|
Got the story wrong
Nov. 7, 2001
Dear Editor:
After reading your brief today on Metro's settlement with PNI, The NY
Times and USA Today yesterday, Philly dailies
settle their suit against Metro, I
was dismayed that no one from your organization bothered to check the
facts.
Your comment that Metro still suffers from advertisers not wanting
to reach out to commuters might have meaning except that you didn't bother
to find out that only 60% of our current distribution is commuter related.
We have made visible changes to our distribution pattern and added
colleges, office buildings, apartment buildings and street boxes. These
now account for a large percentage of our circulation.
I'm unsure why you would print information that is in my opinion skewed
and inaccurate. One would think that being in new media you would welcome
new approaches to an old-style media segment. Perhaps you're not as
forward thinking as you would think.
Sincerely,
James McDonald
Publisher
Philadelphia Metro
Pandora's box was
woe-laden
Nov. 6, 2001
Dear Editor:
Jean Pool, director of operations at Mindshare is quoted by Elizabeth White in today's
XBox story, Expect a blue
Xmas, even with the Xbox, as having
said, "Will it solve our
problems? No. Unless the Xbox is
like Pandora's box and has all the answers, then
no."
Answers?
I thought Pandora's
box contained all the world's problems rather than
answers. It seems odd that everyone I ask agrees with my
recollection
while your pub writes and quotes a completely different view.
Paul McDougal
Thielen and Associates Advertising
Fresno, Calif.
The editor responds:
Paul is absolutely right, and it was something
both the
writer and editor should have caught. Upon opening the box Pandora
releases
all the world's ills but also hope, as the Greek myth goes.
Time to get over the
over-55 hangup
Oct. 19, 2001
Dear Editor:
Regarding
your Friday story,
Nightly News
soars, but not among young,
might it not be time for advertisers and their agency counselors to
revisit the demographic model to which they all cling? Maybe it's just me (I'm one of
those over-55 "undesirable" demo units), but the boomers are
living longer, spending more (we
are still the most affluent group, right?) and we're watching TV!
I also am part of senior management with an agency, and I
make spending decisions for clients. And frankly, I like the 55-64 demo
cell for a huge number of consumer products and services.
Maybe the once-
sacred 25-54 or 18-49 groupings should be shrunk and reevaluated.
At our agency, we zero in much tighter for our clients and we buy more of less
rather than simply sprinkling our messages all over the place.
On another note, Friday night TV isn't the only problem the networks have.
People throughout our country are reevaluating what's really
important in light of 9/11 and the
ensuing conflict in Central Asia. And
look-alike series with nothing fresh to offer aren't a high priority.
Bud
Brewer
Senior VP
Massey
Persons Brinati Communications
Orlando, FL
Jane's Defence and
advertising sales
Oct. 2, 2001
Dear Editor:
I
was Direct Marketing Director, The Americas, for Jane's
during the last "war" in the Gulf.
I still can't make myself
type the word "defence" with an "s."
Back then we were besieged by press calls wanting to know if we were profiting from the war.
After all, we were constantly mentioned as sources in the press.
Our editor was even featured in an on-air interview during the Superbowl
half-time break!
Did it result in greater advertising or subscription sales? Decidedly
not. The
only people who bought more Jane's products than usual during
the Gulf War were the media themselves, because they
needed resources so they'd look like weapons experts on air.
So
we got lots of emergency, fedex the books now!, calls from various
name-brand news organizations.
Subscription
and directory sales to the military slumped because everyone was far too
busy with the action at hand to pay attention to our marketing efforts.
Correspondingly, advertising
sales to the defence and aerospace community slumped because
they knew military eyeballs were elsewhere. As in on
the field.
So war isn't even good for defence publishers!
Anne
Holland, Publisher
MarketingSherpa.com
The burden we all
now share
Sept. 19 , 2001
Dear Editor:
The
past eight days placed an undue level of stress on this country and the
world. Our attention was
turned to a small patch of land in lower Manhattan. We were shocked and horrified at events as they
unfolded
before
our eyes. We made demands on world leaders and almost all came through. We
steadfastly gripped onto hope, as many still do.
The pain
of our loss made us cry out. We raised Old Glory in defiance and respect.
We wept and we are now mourning. We have endured. And
we will continue to protect those values that make our country great and
the world safe.
We are facing a challenge like no other.
To set in motion, once again, the gears of life. To manage our rage. To give unswerving support to the leaders of
this country. To accomplish
and to celebrate.
To
celebrate the enormous, almost superhuman efforts of those who helped by
placing their own lives at risk and still do. To celebrate even the smallest gesture of support by wearing our
colors. To celebrate the lives of so many lost. To begin living again...moving forward to September 10th, 2001.
Paul Benjou
Director of
Client Services
Mediaplex, Inc.
New York, NY
'We're still here':
Our readers respond
Sept. 13, 2001
Dear Editor:
I am writing from The Devon Group of Shrewsbury, N.J.;
our offices are located approximately 35 miles outside NYC--close enough
that we could see the WTC every day. So close that many of us have family
members and friends who commute every day in NYC to work in downtown
Manhattan.
At the moment, our offices are particularly devastated
as our co-worker anxiously waits for word of her brother's
well-being. He is a policeman
and was part of the first "shift" that ran into the Trade Center
to help victims. He has not
been accounted for since yesterday afternoon.
There's nothing we can do to help move rubble or put
out fires. We thought about
giving blood but the local blood banks cannot process any additional
donations at the moment.
But we can all do something--believe it or not it's
collect and donate socks--the rescue workers are in desperate need of dry
white socks to change
into as they move through the muck and water near the collapsed buildings.
At The Devon Group, we are hosting a sock drive and are
asking people to send socks to our offices--we'll take care of getting
them to the rescue workers (via the ferries that are near our offices that
go from NJ to downtown Manhattan). This
is not a joke.
If you want to
participate in this sock drive, please send your (clean) socks to: The
Devon Group, 1129 Broad Street, Shrewsbury, NJ 07702, (732) 542-2000.
We thank you, in advance, for your kindness.
Jeanne Achille
President & CEO
The Devon Group
jeanne@devonpr.com
Sept. 14, 2001
Dear Editor:
I
am only alive today because circumstances forced me to put off a routine
errand. On the morning of Tuesday, Sept. 11, I had planned to go to
the Verizon telephone office in the World Trade Center to consider the
purchase of a cell phone and the necessary dingus to attach it to my
powerbook.
I ended up staying home with my handicapped sister because her
aide called in sick. She uses voice-dictation software on her computer,
and she was surfing the web early in the morning when she saw a site with
a live chat feature on which people were talking about Iraqi terrorists.
Uh-oh, something's going on, she said.
So I turned on CNN and wheeled her
away from the computer and I couldn't believe what I saw next. I am only
writing this three days after the fact because my internet service
provider, which was
located
right in the fallout zone, has restored partial service.
Michelle
Brose
Sept. 1 3, 2001
Dear Editor:
Everyone
at Line56--and we all like your newsletters--is safe. Even our publisher
who had to drive 20 hours to get back to New York from
Michigan, where his plane was forced to put down.
Thanks for asking.
Sept. 17, 2001
Dear Editor:
To
all the people of Madison Avenue and the Media Capital of the
world--we're
with you all the way. A big salute from a small ad agency in Lafayette,
Louisiana.
Rob
Davis
President
Davis Partners
Sept. 17, 2001
Dear Editor:
I'm
safe. Thanks for asking. Hope all is well with you and your co-workers.
Stacey
Bergin
Eisner
Communications
Sept. 17, 2001
Dear Editor:
I
work for an agency in Lexington, Kentucky, and the owner of our company
had a nephew in one of the towers. They heard from him after the first
plane hit but not since. So just like the people in New York, this has
touched us all.
Janice
Kreutzer
Sept. 17, 2001
Dear Editor:
I
work for Donald L. Arends, Inc., a B-to-B ad agency in Oak Brook, Ill. I
work with Cahners Publishing on a daily basis. They lost two of their employees on the first jet that crashed the
WTC--at least one was based in the Des Plaines, Ill., office.
