Newspapers Find Themselves Confronted by Brand Management
Originally published at Outsell, July 8, 2010
In LA, the Times has drawn criticism for lending its nameplate to advertisers while in Washington, the Post lost a blogger who violated its uncertain guidelines. Welcome to the new pressures — and opportunities — of news brand management.
Important Details: For centuries, newspapers have acted on their birthright to call out the excesses, foibles and miscues of government. In Los Angeles last week, the tables were turned.
All five members of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors formally censured the Los Angeles Times for running a four-page ad for Universal Studio’s King Kong attraction, an ad section that carried the nameplate of the Times across its front and wrapped around the Times’ LATExtra, the newspaper’s breaking news section. The elected officials’ protest letter was addressed to Sam Zell, chairman of the Tribune Company, which is now in its 17th month of bankruptcy, with a vote by creditors on the latest reorganization plan due on August 6th.
The protest letter didn’t mince words, urging the Times “stop selling its front pages to advertisers, especially in such an offensive and alarming manner. The cost of this distasteful practice to the people of Los Angeles County is far greater than any short-term gains by the Tribune Company….Today’s mock section makes a mockery of the paper’s mission.”
Times Publisher Eddy Hartenstein responded by article the evening of the protest, saying, “The Universal Studios Hollywood ad wrapping Thursday’s LATExtra section met our advertising guidelines, including a large, red ‘advertisement’ notification on top of the page. Our readers understand the ad-supported economic model of our business, which allows us to provide the outstanding journalism they rely upon 24/7.”
Meanwhile, across the country, the Washington Post struggled with a brand problem of a different kind, as editor Marcus Brauchli quickly accepted the resignation of Dave Weigel, a Post staff blogger of three month’s tenure, whose private online comments about some members of the country’s conservative movement — the beat he’d covered for the Post — became public.
Post ombudsman Andrew Alexander, after talking to a number of staffers at the Post, concluded that standards were vague: “Like readers, some in The Post’s newsroom are perplexed. Internal guidelines say reporters should not “offer personal opinions on a blog in a way that would not be acceptable in the newspaper.” But they also are encouraged to blog with attitude and “voice,” which seems incompatible with neutrality”.
Implications: Welcome to brand management — quite unfamiliar terrain traditionally for newspaper companies — in the age of blurring boundaries. Many large companies consciously focus on brand management, its protection, its meaning and its extension as a key part of business strategy and operations. For newspaper companies, it’s traditionally been more of an unexamined given. The brand, exemplified by that old Black Letter type nameplate, has implied a commitment to public and community service, to being fair, to getting it right, and avoiding any perception of influence by the powerful, whether public official, company CEO or advertiser.
That long-standing position is now threatened by several forces, and Outsell believes the news industry’s mettle is being tested, as it is forced to address what news brands really mean in the digital age.
When the Fourth Estate is criticized by one of the first three, it’s a reversal of form, one made possible by the declining financial and political clout of newspapers, particularly metro newspapers. Weakened, newspapers both leave themselves open to attack — and to doing foolish things that trifle with the continuing value of their legendary brands. The LA Times, back to the Staples Center ad debacle of 1999 through the innovative ups and downs of the Zell era, has seen more than its share of controversy, but it’s far from alone. All newspaper companies face unprecedented pressures to blur the lines, as ad revenue becomes harder and harder to get.
Outsell believes that in the coming digital decade, news brand management will become more important than ever. Since the internet age dawned, news publishers have thought of the print product and the dot.com. Now in the age of the smartphone, iPad and TVs becoming monitors, those news brands that endure and prosper will be ones that master ubiquity. That means that those brands, merrily crossing and re-crossing platforms, become even more important identifiers, stamps of recognition — and one would hope, trust — as digital ubiquity both complicates and simplifies our information worlds.
Finally, Outsell believes that the re-envisioning of news brand is essential. Take the Post’s contretemps. The Post’s instinct in hiring Weigel to bring a fresh voice to conservative movement coverage was on the money. It extended the Post’s franchise, putting more valuable-to-the-reader content under its brand. In its seemingly contradictory directions to its staff, the Post displayed its uncertain footing in the new terrain, an uncertainty shared almost universally in the trade. As Kate Phillips pointed out in a New York Time blog post, Weigel could have gotten a lesser penalty and continued to add value to the Post. Instead, faced with an affront to its credibility, the Post made an either/or decision and his work was gone.
There is a middle way, and it is fast emerging among newspaper companies. It’s the big tent approach to amassing more valuable-to-readers content under a community news brand — and at lower cost. Down the street from the Post, its new competition, TBD.com, formally launching in the fall, has already signed up 82 local blogs for its TBD Community Network, and daily newspaper brethren from the Seattle Times to the Miami Herald to several Hearst papers are taking a similar approach. It’s possible to aggregate lots of useful news and opinion content, at pricepoints from low to high, and let readers know that the content is coming from partner sites — not from the newspaper itself. Readers are smart, and with a clear news site disclosure, they’ll be more flexible about differing standards of staff and non-staff content.