Week In 5
I have always found it to be very interesting as to where advertisers place their ads in magazines/newspapers. I believe that were each advertisement is placed plays a key roll in the effect of the ad. For example, the idea raised in class about an advertisement for an airline placed in front of an article about plan crashes, isn’t going to be very affective. I do think the placement does play an important roll if the content following the advertisement is negative. I do not think that that Huggies placing and advertisement before a story about triples being born will affect the sales of Huggies. I think people would pass by the advertisement and not notice anything different. So overall, I believe that unless the content is negative it will not impact the advertisement near it.
Until today’s class I never realized how much media is influenced by advertisers. I knew that a large chunk of their money came from advertisers, but I didn’t realize that advertisers essentially ran them. The study by Soley & Craig really got me thinking that 71% of American editors had to kill a story because of an advertiser. As a reader, I want to know the truth. I don’t want the stories to be fabricated. I want to know the exact facts. I don’t care that Company X is paying money so that they can look good. Most people don’t buy magazines for advertisements; they buy them for the stories. I just wonder what news and stories would come out if magazines weren’t run buy advertisers. I also believe that it is wrong to use direct pressure. By telling a magazine that an editorial must be about a certain story that is completely wrong. An editorial is meant to be ones own beliefs on a situation or story. An outside source should not be telling that person how to feel. I can see limiting content to reach your audience, but not to just please the advertisers. For example, if you are running a magazine to reach middle aged women, I can see forgetting stories about male lifestyles and what not. I have begun to wonder if there will ever be a day when the media stands up to advertisers and really “works for the people.”
As for questions this week, I am still having some confusion on synergy. I’ve been reading the book, but I still am not certain on what definitely defines a case of synergy. Should our paper deal with a company or one situation where that company uses synergy?
Shira Cohen
Until today’s class I never realized how much media is influenced by advertisers. I knew that a large chunk of their money came from advertisers, but I didn’t realize that advertisers essentially ran them. The study by Soley & Craig really got me thinking that 71% of American editors had to kill a story because of an advertiser. As a reader, I want to know the truth. I don’t want the stories to be fabricated. I want to know the exact facts. I don’t care that Company X is paying money so that they can look good. Most people don’t buy magazines for advertisements; they buy them for the stories. I just wonder what news and stories would come out if magazines weren’t run buy advertisers. I also believe that it is wrong to use direct pressure. By telling a magazine that an editorial must be about a certain story that is completely wrong. An editorial is meant to be ones own beliefs on a situation or story. An outside source should not be telling that person how to feel. I can see limiting content to reach your audience, but not to just please the advertisers. For example, if you are running a magazine to reach middle aged women, I can see forgetting stories about male lifestyles and what not. I have begun to wonder if there will ever be a day when the media stands up to advertisers and really “works for the people.”
As for questions this week, I am still having some confusion on synergy. I’ve been reading the book, but I still am not certain on what definitely defines a case of synergy. Should our paper deal with a company or one situation where that company uses synergy?
Shira Cohen
posted by Ron Bishop at 8:09 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home