Karen
Loos
Media
Director
Donald
L. Arends, Inc.
Oak
Brook, IL
Sept. 17, 2001
Dear Editor:
Thank
you for asking. Yes, I am
safe as are all of the people at the Advertising
Council.
Ira
Tumpowsky
EVP
Media
Sept. 17, 2001
Dear Editor:
I
work on 40th and 6th in a small agency where everyone is safe.
Friends
in Boston who work with TJ Maxx have lost many clients. They were on the
plane from Boston to L.A. I think most of the ad community is safe, given
that most of our offices are in the mid-town area. We have also been
spared a lot of the suffering as many of us have few ties to the financial
community.
Rebecca
Riley
Wolf
Group
Getting back
to work
Sept .
17, 2001
Dear Editor:
Your
commentary "Let us all get back to work and rebuild" is right on
target.
You said that Viet Nam was a challenge to us, and that this war will
be an even bigger challenge, fighting an enemy we cannot see.
For
a while, we will be united because of the shock. But after the shock wears
off, we are all going to
be more suspicious of our neighbors and their
motives. As you said, our only hope is for everyone to get back to
business, to do a better job at what they do, to be creative and
spontaneous. I hope that happens.
J.
LeRoy Yorgason
7134
SW 184th Place
Aloha,
OR 97007
503-848-8997
Book's flawed
business model
September 5, 2001
Dear Editor:
I
can't buy into the business model of Book magazine. Unless they have lots
of cash to burn on paper, printing, distribution and redesign, the segment
cannot support a large circulation magazine freebee.
High circulation to a potential reader who did not
ask for the magazine
deserves a very deep discount.
Hey guys! Didn't you learn anything from the
scores of imploding, content-free web sites that couldn't draw enough
ad revenue...and they didn't have the overhead you do!
Save a few forests and rethink this one.
Paul Benjou
Director of Client Services
Mediaplex
New York
Needed: A summer of
reason
August 13, 2001
Dear Editor:
Whether we like it or not, internet advertising has left an indelible
stamp on the minds of marketers and agencies, the most
visible effect being increasing the accountability
of advertising.
And in a weak economy, marketers are increasingly looking
towards increasing return on investment.
Conventional wisdom deems that
weaker brands have to spend far more money than established ones for
effective branding. Hence, in an environment where dollars have dried up
faster than water in the throat of a marathon runner, marketers are
increasingly turning away from branding and towards direct response
campaigns utilizing mechanisms such as direct mail and email.
We spent the last summer singing the praises of the new economy. We have
spent most of this summer wailing over the demise of
so many of the dot.coms. The need of the hour is to
examine the current environment, examine past mistakes and ensure that when
the economy rises again, agencies serve clients with simple, street-smart,
and jargon-free service (Come on, be honest, do you know what 'synergy'
actually is?).
If this should not happen during the
next economic revival, then as many a boss and many a parent has told me,
"There is no excuse for repeating a mistake twice".
Even as you are reading these words, many people are
working overtime to accelerate media convergence. Wireless technologies are
looming on the horizon. Technologies such as TIVO are sleeping giants, and
interactive features will become increasingly predominant in off-line
media.
What I am trying to say is that interactivity will be possible and
prevalent in all advertising venues. In addition to evaluating impact on
branding--purchase intent,
loyalty, and association--marketers will evaluate campaign success using metrics such as click-throughs, cost per acquisition, etc.
This would certainly mean that agencies would better utilize this summer,
when things are quieter, to develop an action plan for the newer, stronger
economy.
For example, last year I developed many campaigns to drive
traffic. They were wildly successful and in one case the influx of
visitors even crashed the client server. But many of those clients have
said the final bye-bye.
In hindsight, one can see that driving traffic was
perhaps not at all important. At the most it helped in enabling the
client to ask for greater advertising rates, which in weaker times fall by
the wayside to the whims of desperate sales reps and demanding media
professionals.
Anyway, as history has shown time and again,
advertising based models are not the best to generate profits. There has
to be more.
In the newer economy, I shall ask, "OK, this wireless/TV campaign
will generate a 0.75% tap-through. But, why do you want traffic to
increase?" Or something like that. Only if we stop taking a myopic
view of campaign success and start looking at client success will clients
develop trust in agencies and longer, fruitful
relationships will be the result.
Because to be honest last year many marketers didn't know what they
were up to in the first place. The onus is on the media departments of
agencies to ensure that they don't get caught up in long-winded, meaningless
metrics and tons of numbers as they prepare to welcome the new
technologies and develop campaigns across multiple media platforms. As a
result, everyone--clients and agencies--will make more money. And work
might cease to be a four-letter word any more.
Arun Krishna
Marketing Consultant
(formerly Media Supervisor,
Stein Rogan & Partners)
Defending Shoeless
Joe
July 26, 2001
Dear Editor:
Your item on the hickory bat of Shoeless Joe Jackson contains a
statement which can be challenged.
You state that he was
banned from baseball for "his
involvement" in the
Black Sox scandal.
There was never any proof that Jackson was involved. His batting and
fielding was the highest of the season (you don't do that if you're
trying to throw a series), and he actually tried to warn the owners
that the fix was on with other players.
The baseball
commissioner at the time
is the only person who held that Shoeless Joe was part of the scheme
and banned him with the others. There was proof that the other players were
guilty, and their performance records on the field (batting and
fielding) were down, consistent with the fix being in. Not so for Joe;
he was at his all time best.
Do have a great day today.
Leonard J. Hansen
New Orleans
Wallenstein, of the jackass nation
July 24, 2001
Dear Editor:
I thought Andrew Wallenstein had such insight as a media critic. But
then I read his analysis of CBS's failure to cover the Condit story and
realized he might only be moonlighting in the position.
Any self-respecting critic would've seen right through the Condit story
as little more than a veiled attempt to create a new twist on reality
based
TV.
Here's the gag: Take a high-profile guy who has something to hide and
accuse him of a crime he didn't commit. Then watch him squirm night
after
night whilst "commentators" and the television viewing
audience debate his
morality, whether his wife should leave him, and how far down he'll
go....
each night at 6 p.m. in the privacy of our living rooms. Kind of a
cross
between Bill Clinton and "The Fugitive".
No, I don't know why CBS didn't pick it up. I loved the concept, too.
But
that's not my point.
As a member in good-standing of this jackass
nation,
Mr. Wallenstein owes it to all of us to spend a little less time
berating
arbiters of good judgement and integrity and extrapolating on bold new
ways the media can mess with our heads.
Hunter Millington
Scientific American
New York
Why buying media is
a pain
July 2, 2001
Dear Editor:
I've been reading a great deal about the
"ad slump" in Media Life and in other similarly focused
publications.
As one who has been involved in selling and now in
buying media, I can tell you that it's getting increasingly difficult to
effectively and efficiently buy media.
The choices are many, in fact too many.
Unless you're a major global brand, like Coca Cola, you can't
afford to buy either deep enough or wide enough to really impact your
target.
Add to that the facts that television viewing is down
in general, gizmos like TIVO are craftily eliminating advertising
messages, but rates are not dropping.
Outdoor is being regulated out of business in many
venues, daily newspaper display rates are going up while circulation is
going down, magazines and radio are insanely segmented and fragmented, and
the incremental costs of direct mail, such as paper, printing and postage,
are skyrocketing.
So called new media, like the internet, is great in
some respects but difficult in the service sector. And there are
still issues to be worked out, such as security and target marketing.
I believe many businesses are cutting back in advertising and
investing in direct selling, where the results are more easily measured
and the effort is more manageable.
Just one guy's opinion.
Bud Brewer
Vice President
Marketing & PR
Massey Services
Maitland, FL
Where CueCat blew it
June 19, 2001
Dear Editor:
Nice
work by Jeremy Schlosberg on the CueCat scanner. One obvious--or
maybe not so obvious--reason for the difficult
road this device has ridden is
the inconvenience of old, hard-wired technology.
If this device were
hot-wired (infra-red), its ease of use and
mobility, coupled with some simple
re-design, could have expanded their market
ten-fold.
