THE WALL COMES TUMBLING DOWN

By: Greg Mitchell Editorial, Advertising Talking More Than Ever

E&P Special Report from the Dec. 4th issue of Editor & Publisher magazine.

And 'the Wall' came tumbling down.

In the wake of the recent fiasco surrounding the Los Angeles Times' revenue-sharing scheme with Staples Center (involving a special issue of the paper's Sunday magazine), some newspaper industry executives spoke of 'rebuilding the Wall' dividing editorial and business operations. Others argued for further erosion of the Wall. But are the two sides really that far apart? And has a seismic shift already shaken the structural integrity of the Wall?

To find out, E&P polled editors and publishers around the country and posed tough questions about current newspaper practices - and policies.

Our findings proved quite surprising, and significant. Despite deep splits on certain issues, we found a high level of accommodation and compromise - and a mutual desire to firm up the bottom line. Taken together, the results suggest that the age-old image of a high, forbidding concrete barrier separating the newsroom from the business side has already been blasted into history - replaced (for better or for worse) by a low, approachable wall, made of glass.

In late November, E&P sponsored the first in-depth survey on issues surrounding the editorial/business Wall. One hundred five editors and 60 publishers responded to the survey, conducted by Oradell, N.J.-based TIPP, a national polling organization.

Perhaps the most useful set of findings reveals why the current industrywide debate about the Wall is necessary, and urgent.

Flagrant breaches in the Wall, such as the Times/Staples controversy, are rare. This indicates, to some, that concerns about business invasions of editorial territory may be much ado about nothing. Instead, the E&P/TIPP survey results suggest that threats to, or breaks in, the Wall are common, perhaps even daily, occurrences at many newspapers. And, in some cases, they reveal a gulf between the opinions, and policies, of those on opposite sides of the Wall:

? Three of four editors and publishers reported that advertising/editorial guidelines are breached 'sometimes' or 'frequently' in the industry.

? Roughly 40% of the respondents disclosed that their papers had published special sections to obtain advertising even though they knew the focus of the sections had 'little reader interest.'

? One of three in the sample said they believed that 'promotional ties or revenue-sharing arrangements' with the people or institutions newspapers cover was a 'common industry practice.'

? In one of the most surprising findings, given the widespread condemnation of the L.A. Times' secret revenue-
sharing ploy, a majority of publishers (51%) labeled the Times/Staples arena deal an 'acceptable' practice (compared to just 19% of the editors).

? Eight of 10 editors, and nearly 100% of publishers, revealed that advertisers had pulled ads from their papers because of stories they opposed.

? A fairly small, but alarming, number of publishers (19%) and editors (11%) said they found it acceptable for newspapers to consider 'killing or holding a story that might negatively portray an advertiser.' Indeed, about one in 10 of the sample said that their newspaper had already killed or altered such a story.

? Fully one in four publishers believe there is nothing wrong with asking reporters 'to include advertisers in a story.' Editors, not surprisingly, disagree with this policy - but even many of them (39%) feel it is OK that reporters 'be informed of certain advertisers who may be relevant to a story.'

This latter finding reveals that while editors and publishers may disagree on certain practices, cooperation and communication may actually be the order of the day. Perhaps that's because, as our survey shows, a vast majority of both editors and publishers believe their newspapers are not adequately marketed. And strong majorities in both camps say they continue to agree with calls by Mark H. Willes, who heads the L.A. Times' parent Times Mirror Co., for 'closer cooperation' between news and business departments.

In fact, one in three editors, and six in 10 publishers, say cooperation at their newspapers is already high or very high.

Yet, in one of the most fascinating findings, E&P/TIPP discovered that the potential for distrust and discord remains high. Asked who should have ultimate authority on editorial decisions, the vast majority of editors (69%) said 'the editor' - while an even stronger segment of the publishers (79%) said 'the publisher.' Pity the poor owner: Only 6% of our sample said he or she should have final say.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Greg Mitchell is interim features editor at Editor & Publisher magazine.

EDITOR'S NOTE: For more details on E&P's exclusive survey, including interviews with top editors and publishers, please see this week's print edition of Editor & Publisher.





(c) Copyright 1999, Editor & Publisher