I read an interesting article in WebProNews that suggests that a fifth of marketers have purchased advertising in exchange for a news story about their products. And according to the story, another 10% had a nonverbal agreement with a reporter or editor for favorable coverage and 1 in 12 provided gifts in exchange for coverage.
This is not a new story, so the shocker here is not the idea that money is exchanging hands for favors. It’s expected that some palm greasing goes on behind the scenes. What is shocking is the regularity at which it’s happening. The numbers are up and many expect it to increase. And the ease of engaging in unethical practices is being attributed to the online world. I suppose the contention is that consumers are less likely to question tactics or credibilty online because it’s such a quickly absorbed medium. We are skimming information and then quickly moving on. Oftentimes not digesting much more than the surface information. So subliminal messages are easily weaved into our online news stories.
There has been talk about product placement making its way to newcast in recent months and the trend is expected to continue in an effort to “equalize the cost of production”. The story says that the “number of senior marketers admitting to pay-per-play schemes is actually up two percent from last year”. That puts consumers in a tough position of not knowing who to trust when it comes to getting information about out products. Do we need to worry that recalls will be overlooked? Or that harmful products will be promoted as if they are safe? And what of products that will benefit consumers the most? Will they be ignored if they don’t offer the big bucks? If the source that we look to for honest and unbiased information about things that affect our everyday lives can be paid off, the biggest question is- Who is protecting the consumer?