Practically, they should have partnered with the
PC makers to develop
wireless connections rather than rely on cumbersome
USB links.
Paul Benjou
Director
Global Networks, Inc.
So much TV just plain stinks
June 15, 2001
Dear Editor:
I really do wonder
about the American television viewing audience, because at the end of the
day, all the networks are doing by producing shows such as "Fear
Factor," "Survivor," "Temptation Island," etc. is
catering to the whim and fancy of an audience sinking lower and lower into
intellectual emptiness.
Sure, they throw in a "West Wing," a
"CSI," or an "NYPD-Blue" every now and then to stay
somewhat linked to the elusive butterfly of "quality," but
generally speaking, they are just giving people what they (we, I guess)
for some unfathomable reason want.
Maybe it's me, but I
lost track of how and why we have devolved to the point where we need
"real people" eating bugs, cheating on their partners or lying
in a coffin filled with snakes to keep us interested in television.
Maybe it's because there hasn't been an
original or truly funny situation comedy since "Seinfeld" or
early "Frazier" that doesn't exploit some minority group or rely
on a gutter of sarcasm or innuendo.
Sure, you laugh (with embarrassment,
usually) at some of the crap they say and do, but does it truly entertain
or does it simply pander to our lower instincts? And some of the drama,
"ripped from today's headlines" is so banal, badly written,
mechanically acted and poorly produced, that one wonders who really are
the millions of sad, pathetic souls watching this stuff.
I know. I don't have to watch, and
believe me, I don't. My set is off much more than it is on even during so
called prime time. I'm reading more, dabbling in the Internet more, and
I'm enjoying my music, although I must say I'm not too thrilled with
what's "new and exciting" on that front either.
I don't ask much. Entertain me. Inform
me. Interest me. Occasionally challenge me. I'm not a highbrow, nor am I a
prude. I am a consumer, and am reasonably intelligent. Please stop trying
to "one down" one another until even Imus or God help us, Howard
Stern seems highbrow by comparison.
If this is what the American people want,
and if the only role the networks see for themselves is that of delivering
an audience, regardless of any quality to the audience being delivered,
then the medium is doomed. And I guess that's what ratings and viewing
patterns are showing us.
As a marketer, I'm finding it harder and
harder to avoid putting my product in places that frankly offend me. Maybe
that doesn't matter. Maybe I just need to remember what my job is and do
it. Identify my "customer" and reach him/her. On the other hand,
maybe it's time to think about doing something else with what's left of my
life.
Because in my humble opinion, and that is all this
is, most of this stuff just plain stinks!
Bud Brewer
Orlando,
Florida
NASCAR on NBC
June 13, 2001
Dear Editor:
You got
straight to the point in your article on whether or not the
Peacock
network is up to the task of matching Fox's performance. I too was
somewhat skeptical of Fox at the start of this
season. Exploding graphics, weird camera angles,
loud and obnoxious announcers, etc.
But I have to say that
Fox
really hit a home run, and you can count me as one very satisfied "...notoriously
picky NASCAR fan." The only significant mistake they made was
not showing the sponsor graphics for companies who did not buy advertising
during the pre-race lineup. Nice to see that they reacted quickly
and correctly when fans and the media "dinged" them for it. Now I
face a different fear with NBC.
The fear of sappy, melodramatic,
human
interest crap instead of technical details, stats, lots of pit road reporting, and actually airing the live race. I watched in
total dismay last year (I believe it was the
Homestead race) as NBC spent 10 minutes (it felt
like 10 hours) on one of their olympics-style touchy-feely pieces about a driver (Bobby Labonte?) during GREEN flag racing.
Unbelievable!
If they pull
this crap (gee, I used that word twice in the same paragraph talking about NBC--might be a trend here) during the second half
of this year, I guess I'll just have to videotape
all the races so I can bypass the drippy parts.
Thanks for providing this informative article. Let's all
hope the Peacock gets it right!
P.S. I complained loudly to NBC Sports after that race, and never even
got an e-mail server-generated reply.
Chuck Moeller
Sr. Vice President for Operations
Integration
Veridian Engineering, Inc.
1200
South Hayes Street, Suite 1000
Arlington, VA 22202
'The Sopranos':
Readers' reactions
June 12, 2001
Dear Editor:
Maybe the
people who are complaining about my favorite show "THE
SOPRANOS"
have some skeletons in their closets, I don't know. I am Italian
and I love the show because I am smart enough to figure out that I am not
stupid enough to believe that we are all like that, or would consider a
life like that.
I just like good television and this
is the best. I'm proud of my heritage and NONE of us
have perfect pasts or ancestors with perfect pasts so let's quit the
whining and sit down and watch Tony and the gang (no pun intended).
Lionel Paesan
Phoenix, Az
June 11, 2001
Dear Editor:
Please forgive the hotmail
address. I did not want my name, company, or work email address included on anything.
The reason for my quick note is due to all of the talk
about The Sopranos, the
Toyota print ad (with the African American & the gold tooth) that was
pulled, and any other "stereotyped" media that has been
published or aired.
I noticed that a new Porsche
spot started airing this
weekend. Two Irish men are at a bar, debating back and forth who was going
to drink and who was going to be the "designated driver" and
drive the Porsche home. Why is no one kicking and screaming, crying foul
that the "Irish" are being typecast as drunks?
Why is it ok
to make the assumption that all the Irish drink (even though they don't)
but everyone is in an uproar about the assumption that all Italians
are in the mafia (even though we know they aren't)????
This is so
ridiculous! We live in a world where EVERYONE is so PC we forget to laugh
at ourselves. If you are going to yell racists & discrimination at one
show or advertisement, yell racists & discrimination at them all.
Don't pick and choose to suit your moods & cause.
Thank You,
JW
June 11, 2001
Dear Editor:
I
am an Italian and I in no way believe that the show "The
Sopranos" has any content that should offend any Italians. People are
just too uptight. The only thing wrong with the show is that some of it is
not realistic, like the fact that everyone knows they're in the Mafia. It's
much more secretive than that.
Cara Mia Matricardi
June 8, 2001
Dear Editor:
While I personally
enjoy The Sopranos, the truth of our society
is precisely that any other minority would be up in arms over such a show
about their race---The fact that David
Everitt, as a
Jew, personally would not protest is
insignificant compared to all the complaints from the Jewish Defamation
League and others that have been lobbied in
past years over equally petty issues.
I
say, let's all get off this "profiling" bit and thicken up our
skins.
If Black Americans would lead the way, all other
minorities would follow
suit.
But I'm highly suspicious that many Black
Americans are willing to get off
the sympathy bandwagon. Isn't it pathetic? All of
our minority ancestors
who actually DID suffer from prejudice (from the
"mics" to the "dagos" to
the "spics" to the "chinks" to
the "pollacks" to the "niggers") endured
true suffering in relative silence and comparative
internal fortitude.
We are
all flawed--every human ever born is flawed. To
find prejudice lurking
behind every bush will never change our innate
tendency towards crass
behavior, and it demeans true cases of violent,
destructive prejudice.
Jan Hernandez
June 8, 2001
Dear Editor:
It amazes me
that so many people, including Camille Paglia, can spend so much time
discussing what, at its essence, is simply an hour of escapist drama.
First, The Sopranos don't exist. Never have, never will. They
are a fabrication, an exaggeration and a manifestation of OUR idea of a
crime family. I somehow doubt that Brad Gray or David Chase (ne
Cesare, by the way) hung out with the Gambino, Profaci or Colombo
"families" to obtain some psuedo realistic notion of what life
inside the family of a "family" member is like.
James Gandolfini is an ACTOR. He's playing a
ROLE. HE'S READING LINES, for heaven's sake. He's taking
direction. This is fictional, dramatic television, not real life.
Grow up, Camille!
Bud Brewer
Orlando
June 6, 2001
Dear Editor:
First off, I would like to respectfully disagree with Mr. Everitt's comments in their entirety
(Enough protesting already over 'Sopranos'). The idea that The Soprano's is the
best show on television is laughable. While television has for many years
been referred to as "the Vast Wasteland", it was never more true
until the debut of this show.
