How do you tell the difference between journalism today and prostitution? Hmmm?
Sorry: it’s not a joke; there is no punchline; it’s only a question I’ve been asking myself since reading the ”major” Vancouver newspapers last weekend.
Saturday Aug. 28 on page A-16 in The Vancouver Sun there were two captivating stories: the first, topped by a full page headline entitled “A new revolution in home entertainment”; and, the second, another piece entitled “Impact of PVRs on commercial TV expected to grow as time-shifting increases”.
Both stories dealt with PVR technology for home television and both were what seemed to me as quite ”positive” to the technology . But since I have a PVR and enjoy it, nothing seemed amiss to me … even when I noticed there was also a large ad for Telus’s PVR services filling out the rest of the page.
There was nothing to indicate the stories, written by a Terrence Belford “for Postmedia News”, were part of an “advertorial” or “Special advertising feature” etc. The ad and the stories side by side, filling the entire page, looked like just a coincidence or even very clever legitimate page makeup , I concluded.
Until the next day, Sunday.
There in the Province,on page A-25, were the same two articles, written by the same reporter from “Postmedia News”: one now titled “Rising tide of PVRs to transform TV” and the other headlined “They’ll put power in hands of viewers, says media prof”.
The only differences were that the story at the top of the page in the Sun was at the bottom of the page in The Province and the story at the bottom of the page in The Sun was now at the top of the page in The Province. And the stories were shortened in the Province, I assume because its tabloid-style pages are smaller.
BUT again, right beside the two … filling out the rest of the page the EXACT SAME Telus ad, promoting its PVR service.
Now that’s quite a coincidence, I thought, if another completely independent page editor at The Province had the same brilliant placement idea as his “competition” at The Sun… put the two PVR stories next to the Telus PVR ad.
Or is it all part of an Advertorial or Special Advertising Features in both papers, I wondered?
Try as I might, I could not see anything on either page in either paper that would identify these stories as part of any paid advertising. That concerns me.
Our major newspapers, I believe, long ago sold off part of their independence by publishing those special sections on Homes and Cars etc. But they are usually set apart from the rest of the newspaper and can be easily discarded by readers who aren’t interested in either subject or don’t want to be subjected to promotional puff pieces that pander to advertisers.
So those sections have not really bothered me … much. The newspapers do need the money, and the sections are easily identifiable for what they are.
The possible Telus/news stories relationship, outlined above, troubles me more. Much more.
Both in The Sun and The Province they all appeared together in the “A” section of the paper. That, to me, is the news section …the real news section … and a reader should be able to trust that ALL stories run in that part of the paper are true, independent news stories or features conjured up or taken from news wires by the papers’ news and assignment editors … not the sales department!
To run anything but that in the “A” section is bad enough; to run advertising or promo pap in the “A” section AND NOT INDICATE IN ANY WAY that it is advertising related is insulting to the reader and a danger to real journalism!
I had no idea, when I saw the duplication in the papers, what was going on. Maybe it WAS just an incredible coincidence? But it bothered me.
Or were Sun and Provinces readers fed paid-for propaganda disguised as news stories? Did anyone else notice what was going on? How are we to know whether what we are reading is indeed truly assigned by real news editors and not orderded up by the promotion department?
If ad-supported stories are being mixed in with legitimate news, and not CLEARLY identified, I believe it injures the integrity of the newspaper and even the credibility of all reporters whose bylines appear on pages facing or anywhere near the phony copy. How are we to know which reporter’s stories are genuine and which are paid-for promos?
Of course, as I’ve noted on this blog before , I am retired and although I love commenting on issues, I no longer do a lot of investigative inquiries or research. But this was too important to let pass: the public have a right to know whether what they are reading is advertising-linked. And the newspapers themselves deserve a chance to explain and assure us all that advertorials or stories specifically linked to ads are clearly identifed as such.
So I contacted them both.
Next blog: the reaction from The Sun and The Province to my inquiries about those two peculiar pages! You’ll be amazed!
Harv Oberfeld
12 responses so far ↓
1 mariner // Sep 4, 2010 at 5:09 pm
An excellent piece Harvey and I think, has not escaped the notice of many people. I have heard several people comment on different stories – not often, but enough to notice, over similar concerns.
It seem that possibly, the whole corporate approach has done a major shift over the last several years. What once was considered an authentic and authoritive source, has now become beholden to advertizing revenue (as in this case) or to the political whims of a ruling government as in British Columbia currently.
The days of honest and factual news reporting are slowly fading away, I fear. even the world standards of the BBC has been accused of influential compromise. I also believe that the “instant news sources” are so quick to happen that mistakes previously caught, are no longer corrected.
However, to get back to your article – it certainly seems that the newspapers preach one doctrine and practice another.
Thanks and keep up your good work.
