Is The Ad Recession Making The Washington Post Risk Its Brand?

Posted by Stephanie Startz on September 17, 2009 03:56 PM

Did the Washington Post kill a story at the bequest of advertisers to be less "depressing?" Intrigue has heightened that the august newspaper may be sacrificing ethics, and its reputation, for the sake of profitability.

Matt Mendelsohn, a freelancer for the Washington Post Magazine, says that publisher Katherine Weymouth had made it clear that "advertisers wanted happier stories, not 'depressing' ones." Mendelsohn submitted a piece about a 26-year-old double amputee that was headed for print until his editors, sensing a change in the business climate, killed the piece.

The paper has admitted that the story was killed, but denies it was at the publisher's adherence. But Mendelsohn insists that Weymouth created an environment that led to the story's demise.

This wouldn't be the first time Weymouth reached into the newsroom, blurring the paper's code of ethics and tarnishing the Post's brand. In July, the Washington Post erupted into controversy when news broke that Weymouth was pitching "salons" with lawmakers, officials, and business executives, with herself and Post reporters serving as "hosts and discussion leaders" for a fee of $25,000.

As print publications struggle to finance their ventures amidst a barren advertising climate, liberties such as Weymouth's are becoming commonplace. Publishers are caught in a Catch-22, trying to shore up advertising revenue while maintaining the public's trust. The Post was excoriated by readers after the salon scandal. Some considered boycotting the Post, calling the salon program "corrupting." Which leads one to ponder, what's the point in producing a newspaper if you're violating the trust of the audience?

In an increasingly revenue-focused industry, publishers will be forced to protect the integrity of their brands, and by extension, their objectivity and good faith relationship with the public. A balancing act for successful publishers will involve finding creative means to generate ad revenue while maintaining brand integrity. Failure to accomplish either objective will result in the downfall of not only the brand equity, but the brand.

More about: Washington Post, Katherine Weymouth, Newspapers, Media

Peter Brockmann says:

The Washington Post is not in an ad recession. The are experiencing a restructuring in the way consumers get their news (and their advertising). Fewer subscribers = lower rates. More productive competition = fewer advertisers. Not to mention the rise of 'citizen journalists' and the blogosphere which shows that 'professional journalism' needs restructuring too. The Post is in a death spiral.

Change impacts brands. Just ask Polaroid and Kodak executives. The Washington Post needs to reinvent itself or die. Sadly, I think the old balance of news&opinion versus advertising is dead. CraigsList does a better job of classifieds and Google News does a better job of news, not to mention how Adwords is a more efficient and effective advertising tool than the Post ever could be.

September 18, 2009 11:48 AM #

David Bivins says:

While I agree with a lot of what Mr. Brockmann says above, Google News does not do a "better job" with news--it's an aggregator which scrapes links to news stories up and delivers them to you in broad categories. It is not a newspaper. There are no reporters and it has no editorial direction. It's like comparing a newsstand to a newspaper or the cable channel guide to a cable channel.
There is still room in this world for an editorial voice, whether from the WSJ, WP, NYT, IHT, Tribune, etc. The question is, how will it manifest itself? And will any one be able to maintain credibility with its readers without charging readers a small fortune? What will the business model be?

September 18, 2009 12:57 PM #

cash loan says:

Try to add some spell check next time Nice post btw