Is The Toronto Star's Special Section On Counterfeiting An Advertorial Or Real News Reporting?

from the just-asking... dept

Tue, Oct 30th 2007 5:48am — Mike Masnick

Recent reports from both the GAO and the OECD have both suggested that claims about the cost of "counterfeit" goods to industries are highly exaggerated. The actual research suggested that it was a much, much smaller problem than the numbers that were often bandied about by lobbyists trying to create stricter laws. And, unfortunately, since those numbers are the only ones around, they're often used as fact even when they have no support. Michael Geist, who has written about this issue numerous times -- including in the Toronto Star newspaper, seems a little surprised to find out that the Toronto Star now has an entire special section on what a big problem counterfeiting is. The section doesn't seem to include a single opposing viewpoint, and the whole thing is sponsored by an anti-counterfeiting lobbying group in Canada. The articles in the section appear to be written by Toronto Star staff reporters, but it sure looks like an advertorial. This isn't to deny that counterfeiting isn't an issue for many businesses -- but it seems a little odd that the recent studies questioning the severity of the problem don't seem to make an appearance, and the fact that these lobbyists' ads are plastered everywhere. The website for the lobbyists even links directly to the "special" issue.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: counterfeit goods

14 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Denis, 30 Oct 2007 @ 6:30am

This is Toronto
They are a universe unto themselves. They think everything revolves around them. Why shouldn't facts(tional) items be coming from there be true?

But having something sponsored by a certain group with a one sided view is biased.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dev, 30 Oct 2007 @ 6:36am

agreed
The Toronto Star has never been anything other than a gossip rag and a great place to get Hockey sports updates. I've never taken much seriously from that paper before - don't see why anyone should know, 'special sections' included...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chris Charabaruk, 30 Oct 2007 @ 1:07pm
  
  LOL WUT?
  I believe you are erroneously referring to that right-wing toilet paper tabloid known as the Toronto Sun. While the Star has its occasional follies (who or what doesn't?) it's certainly no gossip rag, and all true Torontonians know that the Star's Sports section has never been worth it's weight in foolscap.
  
  That said, the special section on counterfeiting was a ridiculously boneheaded addition to the paper, and the decision probably goes against the Atkinson Principles which the paper's management must adhere to.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Galileo, 30 Oct 2007 @ 6:36am

Wrong Universe.
I thought the universe revolved around the United States.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Newton, 30 Oct 2007 @ 9:12am
  
  Re: Wrong Universe.
  It Does
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Michael Brutsch, 30 Oct 2007 @ 7:45am

Get what you ask for...
Hey, Techdirt is always saying how businesses need to change their dying business models to adapt to new conditions, instead of changing laws to protect their old ways of doing business. Sounds like the Star is doing just that. They've found a new way to make money, shilling for big name brands. What's the problem?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DaveW, 30 Oct 2007 @ 9:28am

Marketing success!
The lobbyists are cracking the champagne! Victory! Our marketing efforts succeeded! It must be true because it was in The Star. The public is scared and will pressure the politicians. The laws will change in our favour, based on thin "facts" and specious reasoning.

As long as media is run by Big Business, the content is up for sale. And newspapers are wondering why blogging is gaining ground at their expense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chris Charabaruk, 30 Oct 2007 @ 1:11pm
  
  Re: Marketing success!
  It's not supposed to be that way with the Star. The main reason I read it (as opposed to the only other two dailies in the city that aren't rubbish) is because it's long been the only paper with real direction and ethics, despite its original past in yellow journalism.
  
  But if 'Holy Joe' Atkinson's principles of governance for the Star are being ignored, then yeah, it'll be no better than the Globe and the Post, both of which are securely in the interests of Big Business. It'll still be better than the Sun, however -- it's hard to sink that low.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Swiss Cheese Monster, 30 Oct 2007 @ 9:59am

They didn't hold back at all did they!
After looking at the website, I can clearly say how it is that you would think this is an advertorial.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Max Powers at http://ConsumerFight.com, 30 Oct 2007 @ 3:50pm

Look Carefully
Get out your electron microscope and see if the really, really, really, fine, fine, fine, print lists the article as an advertorial. If not, then it must be factual news because it is written in a paper.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
andy, 30 Oct 2007 @ 4:14pm

here's how it probly went down...
the reporters were probly promised to have direct contact info for these lobbyists, providing them some good sources on future stories. most likely, there was a catered lunch involved and the group got a chance to present all the problems arising from these issues to the reporters. the reporters lobbed softballs at them while munching on cold, soggy subway sandwiches.

i'm assuming this paper is a daily, so they probly had no problem running to press with whatever they told them. they had exclusive access to this group and, by all accounts, it looked like a chance for the paper to "scoop" other local dailies that weren't privy to this lobbying group's (dis)information.

editorial and sales are supposed to be cleanly defined and not bleed into one another's departments, but there are times when the two muddy the waters. and when reporters aren't well-paid/-trained, it's easy to see why they would be pushovers for an "exclusive" story, pitched by shills.

all this to say, "it happens."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chris, 30 Oct 2007 @ 5:47pm

And the NY fake shopping guide they published?
In the same bloody edition? What a bunch of ass hats.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
stewart sprague, 31 Oct 2007 @ 1:06am

knock-offs
Don't worry, another article in the same edition extolled the virtues of buying fake Coach purses in NYC. Ethics be damned!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dirty Little American Weasel, 12 Feb 2008 @ 7:45am

Countefeits
I wonder how much I could make by selling counterfeit copies of the Toronto Star? Hmmm...

After all, if they can just make things up, why can't I?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]