Quid Pro Ad Quota

Friday, March 05, 2010


The Nazi revenge thriller "Iron Cross" has received little notice and critics who have seen the film haven't been too kind. The Hollywood trade publication Variety initially slammed the film but removed its negative review following a major ad buy by the filmmakers. Was it a quid pro quo? Gawker's John Cook explains.

Comments [1]

Gaetan Giannini from Allentown, PA

I have no objection to adverting sales people selling into content. For example, if a medium is planning to run a piece on golf, then approach golf courses, equipment manufacturer, retailers, etc., about adverting in that issue or during that episode. Also, I think it is smart marketing to copy your advertising sales rep with any press release you are sending to a particular medium. (I don’t mind another voice bringing a good story to an editor’s attention one more time.) What I do fervently object to is the creation of seemingly editorial content strictly for its sales value as well as tolerance of the unfettered quid pro quo where advertisers get positive and pronounced editorial coverage despite the quality of the product or service in question. Running editorial and advertising as one unit where advertisers are “partners” is ethically dubious and it destroys the credibility of real PR in that medium, and perhaps across all media. The wall between editorial and advertising has always had a degree of fluidity, but I fear it is now no more than a gauzy veil. Editors, producers, journalists-rebuild this wall!

Mar. 10 2010 01:11 PM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.