He mentions that Italian-Americans are in
the show, watch the show, and that David Chase is, in his own way,
Italian-American (he must not be too proud of his heritage if he could
change his name...it is something I would never do.)
While all this may be
true, there were also many Blacks in minstrel shows, they watched them,
and even produced them. It didn't make them art, it didn't make them good,
and it sure didn't make them right!
Mr. Everitt seems to be operating under the mistaken notion that the IA
activists want to remove The Soprano's from the airwaves. We realize that
would be impossible and we have never advocated censorship. What we are
asking for is balance. He states that, as a Jew, he doesn't get worked up
with the occasional stereotypical portrayal of Jews in the media. That is
because of balance!
For every unflattering portrayal of Jews, there's a
"Schindler's List" or "Diary Of Anne Frank" to
counteract the negative. When was the last positive movie or television
program featuring Italian-Americans?
Studies have shown that nearly 75% of
all movies with Italians or Italian themes produced since the 1920's have
shown us to be either gangsters or buffoons. Since the 1960's, TV and
movies have gone out of their way to provide balance to every ethnic group
except the Italians. I realize that in New York, people don't all see us
as gangsters...but it's not like that all over.
I live in Georgia, and I
have had even the local sheriff's department tell me that "we know you
Italians can get things done if you want to."
Unfortunately, in many
parts of the U.S., people seem to think that all Italian-Americans either
are in the mob or at least know someone who is. This is something I deal
with on a daily basis with my last name.
I'll end this by stating that mafia movies and shows can be fun
entertainment, but not until the question of balance has been addressed.
With all the earth-shattering accomplishments made by Italians, from
Galileo, Marconi, Meucci, DiMaggio, Sinatra, Capriatti--the list is
endless--you would think someone could make a movie or TV show about
something other than gangsters! Are they even capable of anything
original?
Emanuel Gambino
Flowery Branch, GA
June 6, 2001
Dear Editor:
Let's see if I get your point! An American Jew is saying to
Italian-Americans shut up already. Mr. Everitt you just don't get it and I
believe you are not in a position to appreciate where the Italian
Americans
are coming from.
It is not the Sopranos that is the issue. It is that
Italian Americans are always portrayed from one point of view, the mob.
So I believe your article defends the literary value of the Sopranos and
completely missed the major point, a balanced portrayal of Italian
Americans.
So Mr. Everitt, which is the greater "sin"--
stereotyping ethnic groups or not appreciating the literary value of a show? May I suggest
your next article try to answer that question.
Regards,
Rich Autieri
June 6, 2001
Dear Editor:
As a first generation Italian...just want to let you know I
"LOVE" the show, even the reruns.
Maryann (Mauro) Flaker
Dayton OH
June 6, 2001
Dear Editor:
Youse is so right about "The Sopranos." I don't see anything
offensive to Eyetalians. I am hoping that "Amos 'n Andy" makes a come
back. And I never did see a minstrel show, why not? I herd that was a
Charley Chan with number 1 son and a back dude named "Lightning."
Member the fuss about the Chiwowwow from Taco Bell that talked Spanich,
great wasn't it? No more damn drunkin injuns gettting shot off horses.
Yeah, the Eyetalians have no beef 'cept a few fat guys on the show. Member
when Marloon Brandow kissed Larry King and said, "The Jews control
Hollywood." What a bigot and he's full of chit. I tink there should
be more cops and wops programs for us morons.
Richard Capozzola
June 6, 2001
Dear Editor:
In response to your article of 6/5/01, "Enough protesting already
over
'Sopranos'"--is this supposed to be NEWS?
That's what the site
says. In
fact though presented as 'News' this seems like an Op-Ed piece in which
case it should be labeled as such, lest the reader confuse the author's
personal view with Medialifemagazine.com's editorial position.
As a loyal subscriber
to your newsletter and its Italian motto (work to eat), I was quite
disappointed considering the 'media-savvy' audience that it reaches.
Worse,
Mr. Everitt's chiming in is a bit late and adds nothing substantive to
the discussion.
The problem with the article is that it is misleading and is nothing
more
than Mr. Everitt defending the 'Sopranos' without taking any time to
objectively consider the opposing view dismissing any criticism. As Mr.
Everitt is probably not of Italian ethnicity, his qualifications and
opinion
on the matter is of debatable importance.
Though being proud of 'Dutch
Schultz' certainly suggests a twisted logic. While he does question the
validity of the activists as representative of IA's, he fails to
mention
this in the context that almost every Italian-American organization has
endorsed the recent Illinois lawsuit against the show filed by AIDA
(American Italian Defense Association, sort of a B'Nai B'rith for IAs).
Notwithstanding, Judas Goats with vested interests, certainly the
activists
are speaking for quite a few IAs.
It is crystal clear that Mr. Everitt didn't do any homework before
penning
this article. Otherwise, he would have at least considered the very
real
statistics that provide the underpinning for the IA activists' position
that
the entertainment media unfairly depict IAs as buffoons, gangsters and
bimbos. Review the data at www.italicstudies.org and confirm what is
empirically obvious.
Need more evidence? The Order of the Sons of Italy
commissioned Princeton Research, Inc. to do a study on perceptions and
learned that most Americans believe that Italians *are* involved with
organized crime (I can email the report).
Meanwhile the reality is that
the
FBI's own data indicate that less than .1% of organized crime is at the
hands of Italian-Americans.
On a panel discussion organized by NIAF
(National Italian American Federation) broadcast by C-SPAN this
weekend, not
surprisingly, NY Times writer Maria Laurino in her book, 'Were You
Always
an
Italian' studied the teens at a Bay Ridge, Brooklyn High School and
noted
some disturbing fascination by young mob 'wannabees' and girls with low
aspirations.
NIAF also found some troubling trends of their own by
interviewing young people - www.niaf.org. Professor Joseph Scelsa from
Queens College suspects a correlation between the relatively high
dropout
rate among area Italian-Americans and the media. He should know, he
successfully won a civil rights lawsuit against CUNY for
discrimination.
Now
again, why might IA activists have cause for concern about the impact
of
entertainment like the 'Sopranos'?
To a large number of people, there is a double-standard today when it
comes
to depicting some ethnic/religious groups--it is somehow perceived as
politically correct to depict Italians negatively and not others. For
example, AOL-Time-Warner backed off running 12 animated Bugs Bunny
episodes
(albeit with a disclaimer running at the bottom of the screen) for
their
marathon on the Cartoon Channel for fear of offending Blacks, Japanese,
American Indians etc. with negative depictions.
Mr. Everitt is wrong,
in
the '70s when the NAACP screened a Norman Lear pilot and disproved, it was
promptly scuttled. So much for 'creative script consulting.' Yet,
somehow
for those with seniority at the victimization trough political
correctness
is enforced vigorously. Meanwhile shows like 'The Sopranos' receive
critical
acclaim despite Italian-American media concerns and calls for more
balanced
imagery.
Perhaps IA activists should take lessons from the Jesse
Jackson
camp to better lucidate their concerns. Most recently, he redirected
attention away from where Operation PUSH's shakedown money is spent to
Toyota's recent TV spots that featured a Black person with a gold
tooth.
Mr. Everitt's assertion that simply because the HBO series is a premium
channel, that it exists in a vacuum and is therefore above question, is
half-baked. The point about books is brought up but is another irrelevant
ruse. The season premiere of 'The Sopranos' reached 12 MM HH according
to
Nielsen.
Despite being a pay channel, that makes it effectively a mass
medium where independently published books are not. Otherwise we'd all
have
read, "The A-Z Encyclopedia of Serial Killers." The 'don't
like it don't
watch it' argument is tired. What of the collateral damage?
Considering
the
readers of Medialifemagazine.com, that is almost an insult to the
reader's
intelligence. We all know and see the aggressive print and outdoors
promotion of the show, not to mention the heavy rotation of pan-HBO
channel
barkers and entertainment shows. Very well marketed - think of the
GIMPs!
And, what of the *uncreative* advertising community latching on for a
free
ride with the major national advertisers like Pepsi, ATT, Lycos,
Wrigley's
Gum and Red Lobster using such 'Italian-as-mobster' caricatures on
broadcast
TV and radio commercials? Children see these ads and commercials over
and
over and over again.
