PressEthic

In the Media & Advertising section of the 5 October 2006 New York Times, Stuart Elliott reports that CNN's new Events Division (a recent addition to the Advertising Sales Department) will now offer sponsorship opportunities for "panels, conferences and meetings on newsmaking and newsworthy subjects," which will feature CNN's reporters and anchors serving as speakers and moderators.

Sponsorship of the events will be made available to CNN advertisers as part of multimedia "packages" that include television, Internet, and mobile phone/podcast news. No a la carte event sponsorship options are currently offered.

CNN was careful to emphasize that "sponsors will have no control over the content of the events" they sponsor. For example, an upcoming L'Oreal Paris event that "will salute women for achievements in fields like politics, medicine and philanthropy" seems innocuous enough. Such an event that caters to a key demographic L'Oreal wishes to target -- woman (more specifically, career women) -- makes smart advertising sense. After all, Elliot cites "the growing popularity of experiential marketing," which relies upon "giving brands tangible form to help them forge closer, more emotional ties with consumers."

But since when is it acceptable for a media outlet to dabble in multimedia creative services? Is this not -- despite the best of intentions and strictest ethical approaches -- a recipe for a conflict-of-interest disaster? In short, will CNN Anchor Paula Zahn (who is currently booked for L'Oreal's event) and other CNN journalists be forced to act as corporate mouthpieces for the highest bidding advertiser?

Todd Gitlin, a professor at Columbia's Graduate School of Journalism, voices the opposition opinion in Elliott's story. Gitlin notes that CNN's new advertising venture is on a "'slippery slope,'" in which objectivity could become increasingly problematic and murky. In addition to maintaining its journalistic integrity, CNN must now also satisfy the demands of advertisers/clients (yes, at least to some extent -- this is the reality of business) who are paying to sponsor an event in order to promote their services or products.

If a sponsor were to exert pressure to deliver the "'lite version' of a contentious or provocative subject" or attempt to influence the selection of panel members or discussion topics, would CNN be able to stand up to said advertiser? Remember, these are the premium advertisers who are, according to CNN's own terms, locked into massive CNN multimedia advertising packages.

In such a situation, preserving CNN's journalistic integrity could come at a huge cost in lost advertising revenues for the network. Given the current emphasis on budgets and business concerns in journalism, what are the odds that such an ethically strong, but unprofitable stand could be made (and sustained)?