Sure the byline reads, Michael V. Copeland, Business 2.0 Magazine senior writer, but the article On the Launchpad: Unlocking the iPod is written like a self-congratulatory shill piece typically pumped out by over paid PR firms that Astroturf the news outlets. Minor massaging it is no different than this piece found over at MacNN. Hell, just Google for it and you’ll see close variations on a theme. From business to politics to health-care to world events this type of mouthpiece writing is prevalent and it does a disservice to the consumer of the news. Then again, if you follow the money, who is the real customer?
Not you and not me. The real customers are the ones paying for the placement of these pieces and they are paying for readership. It is the same model as broadcast television where the viewing public is the product and the customer is the advertisers, same model as Google AdWords. So what bothers me about this more than advertising? PR is insidious in that it clothes itself the trappings of authority and responsibility alluding to the notion of substance. Advertising is much more easily spotted in that it does not often pretend that it is any more than what it is, though there are exceptions it is less disturbing and damaging than PR which inserts itself in and amongst items that might actually be news.
PR pieces are laudatory and do not ask the obvious and sometimes difficult to answer questions. In the case of Navio that would be, “How is this different than every other closed source solution that has preceded it?”, “So, tell me, I’m going have to buy yet another device for playback of music and movies?”, “Great, another phone-home solution that will also act as a layer between me and my hardware and likely cause nothing but headaches when I want to burn a CD of photos from my kids first birthday. Why?” I suppose that I ask too much from the Fourth Estate.
To Navio, the PR machine, and all the news outlets that run this crap without asking the tough as well as easy questions, I say screw you.
True ‘dat. It seems to me there are a lot of “reporters” who’d rather read a fax from a PR firm than do some research themselves.
But wait?! Isn’t reading a fax from such a helpful PR firm doing research?
What if that mandate. . . er agenda . . . er fax comes from your boss? Does that count?
LOL! Right on the money! Literally!
I heard this on the Howard 100 News on Sirius and found the copy online. Not sure of the source, but that’s what search engines are for.
FCC MAY FINE FOR FAKE NEWS
Steve Langford
The Federal Communications Commission is investigating dozens of local television stations for airing paid advertisements that were presented as real news stories. Earlier this year an NBC affiliate aired a “news” story about the Super Bowl written and produced by Detroit-based General Motors.” Diane Farsetta co-authored “Fake News”, a study of these mock news ads. “We found 77 TV stations aired them… Not once did they disclose to their viewers the companies that were behind these segments. We just need to make sure that when we do put this information together that the FCC takes action.” It looks like Farsetta may get her wish.
Hmmm, seeing as how the recent confirmation of McDowell to the FCC went through the Senate like a hot knife through melted butter I have little to zero faith that the FCC will follow through. McDowell spent much of his career as a telecommunications industry lawyer so my thought is that he is disinclined to bite the hand that feeds him.
Personally, I think that schools should begin introducing media training to kids as early as kindergarten. Understanding the role of media and message construction and dissemination as well as being able to parse those messages for content is critical to decision making in todays society.