Josh Marshall's TPM's Memo Defends it's New 'Big Pharma' Sponsored Content to Criticism by Readers

[KoKo]

March 28, 2014, 5:16 p.m.
Talking Points Memo defends its new sponsored content ➚



Andrew Sullivan, editor of The Dish, gave a lecture on behalf of Harvard’s Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics last night in which he railed against the evils of sponsored content. Sullivan argues that content intended, on any level, to confuse your reader is a breach of trust and that any writing done in service of a product or brand is propaganda. His accusations were fired at a list of publishers that includes but is not limited to BuzzFeed, The Atlantic, The New York Times, Romenesko, Time, and, most recently, Josh Marshall’s Talking Points Memo.

[Today, Marshall published a defense of his decision to start publishing sponsored content paid for by PhRMA, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

Titled:
A Note on Sponsors--Josh Marshall

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/a-note-on-sponsors

Marshall makes the familiar arguments about his intention to retain independence and to clearly label the sponsored content as such, as well as the necessity of revenue to any news organization. But he also makes an interesting case for a reason why an interest group would want to pay for content beyond ultimately duping his reader:

Why are these “Sponsored Messages” attractive to advertisers, particularly our advertisers? Because our advertisers are policy focused and thus tend to have more complex arguments. They’re not just selling soap or peanut butter. There’s only so much of those arguments you can fit into a picture box or a video. They want room to make fuller arguments, lengthier descriptions of who they are and what they do, as you would if you were writing an editorial — in text, going into detail. The opportunity to do that to an audience like TPM’s is of particular value because you’re people who care about policy and you read stuff. That’s an advantage we have as a publication, something that allows us to stay ahead of the curve and the downward ad price pressures that are affecting much of the rest of the publishing industry.

See also Henry Farrell’s complaint at Crooked Timber and Marshall’s response in the comments:

NOTE: (THIS IS EXCELLENT BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN MARSHALL AND READER CRITICS)

http://crookedtimber.org/2014/03/27/anyone-remember-tech-central-station/

Just as has long been the case, virtually all our revenue comes from paid advertising, mainly from advertisers from pretty clear industry and political motives. These are the advertisers who want to advertise in political publications. Shoe manufacturers and clothiers are generally not interested. (Entertainment companies, interestingly, are)…

Our Polltracker section and app in 2012 was 100% sponsored by the American Petroleum Institute, literally the Oil Lobby. That didn’t make it a ‘sponsored section’. API wanted to associate themselves with the content and run their ads next to it.

http://www.niemanlab.org/2014/03/talking-points-memo-defends-its-new-sponsored-content/

[antigop]

1. well, personally, I think TPM has been going downhill for some time. nt

[KoKo]

2. I've thought so, too.

Do you want to share why you think that?

You are in a Group...so no one should "jump you." just saying....

[antigop]

3. well, for one thing....how much coverage has he given to the TPP? nt

[KoKo]

4. I've seen complaints here on DU about him not taking a stand on TPP..

and if you read the back and forth on this link where Josh goes back and forth with disgruntled readers and donors to his subscription site...this is addressed by one poster connecting TPP to Big Pharma and how they want to benefit from TPP..

That whole discussion is interesting if you have time. If you don't have time he got pressured on Pharma Connections to how could he keep his site honest after what happened at the "Atlantic" (where Josh started out) where Scientologists were paying some of the reporters.

But, you and I might remember Josh from his early "MUCKRAKER DAYS" ...and Josh did try to go after Tom DeLay and many others when he was starting out. Tom DeLay is still free from prison and fighting his sentence. And Josh's TPM was a huge factor in exposing what Tom Delay and others did in his early years. I think Josh tried to "fight against the system" in his early years but marriage and two kids and having his car stolen in a parking lot...sort of started to change his views with his extra responsibilities. IMHO, Josh is a sign that you can come out fighting in your youthful idealism...but, you're going to end up eventually compromising if you don't have back ups "In the System."

I stopped reading him when he Compromised...(even though I knew it probably was coming) years ago. And, we all compromised who were there at that time when Bush II won Second Term...and what has followed.

When he started TPM was at that wonderful time when the "Principled Youth and Old" of the Dem Party were so frustrated by the "Selection 2000" that we BUILT THE INTERNET VOICES. Josh was a part of our hopes and he really did try at that time. (Do you remember back then?) I think the "revolution" just wasn't what he felt he could deal with anymore. But, that's just my speculation.

Just saying..didn't want to go further...but, that "practicality of funding his website" on just Google Ads when most of us use "AdBlock" these days meant he couldn't sustain what he had worked to build. So...it's "Sponsored Advertising." But, once one does that...where does their credibility go...and that's why the responses on this thread are interesting where his long time readers criticize and he answers:

HERE:

http://crookedtimber.org/2014/03/27/anyone-remember-tech-central-station/

[antigop]

5. thanks, koko, I did read part of the discussion...will read the rest later since I have to be

somewhere.

Thanks for the info.

I might also add that TPM seems enamored with "Hillary is inevitable" polls.

Josh should know that polls this far out are pretty much meaningless, yet he continues to post them.