HBO's response is predictable and wise --do not engage. Hiding behind
the
veil of 'art', the Sopranos plays off the same tired stereotypes and is
designed for one thing--maximizing eyeballs. To HBO in this regard I
say
'Salute!' Having watched the show, I do agree that it is a brilliantly
produced drama about treachery, drugs, performed by very talented
actors
rife with Italian-American window-dressing set to a hip soundtrack. But
fine
writing? Old cliches in new packaging.
With all the stories out there
that
involve Italian-Americans worthy of dramatization, what gets produced
and
promoted? More mob movies. The Italian-American actors won't complain
but
they are not happy about being typecast--they'd prefer to eat. However
a
few like Turturro, Loggia and Canadian Tony Nardi have publicly said
they
will no longer play these parts. BRAVO!
Nonetheless, indie film
producers
like Astoria Films have no luck trying to raise money to produce 'Paisan,'
a
film about the paradox of Italian-American GIs fighting in Italy
against
Italians while their parents back home (like Joe Dimaggio's fisherman
parents in San Francisco) faced internment camps, Draconian
restrictions
and
ruined business.
Curiously, far too many in our business have hopped on the 'critical
acclaim' bandwagon fawning over characters that are cruel, shallow and
morally bankrupt set within a show that is a lewd titillating
near-pornographic 50 minutes that has hooked millions by leveraging the
mafia meme (see www.thoughtcontagion.com). Hooray for Hollywood!
A
prominent
editor from Vanity Fair was recently featured on that C-SPAN panel
discussion. Though he was originally impressed by 'The Sopranos', he
later
came to some interesting conclusions. While people laud the show as so
artistically important, original and meaningful these same people tell
critics of the show not to take it so seriously. Again a familiar
double-standard.
If Mr. Everitt would have taken the time to ask, he'd
learn
that what the IA activists want is the perpetrators revealed and a
commitment
for more balanced portrayals with an end to exploitative advertising
campaigns. Such advertising would never depict other ethnic groups in
this
manner.
Granted, many people are not influenced by what they see on TV. But nobody
gets up thinking that they will form their opinions after watching TV.
And
yet, clearly major advertisers pay for 30 seconds of airtime for a
reason--to influence attitudes and ultimately behavior. McLuhan referred to
Madison
Avenue as 'The Frogmen of the Mind' for a reason.
What then is the
effect
when you have 50-minute doses? And let's not mix 'apples' and 'oranges'
either. TV series and one-off films are not the same. Especially, a TV
series repeated several nights a week. What's more, Brad Grey and Chase
are
looking to syndicate a version of the show for broadcast. What then?
Already, the show's successes have kindergartners looking up to
befuddled
actor, James Gandolfini, for his role as Tony Soprano. That is perverse
and
even worries Gandolfini himself.
It is said that crime is a personal choice and is not representative of
some inherited moral degeneracy. What Sen. Roukema and the folks behind the
AIDA
lawsuit are primarily calling for is more balanced portrayals - NOT
censorship and NOT monetary damages. Is that too much to ask?
AOL
Time-Warner could make amends a number of ways besides creating shows
with
deeper characters that are defined beyond the stereotypical Italians:
funding some scholarships, or many emerging programs on
Italian-American
studies or more broadly funding organizations like the Center for Media
Literacy.
As for a show about Jewish gangsters, perhaps Mr. Everitt
could
interview the ADL's executive director for script ideas.
As members of the media business, we ought to consider the serious
negative
byproducts of our business--to do otherwise makes us self-serving
ostriches
worthy of accusations of narcissism.
Dominic Tassone
National PR Director for Fieri
June 5, 2001
Dear Editor:
After some 800 Hollywood films and now Sopranos...Italian-Americans
have
every right to protest this blatant stereotyping that continues
on
despite the fact that FBI stats show that we commit ONLY two
tenths of
one percent of crime.
And for you to praise Sopranos as "artistic writing" you
must be an
employee of HBO or you DON'T know the difference between oats
and a
horse's digested droppings.
There must be something wrong with people that find all the wall
to wall
profanity, murder plots on family members, running over people with
cars,
the beating up of pregnant women, coveting the neighbor's wife,
etc.,
etc, etc. as having entertainment value that is part and parcel of
Sopranos scripts.
As for you liking a Jewish gangster story on the market ?
Forget about it! B'nai Brith would nip this project in the bud.
We Italian-Americans DON'T have a B'nai Brith to look out for us.
We depend on the common sense of writers and critics to point out
that
political correctness is not yet bestowed on us.
Evidently you are NOT one of them.
Walter Santi
Illinois
June 5, 2001
Dear Editor:
As an Italian American historian, I find it appalling
that intelligent people like Pellegrino D'Acierno and
David Everitt can so completely miss the boat
regarding HBO's "The Sopranos."
Just as the excellence of D.W. Griffith's 1915 Civil
War film epic "Birth of a Nation" sugarcoated its
horrendously derogatory images of African Americans,
the "post-modern" (i.e., contemporary) know-how of "The Sopranos" glosses over the same derogatory,
regurgitated images of Italian Americans as criminals,
boors, buffoons, bigots and bimbos.
To put it in perspective: According to a 2001 film
study by the Italic Studies Institute of New York,
Italian Americans have been portrayed negatively in
69% of some 1,200 Hollywood movies produced since
1928. And this is just the MOVIES.
Multiply the
identical portrayals in books, TV sitcoms, theater
pieces like "Tony n' Tina's Wedding," etc...and you
can easily see why Italian Americans are finally
saying, "Basta!" (Enough!)
One final thought regarding il professore's remark
that people don't "believe" such images: President
Woodrow Wilson loved Griffith's "Birth of a Nation";
and, in modern times, President Richard Nixon can be
heard on the Watergate Tapes saying that Italians
"smell different" and that they're all "dishonest."
If the leaders of the Free World are influenced by the
media, how can anyone, with a straight face, claim a
special exemption for ordinary citizens?
Sincerely,
Bill Dal Cerro
June 5, 2001
Dear Editor:
"Nuts to you," says David Everitt. "Nuts" to all of
us Italian Americans
who are offended by "The Sopranos?" Well, nutz to you my
friend.
Sure some Italian Americans aren't offended by "The
Sopranos," but
you
know what, some of us don't like heavy pasta dishes, some of us aren't
Catholic, some of us aren't criminals, some of us rarely use filthy
language, and some of us don't like that show. We don't care much for
their
use of Italian American stereotypes. Stereotypes that have become so
ingrained into American culture, and into world culture, that they are
being
accepted as factual.
I don't like people thinking that they understand Italian Americans and
trying to relate to me because of something they saw on The Sopranos. I
don't like the Italian American stereotypes that are perpetuated by the
show
and I hate the violence.
I remember reading a national survey that was
taken
during the late 1970s or early 1980s. It was to see which ethnic group
in
America was the most feared. "Black African Americans" I
thought.
Especially because it hadn't been that long since the big city
riots. "Columbians" were my next choice because of their
increasing
numbers
and their media ties to the drug trade.
Nope, it was the Italian
Americans
because of the Mafia and the way it is portrayed in mass communication.
I agree with those that say "The Sopranos" is a work of art.
But great
art stands the test of time and it is too early to decide if "The
Sopranos"
is great, or simply pop art. Besides, just because something is art and
popular doesn't mean that people are wrong because they find it
offensive.
The Mapplethorpe photographs are one example. His work is very strong
technically and it draws a lot of interest, but many people find the
subject
matter offensive. Remember "Piss Jesus," and how funding at
the NEA was
changed because so many people found this "work of art"
offensive.
"The Birth of A Nation" was the most popular motion picture
of its
time.
It made millions of dollars, won artistic acclaim from both the critics
and
popular audiences, and it revolutionized the motion picture industry.
Despite the objections of Black African Americans and their supporters
it
was considered an artistic masterpiece and was shown all over the
world.
