From BNET…
The Census Ad Campaign and the Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations for Black Newspapers
By Jim Edwards
Ad agencies Globalhue and DraftFCB and their client the Census Bureau are all frantically spinning their misguided decision to wring government propaganda posing as news from black newspapers, as noted by BNET on March 11. But that doesn’t let them off the hook. Their statements all make sad, possibly racist, assumptions about black-owned and black-targeted newspapers that would never arise if we were talking about mainstream media.
I’m not a fan of George W. Bush’s phrase, “the soft bigotry of low expectations,” but this case looks like a textbook example.
The backstory: Globalhue (whose CEO Don Coleman is pictured) told black publishers in a letter that if they did not provide six news articles about the census in their papers then advertising buys would be “canceled immediately.” That placed those newspapers in a position of providing tax-funded government propaganda posing as news, without disclosure to readers, in return for ad buys — something that would never happen at The New York Times or USA Today.
The statements by the two companies and the Census Bureau — published here in full after the jump — all confirm that the scheme existed, but they attempt to justify it by saying that it was voluntary, “a standard industry practice,” and that all newspapers were treated the same way.
Some of this just isn’t true. Globalhue’s statement says that the National Newspaper Publisher Association — which represents black publishers — was in on the scheme, and that in addition to six news articles the papers would also provide two editorials. In that sense, the scheme was worse than I first reported.
Second, it is simply not “standard” that newspapers supply coverage in return for ad buys — not at mainstream (or “white,” if you want that decoded) newspapers and news organizations.
Third, the notion that the scheme was voluntary stands in stark contrast to the letter sent by Globalhue to NNPA, which said:
In lieu of free ad space, all papers must agree to running six articles (preferably during hiatus weeks) about the Census 2010 as well as two editorials. If paper does not agree to the added value stipulations, buy will be canceled immediately.
Here’s the bottom line: Black newspaper readers, and anyone who cares about the integrity of the news business in general, should be outraged by this. The NNPA was targeted for this scheme by Globalhue, a black ad agency, with the expectation that it would go along. And, according to the NNPA’s own statement, they went along willingly, compromising their standards for money. I challenge Globalhue — or DraftFCB — to produce a letter sent to a mainstream news organization that contains a similar threat to cancel ad buys if they don’t cough up pro-census headlines.
Globalhue guessed correctly there would be lower standards in black media. I don’t know which is sadder: The fact that an ad agency whose sole mission is to stand up for black consumers lowered its standards at the first hurdle; or the fact that black publishers, whose sole mission is to serve their readers, thought this was a good idea.
3 comments:
Once again Jim Edwards is clueless.
What GlobalHue and the Census Bureau are doing is a common practice among media buyers, particularly in a day and age where PR and straight media continue to blur.
Who really thinks that MSNBC, CNN and the rest of the media outlets are reporting every APPLE product release as news organically? APPLE just so happens to run ads on those channels, too, right?
Under the guise of "synergistic buys" and "seemlessness" APPLE and many other mainstream brands have been running this hustle for years with few complaints from industry leaders.
"Hey News Org: You want our ad dollars? Then ad value to our buy by exploring the news component of our client's brand."
Critics of GlobalHue are either clueless as to how media is bought and brands get seeded among news outlets these days, or they're speaking from a place of bias, arrogance and favoritism.
But you'd have to be in the business to know this. Jim Edwards needs to stick to Pine Sol stories.
Thought about some of your points too, especially regarding advertisers influencing media content. The U.S. Census has managed to get lots of press — even for its lame White advertising work. At the same time, Globalhue’s letter is pretty pathetic. After all, minority audiences need more education surrounding the Census, as accurate counts can influence programs that impact communities. Other minority media outlets (e.g., Latino and Asian) seem to be running stories on the Census. Hopefully, these sources aren’t being strong-armed too. Anyway, Globalhue’s letter is pathetic because they probably could have persuaded newspapers to hype the Census for all the right reasons versus threatening to pull advertising. For an agency that boasts understanding minority audiences, Globalhue appears to come off like, well, White folks.
Dont mean to excuse GH's crassness about this. But i think that's how wide-open this "problem" is. GM Media buyers sit on the phone and shoot off emails detailing this very practice as part of common discourse. I've seen it first hand.
No none of that excuses your valid point which that it probably wasn't necessary given the importance of this project to these communities. They probably didn't need to arm-twist that early in the game.
And there's no excuse for just how bad this work is across the board, by every agency from Draft to GH.
This among the worst, most misguided and flat work I've seen in years.
The Draft work is outright embarrassing. and the GH work is simply not good at all.
I dunno who's to blame for what could've been.
Post a Comment