The following is an excerpt from our November issue. Subscribe now.
By: Michael Roy Hollihan
Something very important happened at the Commercial Appeal in October, a revelation of huge importance for readers and for Memphis. So important, in fact, that there was very nearly a revolt in the newsroom.
But if you didn’t read a couple of websites here in Memphis, you’d have never known about it. In fact, you may still not know about it.
On October 16th, the Smart City Memphis blog published a scathing post revealing that the daily had a deal with FedEx whereby a series of upcoming articles, to be called “Memphis and the World,” would be “sponsored” by FedEx. This wasn’t just selling advertising, and it wasn’t a themed special section where advertisers would be recruited around lighter, feature stories. This was front page, hard journalism that would carry a “sponsored by FedEx” notice above every story. Think of “advertorials.” Those text-heavy advertisements that are made to look like a part of the paper, where you have to search for the “advertisement” label to be sure are another similar tactic.
The writer, Trevor Aaronson, had no idea of the sponsorship deal when he left town to research his stories. It was only after his return that he learned of the sponsorship. After a heated meeting with Commercial Appeal Editor in Chief Chris Peck, he refused to write anything under that arrangement. Shortly thereafter, the deal fell apart and now the series may be in limbo.
The newsroom was in turmoil as word of the deal and Aaronson’s treatment got around. Reporters and editors were angry that a fundamental rule of journalism had been breached. A petition of protest was put together and circulated around 495 Union Avenue, gaining over 70 signatures within days, from every department of the newspaper.
The day after Smart City Memphis posted, the Memphis Flyer’s John Branston reported the story and published a copy of an internal memo that had previously been circulated only within a tight circle of upper management. That memo explained that the daily was going to explore new ways of “monetizing content” that would cross the old “wall of separation” between a newspapers’s marketing and editorial departments.
The memo went to great pains to remind employees that no advertiser would be allowed to dictate or influence the writing of a story, but advertisers would be allowed to associate themselves more directly to the hard