Some
of the messages it carried were that Black African Americans were lazy
drunkards, over-sexed rapists of white women, and that they were
stupid,
dishonest subhumans who just loved to sing and dance. It did more to
ingrain
these ideas into world society then anything that had come before it
and
possibly after.
If you have never seen this artistic achievement, or it
has
been a long time since you have, I suggest you sit through it in its
entirety. It is long but very educational with today's understanding of
Black
African Americans.
Italian Americans have had to put up with a media image of us as
criminals since the 1800s. Around 1900 the New York Times ran an
editorial
cartoon that depicted Italian immigrants as rats swimming ashore in New
York
Harbor. Each rat had a knife in its mouth. The drawing was part of the
Times' campaign to stop Italian immigration to the U.S. on the grounds
that
Italy was buying steamship tickets for its criminals and dumping them
in
America.
During the early 1990s I had the opportunity to work for a year for an
old time photography studio at the Mall of America. We took costume
portraits of periods in American history including prohibition
gangsters.
The studio never advertised the gangster portraits as being Italian
American
but simply as "Roaring Twenties."
During that year I
photographed people
from all over the world. Many of them could not speak English but they
would
identify the period they wanted by saying, "Al Capone." How
do these
people
from places like Arabia, Russia, Japan, Australia, and Argentina know
about
the stereotype of the Italian American criminal? That same old tired
media
image of the good-time guys with the great code of honor.
Outside of the "crime families" not much is
generally known
about Italian
American history. Some people remember that the name America came from
an
Italian, and most know Columbus was an Italian that sailed for Spain,
but
most Americans, including Italian Americans, don't know that The Bank of
America
used to be The Bank of Italy, that Italian immigrants were lynched for
refusing to discriminate against Black African Americans in their
stores,
and that Italians and Italian Americans played a major role in the
construction of America's system of railroads.
Italian Americans know that it is largely our own fault that our
American
history has nearly been forgotten. That in our rush to assimilate into
America we often looked the other way when we should have spoken up. We
know
that it is largely up to us to see that we change this one-dimensional
image
of us as organized criminals, which is why I am taking the time to
write.
Doug (Bonacci) Nemanic
Journalist/Teacher
Gunnison, Colorado
June 5, 2001
Dear Editor:
Mr. Everitt in his comments about "Nuts to the charge the show
("The
Sopranos) demeans Italians," shows incredible insensitivity.
It certainly also shows something of Mr. Everitt's character, that as a
Jew,
he stated that he "was very proud of " Dutch Schultz and
Lepke Buchalter!
"The Sopranos" are only the latest in a torrent of Films and
TV since the
Godfather
that have so disproportionately negatively stereotyped Italian
Americans
(with so few positive images) that the Media has been substantially
successful in having Americans think that: Italian Americans = Mafia.
Just this past March 13, on DiversityInc.com the lead article by Linda
Wallace was
"TV Ethnic Stereotypes Perpetuate For U.S. Teen Viewers", and
the first
paragraph stated "American teen-agers expect Italian Americans
cast in TV
roles or movies to play mobsters or restaurant workers...., a survey
found."
Would Mr. Everitt speak out so strongly against Blacks, Hispanics,
Asians,
Native Americans protesting against such a "pattern" of
bigotry?
And why was he hypocritically silent, when the Jewish community was
successfully protesting the inclusion of Shakespeare's "The
Merchant of
Venice" in school curriculum and theatrical venues, because of the
portrayal
of "Shylock".
The Jewish community justifiably doesn't want its "Shylock",
and the
Italian
American community doesn't want its "Sopranos".
Richard A. Annotico
4267 Marina City Drive, Suite 1008
Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
June 6, 2001
Dear Editor:
A couple of bullet points for you re your assessment of the
"Sopranos."
We are concerned that you and others are missing the point
regarding Italian-American concerns/complaints--specifically,
the ENDLESS, I repeat ENDLESS, succession of negatively
stereotypical, downscale, and otherwise uncomplimentary
characterizations, scenarios, dialogue, references, etc.,
proffered/proliferated by "Hollywood" and the media in
general
with little or no attempt at BALANCE, I repeat BALANCE.
Accordingly, this pernicious pattern is most vividly exemplified
by a program like the "Sopranos". Moreover, as a result of
this
media barrage, there is mounting evidence to support the contention
that Italian-Americans are in danger of becoming a discredited
group, despite the fact that the vast majority of said group
lead essentially main-stream, LAW ABIDING existences.
To borrow a term from your recent piece, myself and others of
similar sentiment (certainly the MAJORITY of the Italian-American
community) say "nuts" to the logical non-sequiturs
employed by
yourself and other media writers to justify and defend the
indefensible.
Finally, despite your statement that you would, in fact, welcome
some Jewish mobster portrayals on TV and movies, we wonder how
receptive you and others would be to a comparably stereotypical
program directed at your group--let's say, a "Sopranos" spinoff
series focusing on the recurring "Sopranos" Jewish mobster
character named Hesh Rabkin.
(It's easy to posture on an issue which
you know is essentially moot, knowing full well that
"Hollywood"
would never countenance the inordinate proliferation of comparably
negative stereotypes against Jews, or practically any other
identifiable group for that matter).
PJ DeMarzo
P.S.: Question: Do you know what percentage of adult age Italian-
American males are involved in the so-called "Mob"?
Answer: Approximately one quarter of one percent!
Please, Vince, don't blame the media
May 16, 2001
Dear Editor:
Will someone please make Jesse Ventura just GO AWAY?
The demise of the awful XFL had little or nothing to do with the
"media bias" he so sourly claims.
First of all, the football was only
marginally approaching third rate. Division III college football was
more interesting and competitive.
Second, the staging was just a tad over
the top.
Football fans don't really care about all of the bell and whistle
crap Messrs. McMahon and Ebersole tried to roll into the games. The
promise of "smashmouth football" simply never materialized.
It was more like trainwreck football, with fireworks and cleavage as a garnish.
Third,
spring football has always been problematic, even when it was pretty
good football. Even real fans need a break after six months of
virtually wall-to-wall college and pro games.
Fourth, Saturday night at 8PM????
Young men, the obvious demo the games were aiming at, are out, either
on or trying to find dates.
Finally, will someone please tell the Governor
that most Americans don't give a damn about him or his opinions? He's a
sad clown making a mockery of the American political system and he's a
lousy color commentator to boot.
Thanks.
Bud Brewer
Vice President, Marketing
Massey Services
Orlando FL
Buyers need to master ABC mag audits
May 15, 2001
Dear Editor:
In a recent online Media Life article dated April 30, 2001 (In circ, what you
see you may not get), author Jeff
Bercovici cites a discrepancy in single-copy sales claims
as reported by Harper's Bazaar magazine for the June 2000 filing period.
According to the article, there was a considerable
difference between the publisher's claimed average newsstand sales for January to June 2000,
and the ABC-audited single copy sales average.
The article goes on to question whether "there ought to be far
more wariness" on the part of buyers where publisher claims are concerned.
Wariness, no. But awareness, most certainly. In fact, Mr. Bercovici's
article only serves to re-emphasize why today's advertisers must make
themselves eminently familiar with ABC reporting standards and the
effective use of ABC-audited data.
For as the author so clearly notes,
ABC's consumer magazine Publisher's Statement is simply a publisher's best
estimate of publication performance for the period in question.
And in the short term, even the most well-intentioned publisher is
often challenged to produce an accurate newsstand and subscription
performance tally. That's where ABC auditing standards--and an observant,
well-informed media buyer--can make a considerable difference.
When considering any ABC Publisher's Statement, buyers must constantly
remind themselves that it merely represents a claim, not an objective
verification of performance.
As such,the astute buyer will use ABC data to
actively track the publication's claims over time, comparing the data in
question to that of the previous year,
the previous filing period and past ABC audit reports.
In particular,
the buyer should monitor differences between claimed and audited averages
over several filing periods. Do the differences seem reasonable? If not,
ABC data provides the basis for a discussion with the publisher.
Knowledgeable advertisers also recognize that a publication is only
listed on ABC's quarterly Variance Report when that publication's audited
total average paid circulation differs by more than 2 percent from the
publisher's claim.
