An interesting discussion is emerging at the New York-based
American Society of Shitcanned Media Elites vis a vis getting the revenue end of Web or even print publishing closer to the editorial operation without tainting either.
Former gossipist
Drew Grant takes the position that bloggers should seize complete control of income generation, including selling advertising. More thoughtful than my description might make her, Grant recognizes the inherent potential for corruption but remains adamant that a solution is possible.
Most commentators so far are skeptical, including Grant's putative boss,
Aaron Gell, ASSME's president.
To me this is not a new issue. Editorial calendars, special issues and so on have been around forever and exist to give the sales force something against which to sell. That automatically creates tension between what you write about and what you write. So what?
Is it wrong for an editor to ensure the inclusion of a health-care story in the September issue if it will cement a multi-issue ad deal? Only in the halls of J-schools. Is it wrong for the advertiser to review and comment on the story before publication. Yes, everywhere.
The real difference between inkonpaper and Web-based communications is the difference between institutions and individuals.
An advertising 'department' can easily co-exist with editorial within a larger framework. But the blogosphere is entirely individual and boundaries between the two worlds are impossible to maintain within a single entity.
But I believe Grant will be proven right. My work, my money. How we get there is the question.
Anyone who hasn’t heard of Lilly, the five-legged puppy, is tuned into the wrong station.
