several reasons. First, The New Yorker violated important advertisement guidelines set forth by the American Society of Magazine Editors, most specifically by not running an editor’s letter informing the reader of the single-advertiser issue. But perhaps the most appalling aspect of the ads was the way in which they blurred the line between editorial and advertisement. Every ad (and boy, were there a lot of them) was a cartoon drawn in a very chic urban style, consisting of many red and white bull’s eye (the Target logo), but not the Target name.

Now, I am not so naïve as to think that every advertisement is placed in magazine’s based on many demographic studies and without a specific reader in mind. I know that magazines make a large part of their money by running ads. But it is important that ads are clearly distinguished from the content of the magazine, especially when the publication is considered a news source. I’m sure that this close relationship between ads and content has something to do with the growing public distrust of journalists. If the goal of journalism is to remain objective, then publications must do a better job of adhering to guidelines which promote ethical reporting.