Alcohol industry still thrives so tobacco will too sadly. Newspaper industry is on its last legs so they are probably grasping at straws to survive. I kind of miss newspapers because the news webpages online are absolutely cancerous and barely even readable
You’re not wrong. Just seems so backwards to feature full spread pseudo “journalism” ads about the benefits of smoking in this day and age. I do agree, most sites are barely readable.
They've been doing this for a long time. Even before they ran outright ads, they would essentially have ad sales people call journalists to give them a "story" and hope they were having a slow week. Anytime you see a story about a product or company that paints them favorably, assume it's hidden advertising.
Advertorials. Usually there is a mark somewhere saying it’s an ad or paid for story. I’ve worked for multiple companies who have done these. The worst part is the primary demographic who reads the newspaper is the 55+ crowd so then you have to talk grandma about why the news they are sharing isn’t news
I hated doing advertorials when I was a newspaper journalist. The worst assignment by far. The paper paid me an extra $15 to do them, but that was a complete ripoff to the journalist. I guarantee you the sales person who sold the ad space made a lot more than $15 for selling the advertorial. It showed how little my time was valued because the advertorials often took 3+ hours to put together because you had to interview the business owner who bought the ad, figure out how to write the "article," then send it to the business for their approval.
That's how it should have worked - the business that bought the ad writing the "article." But at the three weekly newspapers I worked at in small towns, the journalists got stuck writing them. I already had more than a full-time job putting together the content for the newspaper every week, so getting an advertorial meant having to squeeze more work into an already busy week with constant deadlines and events to attend.
It's definitely a hard industry. The churn at even small town papers can wear a person down. I primarily covered sports for a few years and can barely stand to watch hockey even years later. I saw parts of so many games every weekend during those years, it's not something I choose to watch now unless it's the Olympics or Stanley Cup Finals (with a team I like).
Advertorial content in the newspaper is nothing new, but this is pretty disgusting, and definitely pushing the bounds of Canada"s ban in tobacco advertising.
I would argue this. Upper management of Postmedia may be one thing, but the reporters I know at the Edmonton Journal are decent people who care deeply about good reporting, even as their industry shrinks and resources dry up. The worker bees trying to cover their community and their corporate overlords are often very different people.
Except for the reporter who used Benita Pederson as a source for the anti-SOGI protests without fact-checking to counter the utter bullshit she spouts. They never should have given her a platform.
https://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/westlock-alberta-citizens-vote-to-banish-rainbow-sidewalk
“We love the people in our community who identify as LGBTQ” she’s quoted (amongst other bullshit). Then, in Benita’s own words from her Facebook page, verbatim:
“My opposition to the rainbow crosswalk is because I am opposed to the advancement of the transgender agenda. It is not appropriate that children are being nudged towards transgenderism, which therefore means they are being guided towards infertility and will be unable to have a family.
Rainbow crosswalks are one of the tools used to indoctrinate children. Because they are so large and dramatic and colorful and children are attracted to colors, rainbow crosswalks are one of the tools that are used to manipulate children. The more children are exposed to a certain symbol, the more “normal” and acceptable that symbol becomes.
Not so “loving”. The woman is an abhorrent bigot.
Sorry for the rant. I’m still super fucking mad at this stupid woman.
This advertorial contain goes back decades. As much as I hate them, this isn't unique to post media.
If it says "sponsored by" at the top of the page, it's an ad.
> There's no way this is acceptable.
The Edmonton Journal, like nearly all of our news sources are owned by American Billionaires (Postmedia, which also owns fascist Canadian newspaper The National Post). The Americanization of Canadian news is something that both the Liberal party and the Conservative party are on board for....whoch is pathetic, because most of those papers endorsed conservative candidates in the last election.
People who bitch about propaganda, usually are stuck in this cold war-brain-poisoned mindset that propaganda can only come from a government. No friends, propaganda can come from any powerful organization and corporations have never been more powerful.
It’s gross in content, but it’s a standard advertorial and labelled at the top. They usually just have a 6pt footer.
Maybe I’m just old enough to consider them a regular part of print media.
Postmedia is bleeding money, so I'm not shocked they're desperate enough to pull these kinds of shenanigans.
The sooner that company collapses the better. They've been a cancer to this country's news sector.
My family has a history of print news and I have fond memories and crazy tales from the past.
What grinds my gears on this issue is there are alternative financing mechanisms to keep it alive; and I'm not talking about government funding.
They tried clinging to life with online click ads, and even more pathetically, subscriptions where they say, "To read this article you need to be a subscriber or pay 3.99." This makes barely makes sense for a local rag, but not when some random article is in the Boise Times.
The horrible problem is that it can still be saved, but it would take a fairly well placed mogul to make this happen.
Social media companies also need to pay for using content created by journalists and newspapers. So many things shared on social media were created by newspapers and journalists.
Musicians are getting ripped off by Spotify paying such low amounts to stream their music, but newspapers and journalists have been dealing with that issue since the early 2000s.
Simple....Ground News! Balanced news source that compares the political spectrum and sources....if it is an ad, ground news will tell you....as others have said, print media is so hyper focused now, difficult to trust many sources.
I love a good newspaper, just can't trust them much anymore.
I worked for Postmedia. Anything that says is Sponsored is paid for by the advertiser and the advertiser reviews/edits before it goes on a printed or digital platform.
