newspaper masthead desecration

Newspaper publishers require newsagents with direct accounts to place newspaper toward the front of the store, in a high traffic (high value) location.  This is how it has been for decades.  Included in their demand is that the full front page of the newspaper is on display.

The front page of The Age newspaper today gives newsagents another reason to ignore the demands of publishers.  Covering the lead news item of the day with a half page ad demonstrates that showing the front page of the newspaper is not that important.  Unless of course people will buy the newspaper to read the Deakin University ad.  I think not.

I guess that news is not regarded as not all that important in selling newspapers by the folks at Fairfax.

The best pictures of the year were not all that important to the peoplee really in charge at The Age newspaper.  The promotion of a special feature in today’s newspaper has been covered up with an ad for Deakin University.  I feel for the editorial team having their work covered up in this way.

The front page of The Age newspaper on Thursday brought shame on the publisher – Fairfax.  Covering half the story reporting on the tragic loss of life in New Zealand was an ad announcing Here’s a Good News story.  The folks at Fairfax have no one to blame but themselves.  I hope that the editorial team uses this to fight harder against the advertising and finance teams within Fairfax to illustrate the damage their focus on money covering up news is doing to the brand.

Note: I have been on the road for the last two days and did not post this sooner as I did not have the image.  I took this photo from a copy at a Virgin Blue lounge.

The headline above the masthead of The Age newspaper today reads THE BEST RACING. Trouble is, they must not believe that since they sold the space over the top of the headline to an ad stuck on for Work Safe.  Advertising beats editorial again.

The promotion for a wonderful feature in today’s Good Weekend magazine has been defaced on the front page of The Age newspaper today with an ad stick on for Millel Cheese and Coles supermarkets.  My other complaint is that the Good Weekend comes separate to the newspaper and we have to assemble these.

The Collingwood AFL Grand Final victory book with the Herald Sun today is very popular.  I am surprised that customers don’t complain when we tell them we need to rip out the coupon.  That front page story is not as important as the Collingwood book I guess. The coupon for the book and the free seeds today are on the bottom left corner of page two.

The West Australian today has an ad for MBF stuck on top of the headline on page one of the newspaper.  While I understand the need for publishers to make a buck where they can, I have to ask – what is the value of a headline in driving sales if it is partially covered up by an ad? I like The West Australian, it is a newspaper for its marketplace.  I’d say it is currently the best newspaper out of single newspaper capital cities.  I don’t like the ad because it detracts from what the newspaper is about.

While newspaper mastheads continue to be covered up in Australia with intrusive advertising, in the US there is fierce debate about the impact of advertisements being printed on the front page of The Washington Post.  Yahoo News has the story including this paragraph:

Newspaper executives and editors pride themselves on maintaining a church/state wall between editorial and advertising and their traditional reluctance to sell front page ads stemmed largely from the sense that they appeared to broach that wall — sending the message to readers and advertisers that the front page, which editors have long viewed as their own sacrosanct turf, would essentially be up for sale. But harsh economic struggles have forced newspaper companies to get more creative when it comes to generating revenue. And with its inaugural front-page ad scheduled for next Sunday, the Post is showing that it’s no exception.

It is an interesting discussion – how a once venerable medium is having to prostitute itself beyond the hitherto unimaginable in order to make money.

A bit late recordding this.  The Age two days ago had an ad stuck right over the crest on the masthead of the newspaper.  As I have blogged previously – remove the ccrest and sell the space on the page if it means that little to you.

The masthead of the Sydney Sun Herald newspaper today is partially obscured by another of the stuck on ads which you need to peel off if you want to see the editorial content underneath.  At the Sydney newsstand where I purchased my copy this afternoon I saw four ads littering the floor. The same stuck on ad is running on the front cover The Sunday Age today.

I know my blogging about this will not change the Fairfax sell-out of their masthead.   It does, however, provide a record for those who are tracking how newspaper publishers are treating their brands in this disruptive print world.

The Age today has another ad stuck on the masthead.  While it obviously generates revenue for them it creates trash for retailers and frustration for some customers.  They should remove their coat of arms and sell the saved space.