(Response: That’s what scares me …the increasing corporate “promotional” influence. I believe it has seriously wounded many newspapers, radio and t.v stations and, trust me, so do many of the real “news” people still worknig there. They are dismayed at the increasing sellout of their pages and airtime … and especially some newsroom manangement’s refusal to admit, even amongst their co-workers, that it is happening … let alone take a real stand against it. h.o)
2 Iwannajob // Sep 4, 2010 at 5:27 pm
Sounds just like the puff pieces on Global these days. I think the term “prostitution” does a disfavour to the honourable profession that has existed for millenia. At least with that profession there is a measure of satisfaction!
(Response: What a great punchline. Why didn’t I think of that!
h.o.
3 Willy P // Sep 4, 2010 at 5:35 pm
Geez Mr O- It’s just a coincidence. This province is rife with them this year according to our Mr. Hansen and King Kampbell, so I truly understand. While I still get both rags in the morning, about the only thing I read is Mike Smyth as the rest is mostly BS and propaganda.
4 D. M. Johnston // Sep 4, 2010 at 5:45 pm
Dead right! The Sun & Province have become almost shills for whoever pays for advertising in th papers. As such, they are mere fishwrap.
TransLink’s Canada Line is a good example: Recently there has been glowing reports about the Canada Line yaddy-yada. The truth be known, over 80% of the Canada Line’s almost claimed 100,000 a day ridership are former bus riders now forced to transfer onto the metro and in the real world, to be deemed successful a new metro line needs to carry 300,000 to 400,000 passengers a day.
both the Sun & Province have never reported that the Canada Line’s cost went from $1.3 billion to (according to Susan Heyes who, because of her court case, has done much research on the subject) almost $2.8 billion.
Again both papers have not reported that because the costs were spiraling out of control that the scope of the project was greatly reduced to the point that our new $2.8 metro has less potential capacity than if much cheaper (at least $2 billion cheaper) LRT had been built instead.
In fact there is little scrutiny with anything connected to the Liberal government and by same coincident the same government pours millions into the paper’s advertising coffers.
It seems in BC, the media prints what it is paid to print and I believe, with the recent HST debacle, the public are finally waking up to this.
Fishwrap, pure and simple!
(Response: I think you are wrong on the $2.8 Billion figure. I believe I have seen that in their stories. But I too worry whether, during tough $$$ times, government advertising is affecting what and how they cover things. h.o)
5 Lynn // Sep 4, 2010 at 6:29 pm
One of the reasons why I cancelled my subscription. Don’t even get me started on Telus. They are (according to my initial investigation) are controlling access to you tube videos on the curve (BB).
So there.
Can’t wait for you to post their response to your inquiries!
6 Kim // Sep 4, 2010 at 6:52 pm
http://www.focusonline.ca/
Not sure if you.ve ever read this magazine, I really like it. Scroll down to Leslie Campbell’s article, Pitfalls of a Postmedia World. They have honest, thought provoking journalism here that we can all benefit from. I look forward to reading your next post!
7 Toby F // Sep 4, 2010 at 7:16 pm
Blurring the lines between news and propaganda is also a problem on TV. This is a good issue to pursue, Harvey. Go get ‘em.
8 Mike Cleaver // Sep 4, 2010 at 8:04 pm
Nothing really new here.
This has been going on for years but recently has become more blatant as newspapers scramble for advertising dollars in the ever increasing media sector.
It also happens on radio and television, having business reports done by people who are in the stock flogging business, real estate people supposedly giving unbiased information about how houses are selling or not, travel agents appearing as independent travel experts and the list goes on and on.
It used to be that said “features” were headed by the disclaimer that these were “paid advertising,” much as do those “selling crap” tv infomercials are tagged fore and aft by a disclaimer absolving said broadcasting outlet of any responsibility for what comes after and before those announcements.
EVERYTHING published these days on ANY media must be taken with a grain of salt.
Get as many sources for the same story as you can, then draw your own conclusions.
Yes, it takes a little work but the truth can be found with multiple sources.
(Response: Speaking of tv …there was that little $650,000 deal Global BC did with Tourism BC in conjunction with their anchor Chris Gailus travelling the province doing puff travelogue pieces. It’s bad enough when they send junior reporters out to do that stuff … but the anchor! Ugh. h.o)
9 tf // Sep 5, 2010 at 2:39 am
Once an investigative reporter, always an….
It’s too bad reporting now falls to individuals and the retired…
Thanks again Harvey!
The fourth estate has been absorbed by the 2nd…
(Response: Newspapers are dying …and they wonder why! Wait til you read about their response to my questions and concerns about that content. h.o)
10 Keith // Sep 5, 2010 at 3:52 pm
Ayup Harvey,
can’t add much more than you and the excellent responses have already said, but coincidentally on Thursday I caught a re – run of Voice of B.C. with V. Palmer and Jim Hughes of the Times Colonist discussing the future of newspapers. Blogs, Internet, free access to their respective newspapers on line etc. were some of the reasons given, but nothing regarding the content that hadn’t already been disected by the 24 hour news cycle, political bias, informercials disguised as news, soft ball pieces, or the growing recognition from readers that their respective publications are often little more than “paid for promo’s” as you so aptly put it.
