Wednesday, April 27, 2016
RISE Self-Evaluation Video
This is my RISE Self-Evaluation video for my assignments in this month's class, Journalism.
Sunday, April 24, 2016
Brand Journalism - News Trend Creates Controversy
Brand journalism, not orange, is the new black. In a world of free online newspapers, social media, and other digital platforms, brand journalism is trending. No longer can the consumer assume their news is a traditional news report with no ties to any company or product as opposed to a brand sponsored one. Both sides of the debate have valid points and concerns about such issues as ethics, the idea of journalistic “separation of church and state,” the financial future of traditional news stories, and the journalists’ own inner battle about being willing participants.
According to "White Papers: The New Rules of Content, the Role of Brand Journalism in PR”, brand journalism is, “. . . a company investing in content and becoming the provider of news.” This doesn’t mean it’s just a bunch of infomercials. Although some of this kind of news reporting might come across as biased glorification of a brand that can do no wrong, much of it is actual, hard hitting news that only marginally has something to do with the sponsoring brand. Cisco, an IT corporation, uses brand journalism in their project, My Network Life. The video series follows entrepreneurs from all parts of the world and shows how they reached their professional goals. The series touches on technology, but it’s also about their journeys.
An important component of the NPR Code of Ethics Handbook is transparency; opponents of brand journalism feel this is a major casualty to this new media trend. They feel a company sourced news outlet will put out stories that appear to be unaffiliated with them, but actually promote and show only the positive and none of the negative when it comes to the company’s brand. This leaves the consumer out in the cold, trying to decide which stories are just company hype and which are true. In “Brand Journalism is One Suspicious Article,” Mark Glaser admonishes, “So please, let’s not trust corporations to act like journalists.”
Proponents argue that there is still oversight, just in a different way. Consumers and entities such as nonprofit organizations have replaced the journalist. In his article, “In Defense of Brand Journalism”, Andy Bull says, “But for every entity seeking to act in this way there can be many that will expose the practice.” According to Bull, there will be a nonprofit organization of some kind that will also use brand journalism to refute any claims of healthy nutrition these companies may try to make. People on social media will not hesitate to use their power of “Share” to enforce ethics on this type of reporting. Those who believe in the validity of brand journalism feel the consumer is much better at policing the companies that engage in this practice than any government entity could hope to be. Their claims must hold water or the people on social media will crucify them in ways that can permanently damage a brand’s reputation.
This can backfire on any newsroom that jumps on the brand journalism bandwagon, as well. Worried about failing, some well-respected publications have turned to the practice. When consumers discover even one of the articles on a publisher’s site is nothing more than an elaborate advertisement, every bit of content on that website becomes suspect. It violates the ethical code by ignoring the rules of transparency, independence and impartiality.
Although the idea that separating reporting from business interests, or “separation of church and state,” is not necessarily an ethical one, Last Week Tonight’s John Oliver argues that this unwritten rule for journalists, which is the heart of journalism, is a good idea. He declares it’s like Twizzlers and guacamole. “Separately, they’re good, but if you mix them together, you get something really gross.”
Those who believe in brand journalism don’t understand what opponents have against it. After all, if the story is clearly marked as such, it shouldn’t become an issue. Unfortunately, the ideal and goal of brand journalism is to mimic real news stories and are written in such a way that the advertisement part of the story is indistinguishable from the actual news.
But, then, as Andy Bull mentions, media outlets are businesses, too. Time Magazine is owned by a business that, every month, sells consumers news stories. It is just as possible for this traditional news source to promote its own agendas and protect its interests as any other brand.
Of course, the reason news outlets have gone to brand journalism is because that’s where the money is. John Oliver may use humor to bring up the financial difficulties traditional news media is experiencing, but he’s right when he says, “No one wants to pay for it.” It’s for this reason that traditional news that have gone digital are floundering. Without sales of their publication, how are they to pay their journalists? Internet banner ads don’t get much traffic, certainly not enough to support an entire newsroom. Brand journalism seems the smart way to do things; the media outlets are able to pay the bills and deliver the news. The way they see it, they don’t have to choose; they can do both at once.
Government grants, wealthy donors, and donations from the general public are possible avenues of helping the flow of the revenue stream for more investigative news. For these resources to be journalistically sound and not given to brand journalism at all, all contributors must be able to guarantee they won’t influence the people they hire to do the work.
The media outlets themselves aren’t the only ones that feel the financial pinch. The journalists feel it acutely. The old, traditional jobs are dwindling, leaving news professionals scrambling for a way to make a paycheck. Many of them have to turn to writing brand journalism pieces, something about which a number of them are ambivalent. “Branded but ‘Independent’ Media” tells the story of Jessica Bennett, a veteran of Village Voice and Newsweek. Eventually she went to work for a Tumblr journalistic publication called Storyboard. “From the start, I worried that a company like Tumblr wouldn’t have the same commitment to journalism as a place like Newsweek,” she said.
To make matters worse, journalists who switch over from traditional to brand journalism are often ostracized by colleagues, friends, and family, who are disappointed that they are no longer a ‘real’ journalist. In a way, they’re right. Depending on the brand a reporter is working for, writing for brand journalism is somewhat like being a PR person. Bennett says, “Decide if you’re comfortable feeling like a PR person, and if you’re not, make sure you can do content that doesn’t suck.”
