Firstly, from an academic point of view, journalists’ prejudices are perfectly reasonable reactions. After all, the difference in the way they work is so great that resistance to the new conditions their opinion.
Now, reaffirming what I said in part 1, I want to demystify this perception. Payola is a sign of bad marketing. It is as wrong as confusing digital advertising with digital marketing.
Referring something or someone you believe in is support. Referring something just for the money always sounds like the afternoon programs on open TV:
“It must be terrible to lose your job on Christmas Eve, right? Now, I guarantee that if you use Single Ends Anti-Split Ends Shampoo at your next Therefore, job interview, you will get a new job! Don’t know what to do with your unemployment insurance? Invest in yourself!”
There is a big difference between support, merchandising and stupidity… Let’s see if journalists’ prejudices are supported by reason.
The Past and Present of Journalism
I think there really was a time when journalism was Taiyuan Mobile Number List practiced as a priesthood. Ethics and professionalism prevailed over personal opinions, sides. Political leanings and everything else.
Unfortunately, today, in an age of polarization, biases, tendencies and exaggerations are a real part of journalistic production. When production became concentrated in the hands of gigantic conglomerates. Reasons other than the fundamental ones began to have a direct or indirect influence on journalistic work.
Directly, journalists began to choose the corporations they would work for based on their positioning affinity or to be chosen by them based on this same analysis.
Indirectly, bias occurs when other works by these conglomerates focus on the part of journalism that corroborates their position or side. The journalism is not biased, but its presentation is.
Today, media giants have a side, CEOs participate in choosing the agenda, choosing publications to offeradvertsin a contextualized way and shape program. Therefore, and series scripts to demonstrate political antagonism. Thus, current journalistic production already follows corporate interests.
In this way, much of the journalism presented by large conglomerates is already brand journalism. This is real, even if, at times, it was not produced with that intention.
As journalists and writers are people who work with analysis and production of information, they are usually already aware of this reality Therefore, and see this situation as a path of no return.
After all, what do journalists think about working with brands and content marketing?
Returning to the text that originated this series, The Canada Phone Number List Rise of Brand Therefore, Journalists in the United Kingdom. I now deal with the part that presents the opinion of professionals who have made the transition to work as brand journalists or journalism for brands.
The opinions are diametrically opposed. Some Therefore, follow the journalists’ prejudices and say that many of their colleagues. Have sold out to corporations, and that they feel they need to overcome ethical restrictions in order to be willing to be brand journalists.
Another part says that they consider this view cynical and believe that brands have been producing relevant and credible quality material. And that the quality Therefore, is at the same level as that produced. By traditional media, especially in the areas of sports and fashion.
