The San Antonia Report created a standing page on its website to explain the newsroom’s policy in regards to advertising and sponsored content. The page describes the difference between the two types of content and is clear in stating how each type of content will be labeled and appear on the website.
After facing viewer questions about political ads, WCPO’s general manager Jeff Brogan wrote a column explaining how political advertising works for broadcasters. In the column he explains the FCC rules for political advertising and how the station is legally not allowed to edit or alter ads ads they recieve from candidates. “WCPO 9 and our parent company, E.W. Scripps, support the freedom of speech principles of the First Amendment, which emphasize a robust and open debate about the political process,” Brogan writes. “Although some of today’s political action committees might use aggressive tactics during the campaign season, their ads fall under free speech and have a right to be on a broadcast.”
During election season, people can be inundated with political advertisements — from candidates, parties, PAC’s and other groups. If you publish or air any of these ads (which most news organizations do) you probably have received complaints about them from your users. Some may be confused as to why this is showing up on your station. Others may be upset about the content inside the ads. And they might be jumping to incorrect or unfair conclusions about you. While some people may understand that your news organization is airing or publishing the ads just as you would with any other business (a car dealership or ice cream shop), too many people don’t actually understand how it works. They may have questions like: Why are you choosing to run ads from certain groups? Are the ads edited or changed before you air or publish them? Do you get the final say in what you publish/air? Is anyone fact-checking them? More from this edition can be found here and to receive the tips in your inbox each week click here.
The Toronto Star updated the newsroom’s online glossary to include labels that clearly distinguish news reporting from paid or sponsored content. “The Star is committed to the principle that our audiences should not be confused about the distinction between our journalism – news and editorial content – and our advertising and other paid content,” the glossary said. This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
When faced with reporting negative news about a financial supporter, NPR took the opportunity to acknowledge the relationship by working a financial disclosure into the story. “We will tell you now that Amazon is a financial supporter of NPR News, and we are raising these questions about Amazon all the same, which is how it should work,” host Steve Inskeep said. This work was done independently from Trusting News but embodies the work we do.
The Coloradoan let their audience know how vital subscriptions were by talking about their funding with their audience. “About 60% of our revenue comes from advertising. The other 40% comes from subscriptions. To sustain the future of local news in Northern Colorado, we are dependent upon support from readers, like you.”
WITF included an editor’s note on the top of a story in their “Transforming Health” project. They said, “we maintain independence between editorial decisions and funding. But as a note of disclosure, WITF’s Transforming Health project receives financial support from Penn State Health. Read our policy on transparency in fundraising here.“
The Coloradoan wrote about funding it received from a local cannabis company that allowed them to re-launch “Sacrificing Our Schools” as a yearlong examination and discussion of public school funding in Colorado.
A journalist at the Community Impact newspaper group used Twitter to talk about the news organization’s mission and explain journalism. The journalist used a personal account to share the information in a Twitter thread. He discussed how they work to be accurate in their reporting and offered to answer any questions people have about the news organization’s coverage or journalism in general.
Some users assume journalists sensationalize news to make money. In this example, the accusation was direct: “Standard, has your marketing department worked out how many unique impressions and page views you get per dead kid?” The staff used the opportunity to explain the reasoning behind why they cover certain stories, what requirements a story needs to meet in order to be relevant, and how their advertising department is separate from their newsroom. The commenter wanted them to make promises they couldn’t make, but the news organization said it felt the back and forth with the commenter and the newsroom’s explanations helped others better understand their news priorities and how they make decisions.