The Sunday Age today promotes TWO GREAT MAGAZINES on the front page of the newspaper.  The promotion is wasted, however, by the ad for wotif which has been stuck over the word magazines.  Why promote two great magazines when you know it is going to be covered up?  The ad people will say that the ad is removable.  Maybe so, but not by somone browsing.  It is the browsers  the promotion of TWO GREAT MAGAZINES is aimed at.

The crest on the masthead of The Age newspaper was covered again today with another ad.  Yes it is advertising.  So why have a crest at all if you are just going to cover it up with commercial noise?  Nothing will change.  This post is just for the record.

God and my right, that is how Dieu et mon droit on the crest of The Age translates according to Wikipedia.  On today’s newspaper, is covered by an ad for iSELECT.  On some copies, the date is also covered.

The AGE had a brilliant wrap-around yesterday, Saturday, covering the ascention of Julia Gillard to the prime ministership.  They ruinied with an ad for HBA stuck right over the word AGE on the masthead.  Why print the masthead at all, run a strip of ads instead.

The copy of the Sydney Morning Herald I picked up in Sydney today has an ad for GIO stuck over the word Sydney in the masthead.  What do the brand experts think about this?  What do newspaper journalists and editors think about this?  Or is the masthead worth that little that it is okay to cover it up in this way?  Maybe they should sell the name off – the ANZ Morning Herald, the Telstra Morning Herald … hang on, that’s what they are doing now with these stuck on ads.

The Subaru ad stuck on the front page of The Age newspaper yesterday damaged the product in my view.  One some copies, the work Age was almost covered.  On other copies the ad covered promotion of the coverage of the World Cup in the newspaper.

Why a newspaper publisher would be happy to be paid to cover up their brand or editorial content on the front page is beyond me.  But what do I know?

With the challenges newspapers face today it does not make sense that a publisher would be happy to disprespect their brand in this way.

Half of the front page of The Age newspaper is covered-up today with an ad for milk. People who buy the newspaper based on the lead story will need to fold back the milk ad to see what the lead story is. If people don’t buy the newspaper based on the lead story then what’s the point of newspaper posters – they might as well be covered by ads too.

The money people at The Age put their needs ahead of editorial with today’s newspaper carrying a subscription ad stuck over content above the masthead pointing to an AFL article.  If they are going to cover it up why have the pointer to the AFL article on the front page in the first place?  It is frustrating enough that they are using the ad to take customers away from retail newsagents.

Thanks to the ad for GIO on the front cover of the Sydney Morning Herald today, the newspaper masthead reads (on many copies) as The Sydnning Herald.    Not only does the ad cover part of the masthead, it also covers editorial content promoting a story.  I like the SMH, it’s a good newspaper.  It is disappointing that the people responsible for permitting this trashing of the brand don’t respect the asset they have.

It is interesting reading about the debate at the Los Angeles Times about the placement of an ad covering the front page of the newspaper in the context of regular ad placement on and over the front page here in Australia by Fairfax newspapers.  There is plenty of coverage by the LA Times move.  See the New York Times, CNN, Reuters and The Huffington Post.

While the LA Times as is different in that is fakes a front page, the principle is the same when the newspaper masthead is incorporated in an ad or it and or editorial is covered by an ad.

How can we expect the public to trust and respect a news medium when the publishers do not?

The Age newspaper today covered half the front page with a house ad.  This was obviously deemed more important to the company to the newspaper than the lead story of the day to the readers.  Pity.

The Age today has an ad for their AFL tipping competition half covering the front page of the newspaper and blocking a view of a good report on public transport issues in Victoria.  While the tipping competition may sell newspapers, it is hardly a good advertisement for the news credentials of The Age.

The Age had an excellent special liftout today with safety tips for young drivers.  Part of the promotional material for this special report on the front page of the newspaper was covered up this morning by another post-it type note – this time for ING Direct.  What is the point of a masthead or front page editorial promotional material if you’re prepared to take money to cover this up?

Half of the front page of The Age newspaper is covered with a wrap-around ad today for ING. While advertisers may like this, newspaper readers don’t. Editorial staff must be frustrated at their treatment by the publisher. What’s more important, the story or the ad? The publisher says the ad. Fair enough I guess – they must put their shareholders first. As a newspaper fan I don’t like it.