I sent a media pitch for an article to a publication which was a good fit with what their readership wants to know – they have covered my client a few times previously so I know there is an editorial fit. The reply I got (from a business development manager, even though my initial contact was with the editorial team) was: “We have ample editorial from our advertisers so are unlikely to use your editorial”. Frustrated? Flabbergasted? Oh yes!
I understand that publications are suffering from the healthy appetite we all have to consume content online and that advertising revenues are diminishing, but I thought we had moved on from the dark old days of swapping money for content. I can clearly remember the early days of my PR career when publications would request payment for colour separation charges otherwise “our content could not be run”. I was as exasperated then as I am today as editorial content should stand on its own merit and not depend on money changing hands.
I wonder if the readers of the publication which contacted me today are aware that the content they are paying a subscription for is only included as it has been paid to be there – where’s the neutrality in that? Anyone else want to jump on the advertorial vs editorial bandwagon and say how a recent media pitch has gone? Deep down I know that not all publications work on the cash for content basis, but today’s response has made me question this and I really hope this unscrupulous practice is not starting to return.
Hurrumph. Rant over!