In the case of Harper's Bazaar, a quick examination of ABC's FAS-FAX
report shows that single copy sales accounted for less than 20 percent of the
publication's overall circulation during the June 2000 filing period.
Thus, the "18 percent difference" cited by Mr. Bercovici was
not flagged by ABC auditors because it reflects a subset that accounts for a relatively
small proportion of total circulation performance--certainly not enough
to cause a 2 percent variance in total average paid circulation. Effective buyers need to
notice the details, but analyze the big picture.
In summary, no tool is effective until it's wielded by one who fully
understands its purpose. Even ABC-audited data--comprehensive though it
may be--is merely a series of numbers until it's actively analyzed,
tracked and compared to publisher claims by a discerning media buyer.
And
how can that media buyer expand his or her knowledge? By tapping into ABC's expansive training and education programs, and
holding each publisher to rigid reporting standards by asking informed
questions fueled by ABC-audited numbers.
ABC data is not intended to
substitute for a media buyer's expertise, but rather to enhance that expertise by focusing attention
on key areas of concern.
As Dan Capell so astutely concludes in Mr. Bercovici's article,
"ABC's dual-reporting system may be the best possible one--as long
as everyone involved understands how it works."
Matthew Spahn
Director, Media Planning and Analysis
Sears, Roebuck and Co.
Chairman of the Board
Audit Bureau of Circulations
Research: Fact? Fiction? Estimate?
May 14, 2001
Dear Editor:
I am writing in response to your
recent article, Rich
are different. They watch 'West Wing.' Writer Gabriel Spitzer reported on a recent publication by TN Media
regarding the demographics attributed to audiences of television programs.
While the information was incredibly detailed and specific, I am dismayed
that not a single mention of "margin of error" or
"confidence interval" was made. The information was reported as
factual rather than derived from statistical estimates.
While we, as an industry, are constantly
subjected to the intolerable market research practices that define Nielsen
Media Research, I do not believe we should condone them, let alone repeat
them.
Even television news programs with their tight deadlines and dubious
reputations have evolved to the point where they present error figures
whenever they report the results of polls, projections and estimates.
While the source for the report is named, there is no mention of the data
source. How was the data collected? How much data was collected? When was
the data collected? Was it during "Sweeps" or over many airings
of the program?
The practice of presenting estimates
(such as demographic attributes to television audiences) without the
corresponding error estimate is at the very best shoddy journalism and at
its worst downright misleading.
If electronic based news reporting is to
survive, it must count responsible journalism among its traits and not
rely on minute-by-minute updates and hyperlinks to keep its readers coming
back.
Frank S. Foster
Vice President of Marketing
erinMedia, Inc.
Sarasota, Florida
The editor replies: The point is well made, and as a publication
covering media we owe it to readers to provide such backup data. The TN
Media study was based on Nielsen data reported between October 2000 and
March 2001. There were no real estimates of the margin of error.
Audit Bureau: You
guys blew it
May 10, 2001
Dear Editor:
I am writing in response to your recent article,
"Bronx Cheer for New ABC Circ Rules." Author Gabriel
Spitzer reported on recent changes to the ABC definition and reporting
requirements for "paid" circulation.
The threshold for what constitutes ABC "paid"
circulation has been lowered, effective April 1, 2001, from 50 to 25
percent of a newspaper's "basic" price.
However, this change has been accompanied by increased
disclosure designed to provide any user of ABC Newspaper Publisher
Statements and Audit Reports with a clear understanding of the elements of
an ABC-member newspaper's circulation.
These changes speak directly to the need articulated by
Peter Gardiner of Deutsch, who was quoted in the article as saying,
"I think there is value in bulk [circulation] . . . but I think it's
got to be identifiable."
In fact, the new ABC report format clearly differentiates
between those copies purchased by individuals at 50 percent or more of
"basic" price from those purchased by individuals at more than
25 percent, but less than 50 percent of "basic."
Additionally, the ABC report clearly identifies the elements
of "Other Paid Circulation," including hotel sales,
newspapers-in-education programs, employee copies and so forth.
Finally, the ABC report analyzes and clearly presents
for each ABC-member newspaper, the three primary sources of "Third
Party Sales." The report does not combine this "bulk"
circulation with home delivery and other full price distribution, as the
article implies.
As a result of these reporting changes, users of ABC
reports are presented with a clear picture of a newspaper's circulation
profile. These changes meet the needs of advertising buyers for
disclosure.
The article correctly states that ABC newspaper reports will
feature readership information.
However, and importantly, a newspaper must participate in
ABC's newspaper Reader Profile service before it can report its readership
information. The Reader Profile service audits newspaper readership
studies to standards developed by an ABC Committee of advertisers,
advertising agencies, newspaper research managers and research suppliers.
Reader Profile is designed to provide comparable and
credible newspaper readership data. It speaks directly to yet
another need expressed by Mr. Gardiner, "If it's a well done piece of
research that could add another piece of information to what we now have,
more power to [ABC and ABC-member newspapers.]"
The process of changing ABC rules was long and deliberate.
The buyers of newspaper advertising were intimately involved in the
process. It is unfortunate that your reporter did not contact us as he was
developing his article. A great deal of confusion could have been
avoided. As S. Scott Harding, chairman/CEO, Newspaper Services of
America has observed, "This was a truly collaborative effort between
newspapers and advertisers." We believe that as the users of
ABC newspaper reports become familiar with the expanded information now
available to them, they will perceive that these changes represent a
significant step forward in helping them to analyze and buy advertising in
ABC-member newspapers.
Michael J. Lavery
President and Managing Director
Audit Bureau of Circulations
Chicago
The editor replies: Media Life apologizes for any errors of fact or
interpretation in the story. The reporter had in fact called the ABC as he
was reporting the story but the call was not returned. Media Life
appreciates that much work went into creating the new procedures and
accordingly the magazine has invited the ABC to submit additional
information, ideally in chart form, to wash away any misunderstandings our
readers may harbor regarding the new system.
TVB is, like, full
of it
May 4, 2001
Dear Editor:
I would like to take issue with
today's news blurb entitled, "Alternative to Traditional Cable on the
Upswing."
For the last year or so, the Television Advertising Bureau
has made the highly questionable claim that local cable audiences are
eroding due to the growth of alternative delivery systems, such as DBS.
The problem with their claim is that they haven't
substantiated it with any local cable audience delivery data.
The TVB seems obsessed with the ritual of flashing ADS
penetration numbers and making the leap of faith that local cable viewing
is eroding.
Obviously, your organization has implicitly bought into this
fiction given the following quote: "This is bad news, as local
advertisers must deduct the ADS percentage of penetration to discern the
real size of their audience if they run ads on cable."
Rubbish.
According to Nielsen's national peoplemeter sample,
three years ago (April, 1998), 68,666,000 U.S. TV homes received cable
programming through traditional fiber/co-axial cable.
At the time that represented 70.1 percent of all TV homes.
Three years later (April 2001), that figure stands at 72,909,000 homes, or
71.5 percent.
Where's the erosion of wired cable homes?
It's one thing for the TVB to cherry-pick certain
markets, but that doesn't represent a full-blown picture of the entire
country.
One last point: TVB's statement that advertisers,
"....must deduct the ADS percentage...." in order to discern
cable's true audience size is quite absurd. Unless, of course, TVB thinks
ADS stands for "Absolutely Distorting the Statistics."
The real way would be for advertisers to examine local cable
delivery within the cable universe, which after all represents wired cable
homes.
In closing, we have no problem with the TVB documenting
the growth of ADS. But we think it is a bad business practice to: 1) make
an artificial claim as to ADS's alleged impact on cable audiences,
especially when the TVB does not present any audience data to back their
claim; 2) mislead the readers of Media Life Magazine into thinking that
wired cable penetration is eroding across the country. That is simply not
the case.
Jonathan B. Sims
V.P., Research
Cabletelevision Advertising Bureau
Forget a comeback,
Michael
April 25, 2001
Dear Editor:
Can someone tell me why Michael Jordan is doing this comeback
thing?
Even with his vaunted competitive spirit, I fear that MJ's
body is going to let him down.
