Friday, January 13, 2012
Now about those sex ads ...
I received a voicemail this morning from a concerned reader regarding an ad in the back of the paper. The ad says that on average, escorts have sex with seven men in a day, while women in general have sex with seven men in a lifetime. (It being an ad and not a news story, there was no attribution for these figures.) The ad was offering hookups with "real, clean women." As opposed to unreal, clean women?
First, this ad is for a company that matches married people looking for sex with someone besides their spouse. The company slogan: "Life is short. Have an affair." (Want life to be shorter? Get caught.) But it's really none of my business how people run their marriages.
My point is—and please tell your family, friends, coworkers, pets—as editor, I have no control over our advertising clients. And it should be that way because I wouldn't want the advertising department controlling editorial content. I explained this in a previous blog post. This is known as the "editorial/ad wall" and no, Mr. Gorbachev, this wall won't be torn down.
I don't like some ads that run in the Indy. I'm sure there are stories that make our sales reps cringe. That's the newspaper business. People sometimes ask, "Why do you run these ads?" The answer: "It helps pay the bills." That's the unvarnished truth.
My suggestion to people who don't like ads of a sexual nature: Don't read them.
Comments (3)
Showing 1-3 of 3
How can anyone object to these ads? These women are doing it by their own free will? They are liberated and free to do what they want, aren't they?
like
dislike
My parents used to say, "If you don't like the program (TV), change the channel". Same holds true, nobody is forcing anybody to read whatever ad is posted. I agree though concerning the "objectify" women thought. No need to 'de-base' a gender. The paper is distributed free. Maybe if they charged a dime a copy, the ad. dept. could screen entries w/the extra $$ brought in.
Is there anything else we can do? I find it sad that a newspaper lauded for being progressive has a page full of ads that objectify women. I also don't understand why the editorial department can't veto ads without the advertising department having influence over editorial content. Can't one be above the other? I understand that the Indy needs money to exist, but is there any way for ads chosen to be in line with the views of the paper as a whole?
This post seemed reasonable until I read, "Don't read them." I would have liked a suggestion like, "Tell our ad department," or "Offer an alternative source of revenue." The nature of ads makes it difficult to not read them - they are designed to be attention-grabbing. This one in particular is bright pink and hard to ignore.
Latest in For What It's Worth
-
ProPublica's Paul Steiger to speak at UNC tonight
Steiger is the founder of the nation's leading independent, nonprofit news organization.
- Feb 20, 2012
-
The guise of objectivity
Math problems are objective. The Yellow Pages are objective. Journalism is not objective.
- Jan 30, 2012
-
What's up with the photo of Michael in the Iowa caucus story?
As an alt-weekly, we need to be cheeky, especially when it comes to politics.
- Jan 5, 2012
- More »
More by Author
-
Does Shell Oil have Perdue's ear on fracking?
Perdue endorses fracking after visiting with Shell Oil in Pennsylvania.
- Mar 15, 2012
-
Primaries 2012: The early show
Issues reported to the Election Protection Hotline; early results in Wake, Durham and Orange counties
- May 9, 2012
- More »
