“Perceptions
are real. They color what we see...what we believe...how we behave. They can
be managed...to motivate behavior...to create positive business results.”
Burson-Marsteller public relations company
Traditionally, most media
outlets have intentionally separated their editorial and advertising
departments. The news was reported, regardless of its impact on advertisers.
Increasingly, this separation is being eroded.
You might recall viewing a
televised news item about the difficulties experienced by the owners of the
Sky Dome stadium in Toronto when they tried to wash the outside of the dome.
Well, that wasn't really a news item at all; it was an advertisement dressed
in news' clothing, supplied to the television station by the makers of
Sunlight detergent, which was, you probably couldn’t help noticing, the
brand used in that large-scale cleaning operation.
This piece of hype, which
appeared on prime time newscasts, went to the television stations in the form
of a video news release (VNR). VNRs are complete news stories, written,
filmed, and produced by public relations firms. They are designed to appear to
be genuine news items. And producers often air them without revealing their
origin. According to a Nielsen Media Research study, about 80 percent of
television stations in the United States use VNRs. More than 70 percent use up
to ten a day!
One company supplying VNRs to
Canadian stations is News Canada, which also creates already-typeset newspaper
columns and canned radio shows. Their clients have included organizations like
the Canadian Petroleum Association and the Conservative Party of Canada, as
well as corporations like General Motors, the Bank of Montreal and Shoppers
Drug Mart. News Canada claims in its promotional literature that “editors
publish more than 95 percent of News Canada’s typeset columns with the
message unchanged”.
A more overt blurring of the
news-advertiser boundaries occurred during the Winter Olympics in
Nagano, Japan. According to the Multinational Monitor, Nike’s
sponsorship of CBS Sports’ coverage of the Olympics included reporters
wearing parkas adorned with the Nike logo. Reporter Roberta Baskin, whose
story about Nike’s less-than-perfect labour practices in Vietnam was aired
on the investigative program 48 Hours in 1996, wasn’t pleased with
the sports reporters acting as billboards for the athletic shoemaker.
According to Multinational Monitor’s reporters Russell Mokhiber and
Robert Weissman, Baskin believes that Nike’s sponsorship has caused CBS to
avoid further negative coverage of the company. CBS News President Andrew
Heyward has apparently called Baskin’s anger “intemperate” and denied
any connection between Nike’s sponsorship and the network’s news coverage.
Magazines, whose financial
situation is often more precarious than that of newspapers, are especially
vulnerable to the manipulation of editorial by advertisers, or to the lure of
free editorial.
Some large advertisers,
especially in the U.S., have, for some years now, been asking mainstream
magazine editors to submit articles to them before publication. Corporations
like Chrysler and Procter & Gamble would rather pull their advertising
than risk having their corporate image tarnished or being attacked by special
interest groups as a result of their ad accompanying a controversial article.
The journalism profession
frowns on this practice. Magazine industry associations in both the U.S. and
Canada have recently condemned the practice of submitting articles to prior
review by advertisers. And some organizations have established rules of
conduct for their members. However, the practice continues.
In fact, some magazines
intentionally blur the lines between editorial content and advertising in
order to bring in revenue. Many specialty magazines willingly publish
advertorials – articles submitted by and promoting companies who advertise
alongside the articles. In some cases, it is clear to the reader that the
article was written by the advertiser; in others, the editorial is presented
as fact in spite of its bias. (Natural Life magazine does not run
advertorials.)
Why is this happening? Well,
it's becoming increasingly difficult to separate the news makers from the news
gatherers. Most of North America’s newspapers, magazines, and radio and TV
stations are owned by the same transnational corporations about which they
report. The American television network ABC is a subsidiary of Disney, which,
in addition to its entertainment holdings also owns an oil and gas company and
an insurance company. The NBC and CBS networks are owned by General Electric
and Westinghouse, respectively. In Canada, one man – Conrad Black – owns
or controls close to two-thirds of the daily newspapers.
Additionally, the
corporatization of the media often leads to budget cutbacks, staff reductions
and less time for careful research in the news departments. As the corporate
mindset becomes entrenched, news becomes just another product.
There are other, more subtle,
ways in which corporations use the media to further their own economic
agendas.
Public relations firms are very
good at their work of managing public perceptions to create positive business
results. For instance, in the lead-up to the Climate Summit in Kyoto last
December, millions of dollars were spent on anti-global warming propaganda by
corporations that will suffer from restrictions on the burning of fossil
fuels.
According to the
Vancouver-based Fraser Institute, a right-wing think tank that is often used
as a source by the media, global warming does not exist as an environmental
problem. In a brochure advertising a conference to debunk global warming, the
Institute states that: “The public has been barraged with apocalyptic
predictions of global warming. This campaign has been so successful that
global warming is now reported as fact...the evidence, however, does not
support the predictions.”
Another common way for
companies to influence the public agenda, especially in the health and
environment fields, is to create phony grassroots organizations whose mission
is to spread disinformation about an issue and sometimes to pressure
politicians regarding pending legislation. They have catchy, innocuous
sounding names like Forests Forever and the Global Climate Coalition and their
corporate roots are cleverly hidden – even in the news items that report on
their activities.
To help defeat anti-global
warming initiatives, a coalition of American energy industry organizations
formed a group called the Information Council for the Environment (ICE) in
1991 to, as its literature put it, “reposition global warming as theory (not
fact).” The half-a-million dollar campaign was coordinated by a
Washington-based public relations company called Bracy Williams & Co.
People working against
clearcutting of old growth forests have long been aware that NPR – the
Canadian arm of the world’s largest public relations firm Burson-Marsteller
- is behind a campaign to ally First Nation peoples with logging companies
against environmentalists. Burson-Marsteller has a history of working on
behalf of BC’s logging companies, having formed the British Columbia Forest
Alliance (BFCA), which is funded by companies like Louisiana-Pacific,
Mitsubishi and Weyerhaueser.
Burson-Marsteller also created
the National Smokers Alliance, which lobbies for smokers’ rights on behalf
of the Philip Morris tobacco company.
Governments are also
contributing to skewing of the news by encouraging libel chill. Thirteen
American states have passed what are called food disparagement laws. They give
the perishable food industry the power to sue people who criticize their
products, using standards of evidence which dramatically shift the burden of
proof in favour of the industry.
These laws were the basis for a
couple of libel lawsuits that have recently been in the news. Texas cattlemen
claimed their industry was defamed on the Oprah Winfrey show and that cattle
prices dropped severely as a result of a discussion about whether or not mad
cow disease was a threat in the United States. Even though, at the end of
February, Winfrey was acquitted of the charge of spreading false information
because she said she wouldn’t eat hamburger, the mere threat of such
lawsuits is bound to further erode the quality of information provided by the
mainstream media.