Fine Line Between Earned and Paid Media

I read a smart post by Dave Fleet about “Why Paying Bloggers For Posts Changes the Game.”  He basically says that paying for the post turns it into paid media, also known as advertising. And if the media, or coverage, is paid for then perhaps the advertiser influences the content.

This paid content emerges as something different from what we see in mainstream media. Newspapers and broadcasters typically aren’t paid by brands to cover anything. Journalists share the facts and editorialize based on research that’s ideally not influenced directly by payment from advertisers.

However, as I stated in another post here, “Some might argue that print and broadcast media outlets are indeed influenced by advertisers, especially these days due to declining revenue.” It’s hard to imagine that mainstream media doesn’t at times treat big brands buying millions of ads more favourably.

Jumping to the comments section of Dave’s post, one commenter asks, “Isn’t the mere acceptance of so many ‘freebies’/products/trips/event tickets/ etc., etc., tantamount to accepting cash?” She refers to PRs sending products to reporters for them to review. I don’t think it’s the same as accepting cash because the journalist is obliged to provide an honest and fair review after getting the so-called freebie. They can’t write about it if they don’t experience it first.

Another POV comes from Jen Maier who runs the UrbanMoms blog network. She argues here that networks should operate like mainstream media and pay bloggers for their writing. The advertisers and sponsors pay to be part of this influential network (one million plus views per month) for the same reason an advertiser appears in the Globe and Mail: the brand wants to be seen and appreciated by its many readers.

Perhaps comparing a vast blog network to a standalone blog is like comparing apples to oranges since the writer in the blog network isn’t paid directly by the advertiser.

So what does this mean for PR and earned media? Fewer bloggers to pitch based solely on the merit of the story, for one thing. It also means that the lines are blurring between paid and earned media, between church and state. There’s a finer line now between editorial and advertising that needs consideration by all parties: bloggers, brands, agencies.

So as always, PR pros need to know whom they’re pitching. They also need to understand the shifting nuances of earned vs. paid media.

2 thoughts on “Fine Line Between Earned and Paid Media

  1. Great thought provoking post, Trevor. Having been on both sides of the equation as brand marketer and “blogger” I feel strongly that the way to resolve this grey area is by clearly defining one’s objectives. What is the brand paying for? What is the blogger getting paid for?

    Developing clear guidelines and best practices on both sides will insure that there is no question on either side and will protect the brand and the blogger. This is exactly why we developed the UrbanMoms Network. It provides a professional service to brands – access to influencers with clear parameters on both sides.

    As I always say to my clients, it is critical to align yourself with a partner in the social media space that you trust and can help you navigate its unique complexities. It’s not as scary a place as it first appears!

    1. Trevor Campbell

      Thanks, Jen. I basically agree but the traditional PR guy in me is still grappling with the idea of paying for coverage. That said, your network model makes sense.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s