Making the leap to brand journalism doesn’t give the media professional a sense of stability and well-being. A journalist never knows if the company she is writing content for is going to continue doing it. Some companies feel like it’s too much work and not worth bothering with. As this particular trend grows, the savvy of the digital natives will start to see through the smoke and mirrors. Even so, the debate about whether or not brand journalism is evil incarnate or an exciting new adventure will probably not end anytime soon. No matter which side finally wins the argument, the other side will believe consumers are the real losers. Maybe by then black will be the new black.
According to "White Papers: The New Rules of Content, the Role of Brand Journalism in PR”, brand journalism is, “. . . a company investing in content and becoming the provider of news.” This doesn’t mean it’s just a bunch of infomercials. Although some of this kind of news reporting might come across as biased glorification of a brand that can do no wrong, much of it is actual, hard hitting news that only marginally has something to do with the sponsoring brand. Cisco, an IT corporation, uses brand journalism in their project, My Network Life. The video series follows entrepreneurs from all parts of the world and shows how they reached their professional goals. The series touches on technology, but it’s also about their journeys.
An important component of the NPR Code of Ethics Handbook is transparency; opponents of brand journalism feel this is a major casualty to this new media trend. They feel a company sourced news outlet will put out stories that appear to be unaffiliated with them, but actually promote and show only the positive and none of the negative when it comes to the company’s brand. This leaves the consumer out in the cold, trying to decide which stories are just company hype and which are true. In “Brand Journalism is One Suspicious Article,” Mark Glaser admonishes, “So please, let’s not trust corporations to act like journalists.”
Proponents argue that there is still oversight, just in a different way. Consumers and entities such as nonprofit organizations have replaced the journalist. In his article, “In Defense of Brand Journalism”, Andy Bull says, “But for every entity seeking to act in this way there can be many that will expose the practice.” According to Bull, there will be a nonprofit organization of some kind that will also use brand journalism to refute any claims of healthy nutrition these companies may try to make. People on social media will not hesitate to use their power of “Share” to enforce ethics on this type of reporting. Those who believe in the validity of brand journalism feel the consumer is much better at policing the companies that engage in this practice than any government entity could hope to be. Their claims must hold water or the people on social media will crucify them in ways that can permanently damage a brand’s reputation.
This can backfire on any newsroom that jumps on the brand journalism bandwagon, as well. Worried about failing, some well-respected publications have turned to the practice. When consumers discover even one of the articles on a publisher’s site is nothing more than an elaborate advertisement, every bit of content on that website becomes suspect. It violates the ethical code by ignoring the rules of transparency, independence and impartiality.
Although the idea that separating reporting from business interests, or “separation of church and state,” is not necessarily an ethical one, Last Week Tonight’s John Oliver argues that this unwritten rule for journalists, which is the heart of journalism, is a good idea. He declares it’s like Twizzlers and guacamole. “Separately, they’re good, but if you mix them together, you get something really gross.”
Those who believe in brand journalism don’t understand what opponents have against it. After all, if the story is clearly marked as such, it shouldn’t become an issue. Unfortunately, the ideal and goal of brand journalism is to mimic real news stories and are written in such a way that the advertisement part of the story is indistinguishable from the actual news.
But, then, as Andy Bull mentions, media outlets are businesses, too. Time Magazine is owned by a business that, every month, sells consumers news stories. It is just as possible for this traditional news source to promote its own agendas and protect its interests as any other brand.
Of course, the reason news outlets have gone to brand journalism is because that’s where the money is. John Oliver may use humor to bring up the financial difficulties traditional news media is experiencing, but he’s right when he says, “No one wants to pay for it.” It’s for this reason that traditional news that have gone digital are floundering. Without sales of their publication, how are they to pay their journalists? Internet banner ads don’t get much traffic, certainly not enough to support an entire newsroom. Brand journalism seems the smart way to do things; the media outlets are able to pay the bills and deliver the news. The way they see it, they don’t have to choose; they can do both at once.
Government grants, wealthy donors, and donations from the general public are possible avenues of helping the flow of the revenue stream for more investigative news. For these resources to be journalistically sound and not given to brand journalism at all, all contributors must be able to guarantee they won’t influence the people they hire to do the work.
The media outlets themselves aren’t the only ones that feel the financial pinch. The journalists feel it acutely. The old, traditional jobs are dwindling, leaving news professionals scrambling for a way to make a paycheck. Many of them have to turn to writing brand journalism pieces, something about which a number of them are ambivalent. “Branded but ‘Independent’ Media” tells the story of Jessica Bennett, a veteran of Village Voice and Newsweek. Eventually she went to work for a Tumblr journalistic publication called Storyboard. “From the start, I worried that a company like Tumblr wouldn’t have the same commitment to journalism as a place like Newsweek,” she said.
To make matters worse, journalists who switch over from traditional to brand journalism are often ostracized by colleagues, friends, and family, who are disappointed that they are no longer a ‘real’ journalist. In a way, they’re right. Depending on the brand a reporter is working for, writing for brand journalism is somewhat like being a PR person. Bennett says, “Decide if you’re comfortable feeling like a PR person, and if you’re not, make sure you can do content that doesn’t suck.”
Making the leap to brand journalism doesn’t give the media professional a sense of stability and well-being. A journalist never knows if the company she is writing content for is going to continue doing it. Some companies feel like it’s too much work and not worth bothering with. As this particular trend grows, the savvy of the digital natives will start to see through the smoke and mirrors. Even so, the debate about whether or not brand journalism is evil incarnate or an exciting new adventure will probably not end anytime soon. No matter which side finally wins the argument, the other side will believe consumers are the real losers. Maybe by then black will be the new black.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)