smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Bill Jones" <wigout6@juno.com> |
| Subject | Re: anyone know anything more |
| Date | Wed, 24 Jan 2007 13:23:46 GMT |
[Part 1 text/plain (1.5 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
Not to perpetuate an old topic for much longer, but... someone wrote:
>> Anyone who has ever thought the magazine/newspaper business does
NOT work like this is naive. They review our CDs. We advertise in
their magazine. We sell product. It's a pretty cut-and-dry equation.
John Micek commented from the news side:
> Ummm ... hi, newspaper reporter here. We write stories because
they're newsworthy. That is, someone has a new release, which makes
them news. Or they're performing in the area, which makes them news.
The implication that there is a quid pro quo -- or an expectation of
one -- among in the mainstream press is, frankly, offensive. The
entertainment press might function differently. But it is not,
categorically, how we function.
John is exactly right in describing a characteristic that apparently
sets (most?) newspapers apart from other types of mainstream media,
including magazines, and perhaps to a lesser extent radio and TV. I
must admit to having only peripheral exposure to those other media,
but, in my experience with newspapers, I've seen *many* instances
where a significant account has pulled advertising due to
dissatisfaction with news/editorial coverage. It can be frustrating,
but it's an essential part of the critical "church & state"
relationship. Unfortunately, this independence doesn't seem to be
recognized or appreciated by the general public to the extent that it
should be.
Be seeing you,
Bill
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.