More Political-Ad Fallout On the Way?

By: Jennifer Saba As advocacy buys increase in newspapers, so does the rate pressure ? and the controversy. The most notable recent example involved The New York Times, when it accepted an ad from the liberal group MoveOn.org in early September. The ad called out Gen. David H. Petraeus with the tag line "General Betray Us?" as he was about to report to Congress on the surge in Iraq. Two issues emerged: the rate the group paid, and the language it was allowed to use.

The organization had paid a discounted "standby" rate (meaning the paper could not guarantee which day it would run) of $64,575. When it came out that someone at the paper had assured the group that it would run on the day Petraeus was to testify, the Times admitted MoveOn should have paid the full $142,083 rate. Rudy Giuliani, sensing a opening in his race for president, charged that the paper had given the group a discount because it allegedly shared its liberal views ? and demanded space for a full-page ad, at the same discounted rate, to respond. The Times granted that. MoveOn.org offered to pay the difference between the standby and full rates, and challenged Giuliani to do the same (he did not).

Some newspaper executives interviewed by E&P shrugged off the notion that the Times did anything deliberately untoward. But it does point to potential land mines, both in rate structure and what's allowed to run in the ads.

Washington Post Senior Advertising Manager Marc Rosenberg says he is not concerned about any fallout that may come from the MoveOn incident. One way to avoid potential dust-ups is to have clear rate structures and, he added, the Post (as does the Times) imposes a set of editorial standards that an ad has to meet.

For starters, it has to be obvious to the reader who placed the advertisement. If the ad quotes or mentions someone or some other organization, it's immediately flagged for the paper's attorneys.

"Our lawyers review any advocacy ad anytime the ad mentions or quotes anybody other than the advertiser. It's a trigger of review," Rosenberg notes. And if the ad contains questionable language or images, it goes straight to the newsroom to see if it meets editorial standards. Furthermore, Rosenberg says that if someone wants to respond to an ad, the paper will do everything possible to make sure they can do it in a timely manner and in a similar position.