ASBPE
Speaks Out on Hypertext Ad Issue
Blog-driven debate
about sponsored links in editorial content
focuses on
our ethics code.
Should publishers sell hypertext links
within their editorial content—providing
advertisers with a foothold there, while
opening a new avenue of online revenue
for the publication? ASBPE’s Guide
to Preferred Editorial Practices gives
a quiet, unequivocal answer: No.
The power of the blogosphere, however,
began turning cases of hypertext-link
sales into a major issue in May. And
the
debate has raised the profile of the ethical position taken
by the Society in the ethics guidelines adopted last year.
At the heart of the issue was B2B
blogger Paul Conley calling publisher
Ziff-Davis
to task over its use of Vibrant Media’s
IntelliTXT, a technology that can place advertiser links
within editorial content, using a double-underlining that
attempts to differentiate the paid link from regular editorial
links. Its links were sold and placed after the content was
written.
Conley cited ASBPE’s
ethics code as an illustration that industry
standards opposed the Ziff-Davis approach.
In a dialog between Paul Conley and Eric
Shanfelt (emediastrategist.com),
president and founder of eMedia Strategist and former senior
vice president of eMedia for Penton Media, the discussion
at one point focused on the punctuation in one paragraph
in the ASPBE guidelines, and how the paragraph might lead
to misinterpretation.
Boston journalism
ethics expert Jeff
Seglin—a member
of the ASPBE committee, who teaches at Emerson College and
writes a syndicated business-ethics column—served
as a spokesman for the Society in several blog posts. At
the
same time, the committee met by email to review the language
of our guidelines.
After a review
by ASBPE’s standing ethics committee,
in May a minor change was made in the language of the code
under the heading “Approve
Hypertext Links.”
In our old language:
Contextual links
within editorial content should
not be sold, and generally should
not link to a vendor’s
Web site, unless it is pertinent to the editorial content
or helpful
to the reader.
The ASBPE code
says flatly that “hyptertext links
should be placed at the discretion and approval of editors.”
The
new language, which ends that paragraph, reads:
Contextual links
within editorial content should not
be sold. If an editor allows
a link, it generally should not
link
to a vendor’s Web site, unless it is pertinent
to the editorial content or helpful to the reader.
The
issue has continued to spread through
blogs, led by an
article posted on Folio: magazine’s
web site Posts appeared on Poynteronline and marketingvox,
for example, and opinions were expressed
by such bloggers as custom
publisher Rex
Hammock; Shiblog’s
Prescott Shibles; and Frank Chloupek,
who is web development director, manufacturing
for the Supply Chain & Metals Group of Penton Media
(see
comments to this post). Other views were posted by
content, marketing and eMedia consulting blogger Dave Iannone
(see
comments to this post), and
by Sue
Pelletier,
MeetingsNet web editor and editor of Association Meetings magazine
(and also an ASBPE Boston chapter board member). Wrote
consultant and media monitor Tish
Grier: "I
so completely agree with Paul (Conley).... This kind of
thing is nonsense.
Hyperlinks in text should lead to further information,
as in related stories, and not to ads. This really is just
bloody
awful. …"
In a statement provided to Ziff-Davis,
Folio: and Paul Conley, ASBPE
president Roy Harris said: “We feel
the code offers a clear guideline: Editors, not publishers
or ad-sales
folks, should make the final decisions on ALL uses of links
within edit copy. Also, ad links within editorial text
should NOT be sold under any condition.”
Within days
of Conley’s original
post, he
noted that Ziff Davis pulled the IntelliTXT
links. In the meantime,
he reported, paid
links appeared
on some CMP web sites, but were later
removed.
The Boston/New
England blog has
been keeping up with postings as they occur. Related story:
Back to ASBPE News page |
