Dallas News Decides That Journalists Should Report To Ad Sales

from the church-and-state-is-soooo-last-millennium dept

Thu, Dec 3rd 2009 1:50pm — Mike Masnick

John Obeidin points us to the news that The Dallas News has basically wiped away the standard "church" and "state" separation of journalists and ad sales and has reorganized such that editorial and journalism positions now report to ad sales managers (nicely renamed "general managers"). Of course, historically, newspapers have always been clear to separate the two. There's no reason why this needs to be the case, but it can certainly raise questions about the objectivity of the reporting.

Of course, it's interesting that this is happening just days after those new FTC guidelines on making it clear if content is somehow sponsored. So, will the Dallas News now need to be more clear about its advertising partners, since the paper is now admitting that its editorial content will now be closely tied to its advertising relationships?

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: ads, church and state, journalism
Companies: dallas news

9 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2009 @ 2:39pm

I makes me wonder who NBC news personnel (content providers) will report to when Comcast (content distributors / advertisers) gets a hold of them. Chilling...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2009 @ 2:57pm

Perhaps they are just doing the safest thing, in that the ad managers can check to make sure there are no conflicts of interest not mentioned.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2009 @ 3:06pm

I've always felt the "separation" between the two is largely false anyhow. I'd rather see a company who stands behind the products it advertises rather than the usual claim of no responsibility. Free credit reports and fatblockers and male enhancement are almost always scams, and companies hide behind this wall to defend why they air these ads.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Johnny Canada, 3 Dec 2009 @ 3:11pm

For once an honest newspaper.

Not honest with the facts, but honest on where they stand.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mike42 (profile), 3 Dec 2009 @ 3:14pm

Cost-cutting manuever
I did some contract work there, and I would bet dollar-to-donut that this is a cost-cutting scheme. The fat bankrolls are long gone! Cue-Cat, anyone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ron, 3 Dec 2009 @ 3:29pm

Nothing New
My understanding is that most papers have always had strong ties between the advertising sales and editorial in the special sections like autos. The dealers ran ads and expected good reviews on the new cars. At least the "journalists" had fun test-driving the new cars even if they did have to pay homage to the real money makers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
matt, 3 Dec 2009 @ 3:43pm

local insight
As a dallas subscriber one only has to look at the subscription rates to see the issue. Renewal rates for the Dallas Morning News went WAY up. A result of both declining subscribership and increased cost. So I agree w/ Mike42 & Ron.

That being said, "health/education, entertainment, travel/luxury, automotive, real estate, communications, preprints/grocery, recruitment, retail/finance, and SMB (small and medium businesses)/interactive" (the sections quoted in editorandpublisher.com's article) are mostly ads anyway!

Real estate? Ads for used homes (Realtor ads) and ads for new subdivisions.

Preprints/grocery? Those are just ads

Recruitment? Aren't these just help wanted ads?

Retail/finance? I assume they mean ad-driven content, not the business page.

Automotive? These have been ads for years.

So I fail to see the controversy. All of these sections are either already almost entirely ads or are sections that really drive sales of the paper (for example the entertainment section).

It doesn't seem like they're having their local/national news reporters, business writers or anyone like that report to ad men (and women).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cj, 3 Dec 2009 @ 4:03pm

You have got to be kidding me
This is insane. There is no earthly reason that these 2 departments should come together, other than to make additions to bylines that there may be a conflict of interest.

I think this just goes to show where most of the US mentality is. They're all lying to us, so who cares, seems to be the answer everyone is giving.

I'd rather have no news than falsified information.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
meh, 3 Dec 2009 @ 5:02pm

Well - it is Texas after all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]