TinkerX

Senator Barry Goldwater once said of pornography, "I don’t know how to define it, but I know what it is when I see it." I think the opposite is true for advertorial; I can define it, but I can’t always tell when I see it.

For most big magazines, news dailies and serious TV news networks, the line between advertising and editorial is clear and can’t be crossed; it doesn’t matter how much you spend (or don’t), advertisers should not be allowed to affect (or even come in contact with) editorial material. Material that’s paid for by advertisers should be clearly labeled as such. Either as "Special Advertising Section" or, at least, "a joint program presented by X and Y."

On the heavy-duty retail side of advertising, that line has to stay in focus. The editorial staff can’t be influenced by the fact that a company bought $XXmillion of ads last last year. I have found, however, that in the realm of specialty (eg legal) publications and smaller, business pubs, the line is softer. A few thoughts on why that’s the case:

The audience is the news: For b2b pubs, including legal ones, the readership often makes much of the news. We have a word for legal experts; we call them "lawyers." Big firms from an advertising standpoint are going to be big from an editorial buzz standpoint. It just makes sense, and it’s hard to get away from. This means that it’s more likely that sources for material will come from advertisers than in the "mainstream" media world.

The pubs are smaller: Your ad guy may be your editorial contact. If you’re talking with him about how you want your advertising campaign to focus on your malpractice defense group, he’ll probaby think of you when he needs insight into that topic on an editorial basis.

The budgets are smaller: On both sides. And the smaller the fee a pub can demand for "straight-up" advertising, the more likely that they have to get creative in order to get new revenue.

B2B is newer to advertising: Lawyers, and many other professionals, are more comfortable with an editorial format. It gives you more words, which must be better… right? And you can get deep, deep, deep into an issue that’s really important… to you. This is a disconnect with the basic purpose of most advertising which is to convey emotional content, not data. A good ad can create resonance with an issue without spelling out "You need this product because it does the following 209 things."

Here’s an analogy I’ve used with some success: Imagine you’re going to an event and you want the people there to come away with the idea that you are a smart, funny, charming person. Are you going to walk up to everyone at the party and say, "Hi. I’m a smart, funny, charming person"? Not bloody likely. You say things and do things that are smart, funny and charming. So it is with advertising; not a direct assault, but a program of images and words that lead to a conclusion. Anyway. B2B folks like lots of words. Advertisers like to sell product that the client will enjoy.

Content is content: It’s a good deal for the pub if they can get advertisers to pony up some editorial material… and pay for the privilege. It may not be the same as a really hot story or professional, deeply researched article… but it’s content. And content is what brings consumers back to their chosen media.

So… is there value in advertorial? Of course. There are opportunities for paid "sponsorships" of particular programs; interviews, roundtables, seminars, panels, etc. In some cases, it’s not quite clear that the sponsors are also participants; it depends on how the piece reads and if there is any information on the section. Some pubs state clearly, "This Spatula Roundtable is a joint presentation of the Daily Telegraph and Frank, Incense and Myrrh LLP." Some say nothing.

Is any of this deceptive? I don’t know. If the "sponsored" article clearly states that it was written by a lawyer at a particular firm, the reader doesn’t think it was written by an unbiased reporter. If the participants in a panel are identified as coming from their particular fields and companies, that’s not deceptive. I’ve seen advertising programs that come with an editorial "value add;" ie, "Buy $X amount of advertising and we’ll let you author a column." I also know that smaller pubs tend to favor companies that spend with them when it comes to "earned" media — standard PR fare. If you’ve got a choice of 10 law firms that can answer a slow-pitch question about tax incentives, who ya
gonna call? Smart pubs spread the love around in order to build good relationships all over town, but it’s hard to break into a circle of heavy-hitting advertising clients that also like to be quoted, and are good at it.

The general perception of the American media consumer is, I believe, that editorial and advertising are separate unless otherwise specified. At the highest levels, we know that gets a bit bent. And though media owners have various philosophical axes to grind (ie, the supposed "liberal media" bias), most high-quality editorial sources guard their reputations very seriously, as it’s usually their most important brand asset.

Is anyone fooled by the "studio audience" in infomercials? Or by the celebrity host who’s "amazed" at the cleaning power of orange extract? How many people actually read the "special advertising section on men’s health" sponsored by Viagra? All I know is that advertising works one way and editorial another. As I say at least once in most of my annoyingly long posts, make the strategy fit the goal. If you’re looking to increase name recognition and mindshare, stick to advertising. If you want to appeal to a limited swath of specialists who will take the time
to read an article in a particular area, go for editorial. If you’re looking to get some good internal mojo, get individuals published; everybody loves to see their names/ideas in print. If you can’t pay for editorial "sponsorships," get in good with the appropriate desk at your local pubs. Provide free content whenever possible. Most sophisticated
marketing programs include a good mix of both bought and earned media. Even if some of the "earned" stuff is earned by paying for it.