Tit for tat media war erupts in wake of Oborne resignation

When Peter Oborne left The Telegraph and outed their compromised and corrupted newsrom hiding stories a few other media outlets jumped in for the kicking.

But the tables have turned in a tit for tat war that is breaking out over media ethics, with accusations now besetting the Guardian.

The Guardian is facing questions over its relationship with advertisers after allegations that it changed a news article amid concerns about offending Apple.

The media organisation has criticised The Telegraph for failing to observe the “Chinese wall” between advertising and editorial coverage, a claim The Telegraph strongly denies.

However, The Telegraph can disclose that in July last year Apple bought wraparound advertising on The Guardian’s website and stipulated that the advertising should not be placed next to negative news.

A Guardian insider said that the headline of an article about Iraq on The Guardian’s website was changed amid concerns about offending Apple, and the article was later removed from the home page entirely.

The insider said: “If editorial staff knew what was happening here they would be horrified.”The Guardian declined to comment on the specific allegation, but said: “It is never the case that editorial content is changed to meet stipulations made by an advertiser. ?

“The spokesman added: “Apple, in common with other advertisers, sometimes choose to make stipulations about the type of content their ads appear around. If the content on the home page does not meet stipulations, the ad would be removed.” Apple declined to comment.The Telegraph also understands that there are concerns within The Guardian about funded journalism on its website.

It confirmed that it is in discussions with the European Climate Foundation “regarding the funding of journalism projects”. The foundation lobbies for climate and energy policies to reduce emissions.

The Guardian is facing further questions over a section of its website sponsored by the Go Ultra Low Group, a group of vehicle manufacturers promoting low-emission vehicles.The section includes 11 articles devoted to the benefits of low-emission cars, including one entitled “miles of smiles” and another “driving into tomorrow, today”.

At no point do the sections or the article disclose that the content has been sponsored by the Go Ultra Low Group, a ?2.5 million campaign supported by seven international car manufacturers.

It was always going to happen…but the media barons and editors never listened, now native advertising, the saviour of their forlorn rags is probably going to finish them off.

One large company spokesman told me last week that the only way their company can get positive coverage is to now pay for it via native advertising and the Herald is very rapacious in their charging regime.

I also know of two sports that have to pay for their coverage in the Herald and also in Fairfax. I’m not talking about features, I’m talking about what should be genuinely described as news, but the attitude of the Herald and Fairfax is if the sports organisations do not pay then there will be zero coverage. There are even demands for the expenses of reporters travelling to cover events.

Of course they are all too afraid to properly out these ratbag media organisation or their stand over because then they really will get zero coverage.

The media are supposed to be the ones who hold the powerful to account, but what happens when they become powerful…there would appear to be no-one to hold them to account.

 

– The Telegraph

29%
×