Maybe I just don't want him to do anything to replace the
picture in my head of his final jump shot in the 1998 NBA playoffs
with a Y.A. Tittle-type photo of an athlete who hung on too long.
Hud Englehart
President
KemperLesnik Communications
Chicago
Donna's got it right
April 12, 2001
Dear Editor:
I just read Jeremy's interview with Donna Hoffman "Donna Hoffman on why web advertising fails"
and even though I bristled at the title, I
couldn't agree more with her assessment that banners don't work!
We have been steering our clients away from them for a year, and my own experience
mirrors her assessment of contextual advertising and affiliate success.
We have also found e-crm to be highly effective--whereas we develop campaigns
to drive email acquisition, and use direct html email as the primary sales
channel.
We are to the point where we blatantly tell clients that banners, unless
very targeted and a quasi-branding objective, are NOT the solution for sales
and direct response. Sweepstakes/promos driving email acquisition etc. tend
to be the better application.
Gene Slyman
Media Director, East Coast
SF Interactive, Inc.
Why web ads fail
April 9, 2001
Dear Editor:
Donna Hoffman misses a key point in her otherwise thorough discussion of why web advertising is so
largely ineffective: PEOPLE IGNORE THEM!
Gerard R. Farrell
Navasota, Texas
I'll stay a Baby
Boomer, thanks
March 15, 2001
Dear Editor:
Go back about 10 (or even 20) years, and what the author calls
"Generation
Joneses" used to be called the latter half of the Baby
Boomers.
Baby Boomers were born from '45 to '64, although it was always
assumed that those
idealists born between '45 and '55 were different from those of us
realists
born between '56 and '64 who grew up during a recession and gas
crisis.
The author pegs us rather accurately, but he's not telling me
anything I
didn't already know--he's just slapping a new label on me.
Sorry, but I'll continue to call myself a Baby Boomer. It's hard to wear a new label after 40 years.
Jane Beresford
VP, Media Research Director
Creative Media Inc.
New York
Sure we'll pay --
sometimes
March 6, 2001
Dear Editor:
I adore Media Life. But I gotta say that Jeremy [Schlosberg's] reporting
on the CEA story today, Study: Surfers just
say no to paid content, was really lopsided.
The fact that Slate and TheStreet couldn't do the for-fee model
is incredibly old news and has been superceded by the growing
number of folks who are selling subscriptions to online content
very handily: folks like Ancestry.com, ConsumerReports.org,
PreachingToday.com, Hoovers and others.
Also, consumers have
proven repeatedly that they will pay for access to archived
newspaper stories online.
I know because we report on this every
week in ContentBiz.
What's changed is that consumers (and businesspeople) won't pay
for certain types of content anymore that they think should be
free.
For the most part this stuff is the kind of thing that
showed up in their daily newspaper or TV News before and was
cheap enough or free.
What people will absolutely pay for is content they perceive
as being specialized and authoritative. Content that serves a
need--that they are pretty sure they couldn't get anywhere else.
Niche stuff.
And they've been paying extra for that for years
via the print newsletter industry. Now they are paying for
it online too.
And here's the good news-- it appears that once content buyers
are convinced something is worth paying for online, price isn't
as huge an issue as it is elsewhere.
Many content marketers
testing price have told me as long as you've gotten over the
"Yup I'll pay for it" hump, price points are pretty elastic (within
reason).
You gotta remember that the CEA know about consumer
electronics -- TVs, videogames, etc. -- they are not
mainly focused on content, and they sure aren't focused
on text-based content, which is mostly what's selling
online these days.
Anne Holland
Publisher
MarketingSherpa.com's ContentBiz
Washington, D. C.
It
depends on what you ask
March 6, 2001
Dear Editor:
Jeremy Schlosberg's writings are always interesting, but in his piece Surfers just
say no to paid content he has omitted an important point.
He quotes a survey by the Consumer Electronics Association to the effect that "the vast majority of internet surfers believe all web content should be free. Fully 77 percent of web users today oppose the idea of paying for information, according to the survey. Another 11 percent say they are neutral about the issue. Only 4 percent support it."
These findings prove nothing except the limitations of survey research. Who in his right mind is going to say he thinks he should pay for something he is currently getting for nothing?
Put it another way. Ask 1,000 people whether they think free air travel would be a good idea, and how many do you believe would denounce it?
Does that mean that those liking the idea refuse to pay at present for airplane tickets? Of course not.
A slightly more meaningful question would be: "Your favourite website, hitherto free, is going to start charging $50 a year for access. Will you pay?"
But even that question is hardly worth asking, since the answers will tell us only what people say, not what they will do. I'm afraid that asking silly questions, even if you use a computer to tabulate the answers, does not constitute a guide to wise commercial decisions.
Will people pay for access to a website? The logical answer is yes, if they value it enough. How to find out whether they do? Suck it and see.
For example, I publish a niche website called Market Research News (www.mrnews.com ), which since the beginning of 2001 has charged for access at the rate of 60 British pounds a year.
The number of paying subscribers (from all over the world) is small but respectable and increases every week. The move to paid-for was the only way to keep the site going after two years of free access.
I sought opinions among the target audience before making the move. Hardly any of those asked thought paying was a good idea. Mind you, they were all professional researchers!
One more thing, Jeremy Schlosberg compares the Internet to a public library. False analogy! Public libraries are "free" only because they are maintained by public funds, raised from the selfsame people who use the libraries.
A more accurate analogy might be an encyclopaedia. Nobody expects to receive Encarta or the Encyclopaedia Britannica for nothing.
Philip Kleinman
Editor & Publisher
Market Research News and MR Week
London, England
Time's Muller: Our
affair broke no rules
January 5, 2001
Dear Editor:
I have only one quibble with
your generally accurate story (Teen
People editor bolts for Europe and love) , and it concerns
your assertion that my relationship with Christina Ferrari was a
violation of company policy.
There are plenty of couples at Time Inc., married and
unmarried. The only policy requirement is that there not be a
reporting line between them, in other words that one cannot be the boss
of the other.
As soon as I suspected that a relationship with Christina
might develop, I told my boss, Norm Pearlstine, and we agreed that I
would get out of the editorial chain of command insofar as Teen People
was concerned.
Christina, who had been reporting jointly to
Norm and me, began reporting directly to Norm. In accordance with
company policy, I then stayed away from all decisions about Christina's
compensation, career, budget, staff, etc.
Henry Muller
Editor at large
Time Inc.
New York
Put a lid on your
politics, please
January 4, 2001
Dear Editor:
Is
medialifemagazine designed to be an informative work dealing with news
relating to the mass media world or is it really just another platform
meant for distribution of leftist bullshit?
In a "news" story featured in today's
"Shorts" section (1/4/01), the Rabbi Kenneth Roseman is
labeled a "self-righteous moralist" for taking a stand against
the upcoming Fox program "Temptation Island."
Apparently the editors of medialifemagazine
have forgotten that there is a difference between "news" and
"opinion."
Leave off the opening phrase, "And speaking of
self-righteous moralists," you have a rather informative story,
"news."
The reader is left to determine his/her
own feelings regarding the actions of the rabbi and his reasons for his
protest.
By including the phrase, the entire piece becomes
nothing more than leftist bullshit, "opinion."
Of course, the "story" really isn't
"opinion" either because the writer does not attempt to sway
the reader with his/her own well reasoned opinions. Rather, the
typical tact is taken--the "conservative" subject of the story
is degraded before the story even begins, "Look at the crap this
fool is trying to pull..."
If you can't make a strong "moral"
argument against what the subject (the rabbi) has to say, call him a
"self-righteous moralist" and assassinate his opinion before
it can be stated.
The irony of the including a phrase like
"self-righteous moralists" can be summed up with this little
phrase: "pot calling kettle black."
It takes a "self-righteous moralist"
to label another a "self-righteous moralist".
Laurin Willis
Richmond
PS: A another note to the editors. Do you remember the rule about not
starting sentences with a conjunction?
The editor replies: The letter writer is right. The offending phrase
lent nothing to the news item and was totally uncalled for. It has been
removed.
|
