Spring Break
Byline versus the Bottom Line
Newspapers must be prudent with front page advertising, says Kevin Alexander
By: Kevin Alexander
Issue date: 6/25/07 Section: Opinion
There is a climactic internal debate brewing among journalists. On one hand, our job as the media is to inform readers about everything they would - and should - care about.
On the other hand, we want to make money.
Journalism is a business, and while advertisers don't hamstring newspapers as severely as other media outlets, concessions have to be made.
You may have noticed the inch and a half advertisement on the front page today. If you didn't, go ahead and take a look, I can wait.
What do you think? Some will probably believe it's an eyesore, a descent into tabloidism. The business majors will likely consider it a wise financial decision.
The same dichotomy of thought exists among The Battalion staff, and among journalism as a whole.
Many journalists like to consider themselves the ultimate civil servant - fighting "The Man" and all that - and consider the space on the front page holy; untouchable by corporate thugs looking to convert the paper into a limp puppet. They believe the ads look tacky and take away precious space for news stories. This line of thought is dangerous and inflexible. It's the metaphoric dinosaur before the metaphoric meteor hits.
Conversely, there are the newspaper business people - the buyers, the sellers and the budgeters - who are regularly enticed by the bottom line. Some may put the bottom line above the byline, and risk steering the paper into a corporate dreamland. This mode of thinking would eventually destroy the credibility that newspapers need like oxygen.
In truth, the prudent compromise is somewhere in between these two positions.
Front-page advertising is a cash cow waiting to be milked and like the dairy version, it can only produce so much without causing damage. We, The Battalion and the world of journalism as a whole, need to make sure that readers recognize paid advertisements as such. The presence of a front-page advertisement means more money was paid - not that we like that product or service more or are handing out a favor.
The media has a responsibility to make that money count for something when it comes to the quality of journalism in the paper, on the Web or on video. As long as we don't print disingenuous or malicious ads and keep the space allocated within reason - no more than an inch or two on the front - then the shift should be palatable enough for everyone.
In the end, it's not about hanging out with the almighty dollar or pawning off our collective journalist soul. It's about coming up with ways to make our business better - collecting more precise information faster.
As long as readers can tolerate another two inches of corporate messages and journalists can concede the crusader zeal, we can milk the cow for everyone's benefit.
On the other hand, we want to make money.
Journalism is a business, and while advertisers don't hamstring newspapers as severely as other media outlets, concessions have to be made.
You may have noticed the inch and a half advertisement on the front page today. If you didn't, go ahead and take a look, I can wait.
What do you think? Some will probably believe it's an eyesore, a descent into tabloidism. The business majors will likely consider it a wise financial decision.
The same dichotomy of thought exists among The Battalion staff, and among journalism as a whole.
Many journalists like to consider themselves the ultimate civil servant - fighting "The Man" and all that - and consider the space on the front page holy; untouchable by corporate thugs looking to convert the paper into a limp puppet. They believe the ads look tacky and take away precious space for news stories. This line of thought is dangerous and inflexible. It's the metaphoric dinosaur before the metaphoric meteor hits.
Conversely, there are the newspaper business people - the buyers, the sellers and the budgeters - who are regularly enticed by the bottom line. Some may put the bottom line above the byline, and risk steering the paper into a corporate dreamland. This mode of thinking would eventually destroy the credibility that newspapers need like oxygen.
In truth, the prudent compromise is somewhere in between these two positions.
Front-page advertising is a cash cow waiting to be milked and like the dairy version, it can only produce so much without causing damage. We, The Battalion and the world of journalism as a whole, need to make sure that readers recognize paid advertisements as such. The presence of a front-page advertisement means more money was paid - not that we like that product or service more or are handing out a favor.
The media has a responsibility to make that money count for something when it comes to the quality of journalism in the paper, on the Web or on video. As long as we don't print disingenuous or malicious ads and keep the space allocated within reason - no more than an inch or two on the front - then the shift should be palatable enough for everyone.
In the end, it's not about hanging out with the almighty dollar or pawning off our collective journalist soul. It's about coming up with ways to make our business better - collecting more precise information faster.
As long as readers can tolerate another two inches of corporate messages and journalists can concede the crusader zeal, we can milk the cow for everyone's benefit.
Be sure to include your name, major, and class year. Submissions without this information are subject to deletion.
By submitting a comment, you agree to thebatt.com's Terms of Use.
You may also send a Mail Call to The Battalion at mailcall@thebatt.com