This is from Les Leyne describing the job of Attorney General as cursed.
http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Leyne+cursed+caution+wise/3326828/story.html
Listing a neccesssary sequence of events but using suggesting alchemy as a reason for a string of disasters without considering that these people shouldn’t have been in the job, due diligence wasn’t done or Gordo’s judgment might not be up to snuff only adds to the disdain the readers are now showing thus the falling sales.
(Response: Good to know readers care starting to question what they-re reading. A sad deterioration in the the public’s trust in the integrity of newspapers … and they will no doubt pay a price for that. h.o)
11 blueberi2 // Sep 5, 2010 at 11:15 pm
The editorial credibility of the Vancouver Sun and Province is a concern to readers who rely on mainstream press for daily information. And while errors in fact, attribution and sponsorship can be exasperating and costly, errors in opinion columns can be equally disturbing and misleading.
While opinion pieces may be dismissed on the basis that opinion need not be based on facts, most honest commentators believe that opinion columnists are or at least should be familiar with the facts of whatever case they’re arguing.
The Vancouver Sun appears to compound confusion between facts and opinion by intermingling roles of reporters with that of columnists.
It is a remarkable coincidence that a one-sided review of the career of Faye Leung, 76, a persistent Bill Vander Zalm antagonist, should appear within days of the Vander Zalm inspired anti-HST victory.
Who inspires such good timing on the part of Sun editorial?
While opinion columns often are excused or defended on the grounds that opinions need not be based on facts, the facts of Leung’s lack of credibility according to the B.C. court documents, are very clear. And they are not mentioned in an opinion piece by legal affairs columnist Ian Mulgrew on page A3 of the Sun’s Tuesday, August 31 edition.
While Mulgrew generally appears capable of reporting facts of cases underway in the B.C. courts, as a legal affairs columnist he appears to skip information that would have destroyed his light-weight story. His column refers to the 20-year-old legal dispute between then-premier and now-newsworthy Bill Vander Zalm and former real estate sales agent Leung, AKA Leung Fuey Chell. But it omits the court decisions, which were unfavourable to Leung. He describes the elderly woman’s hat and feet and voice and business card and her quest for revenge against Vander Zalm, who she claims owes her $1.6 million for her role in selling his Fantasy Gardens theme park in Richmond 20 years ago. In seeking revenge, Leung plans to tell “the real true story” in a book that is 95-per-cent completed, Mulgrew wrote.
The story might be fascinating if court records hadn’t already disproved Leung’s claims. And Mulgrew likely would have known that before he sat down to the interview. As a journalist with approximately 40 years experience in various media, including 13 years with The Vancouver Sun, he surely had unlimited access to court records and the newspaper’s own library files concerning Leung. However, he failed to mention legal and library records that detail Leung’s involvements with Fantasy Gardens in cases that were decided by judges in B.C. Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal.
In early 1995 the B.C. Court of Appeal sentenced Leung to time served after it allowed her appeal from a sentence of 15-months imprisonment following conviction of four counts of receiving a secret commission, one count of theft and two counts of fraud.
Mulgrew’s column does not mention any discussion with Leung about the court decisions dating back 20 years in which judges questioned her credibility, described her as “consistently and deliberately” hiding the truth and “continuation of her fraudulent conduct”.
And the timing of Mulgrew’s column was co-incidental with coverage of the success of Vander Zalm’s anti=HST campaign.
(Response: I cannot independently verify all the information provided …but I do recall Leung’s testimony/ case against Vander Zalm failed way back then. h.o)
12 blueberi2 // Sep 6, 2010 at 1:52 am
Further to my earlier Mulgrew/Leung comment: all B.C. court decision archives may be accessed via internet. I don’t have all the citations concerning Leung and Vander Zalm at hand but the B.C. Appeal court decision on Leung’s conviction is #CA18949. Vancouver Registry, Feb. 14, 1995: Two earlier decisions including #C911101, which refers to Leung’s “consistently and deliberately ” hiding the truth and her “continuation with fraudulent conduct” is in a Feb., 1992, decision by BCSC Judge Ian Donald. A June 25, 1992 decision by BCSC Judge D.H. Campbell acquits Vander Zalm of using public office to advance his private interests. I believe the same decision refers to Leung’s claim that she had found ” and possessed “a suitcase full of documents” which never were produced in the case.
While Vander Zalm’s conduct in business and in public office may fall a few measures short of perfection, the court decisions on record conclusively dealt with Leung’s allegations that she was cheated by Vander Zalm. The evidence and conclusions were heard and resolved in the public arena about 20 years ago.
A question that occurs to the ordinary reader is how Mulgrew as the Sun’s legal columnist remained ignorant of that recorded history, and, if not, why did he not ask Leung why she was at this late date reviving her complaint against the former premier.
The coincidence of Vander Zalm’s victory in organizing the anti-HST protest and Mulgrew’s trotting out a revised version of Leung’s ancient complaint of injustice also leads us to wonder where the editor was when Mulgrew filed his column through the Sun’s city desk last Monday.
(Response: Great stuff. Thanks. The people in the blogosphere never cease to maze me with their terrific knowledge! h.o)
Leave a Comment
CAPTCHA Code is needed.