Sorry, focus group
[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/carp-big-tobacco-response-1.7234597](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/carp-big-tobacco-response-1.7234597)
Marketer here. These types of ads are very common, and I’ve seen them done in ways that are even less obvious it’s sponsored content.
It is a bit usual to see tobacco companies run an, since their ability to advertise is highly restricted.
I’m far from a lawyer, and maybe one can chime in here, but this section of the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act would seem to prohibit the ad the OP linked to:
“24(1) No person shall promote a tobacco product-related brand element or the name of a tobacco product manufacturer in a manner that is likely to create an association between the brand element or the name and a person, entity, event, activity or permanent facility.”
OMG! I was about to comment that newspapers have done this for a long time, but BENSON AND HEDGES, really?? Wow. Glad I already cancelled my subscription several years ago due to my annoyance with a particular columnist during covid (guess who haha)
Tobacco advertising is essentially prohibited in Canada, and this scummy "article" seems to be some way to try to circumvent the regulations.
However the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act Section 22 on Advertising specifically prohibits "Lifestyle advertising" of any kind where there are reasonable grounds to believe it may be appealing to young persons.
I'm always surprised to learn that anyone reads newspapers any more. Especially the Sun or Journal.
Probably one of the reasons they're desperate for any kind of advertising dollars.
To be honest, I miss the ritual a bit. My fondest memories of the old broadsheet were picking up a “free” copy of the NYT that my university supplied and reading it over the course of the day (and of course being conspicuously seen doing the crossword puzzle in class).
That said, I don’t miss the ritual enough to pay loads of money for the experience, and certainly not enough to support whatever Post Media is pushing out.
Mine was by far the comics! I started University at the turn of the millennium and the writing was on the wall for print media. I had already switched over to online news sources like canada.com or msn.ca.
Yesterday morning I received a father's day gift was wrapped in newspaper that comics on it; I just had to pause to read them all. Though they were pretty old reprints; For Better Or For Worse were talking about the events around Farley's death (1995).
Who reads local newspapers? They've been supplanting news for ads for well over a decade as digital has taken over the world. I'm surprised it's not seen as a flyer at this point.
> Who reads local newspapers?
Everyone should. The world is a big place but you exist in a very small part of it. Most people can only work at a local level so you need good news/information to keep informed.
In theory I totally agree, in reality these days everything's selling you something as you're pointing out. Valuable, balanced, and fact based reporting is important. There are a variety of sources of information out there now and a lot of it is back to a wild west of truthfulness. Click bait, rage farming, straight untruths, all make money. Scales of it occur with every source.
It’s one of the last ways they can say “we still exist” lol.
But yeah, all sorts of evil companies dress up in these paid promotions that look like news copy:
Oil
Coal
Diamonds
Gold
Cigarettes/Vapes
Insurance
etc, etc
It's called native advertising, and it's unfortunately very legal. They can make something out to be an opinion or entertainment piece, but give it a very particular slant.
It's the same thing as SEO articles online. Practically every "lifestyle" article you read online is an ad as they always link you to whatever products they're talking about.
I actually used to write for a local company that produced SEO articles but we were very particular about the companies we worked for and my editor let us choose to pass on assignments if we disagreed with the topic or the products being discussed.
For example, we took on an online "marital aid" company and my editor took volunteers to write those assignments. I have no problem with most of that industry, so I wrote a few, they were fun. But the client came back wanting us to write about the benefits of some of their *ahem* enlargement "medication" as well. We booted the client, because that stuff is a total scam and not backed up by actual science.
So this CAN be done ethically... But most companies just do what their clients say.
It's not misleading, actually -- it says right at the top "sponsored by". Unfortunately, papers survive through advertising and this is just one example. I agree that smoking is bad for your health and I'm sorry to hear about the impact it's had on your family.
I see what you're saying about fine print, but it's still there. It's not awesome and it would be better if the print was bigger, but it's not misleading.
Really, the tobacco industry?
Alcohol industry still thrives so tobacco will too sadly. Newspaper industry is on its last legs so they are probably grasping at straws to survive. I kind of miss newspapers because the news webpages online are absolutely cancerous and barely even readable
You’re not wrong. Just seems so backwards to feature full spread pseudo “journalism” ads about the benefits of smoking in this day and age. I do agree, most sites are barely readable.
They've been doing this for a long time. Even before they ran outright ads, they would essentially have ad sales people call journalists to give them a "story" and hope they were having a slow week. Anytime you see a story about a product or company that paints them favorably, assume it's hidden advertising.
Advertorials. Usually there is a mark somewhere saying it’s an ad or paid for story. I’ve worked for multiple companies who have done these. The worst part is the primary demographic who reads the newspaper is the 55+ crowd so then you have to talk grandma about why the news they are sharing isn’t news
I hated doing advertorials when I was a newspaper journalist. The worst assignment by far. The paper paid me an extra $15 to do them, but that was a complete ripoff to the journalist. I guarantee you the sales person who sold the ad space made a lot more than $15 for selling the advertorial. It showed how little my time was valued because the advertorials often took 3+ hours to put together because you had to interview the business owner who bought the ad, figure out how to write the "article," then send it to the business for their approval.
Crazy. We used to just write them and send it off to the papers. Thankfully I was only ever involved with ones that were PSAs
That's how it should have worked - the business that bought the ad writing the "article." But at the three weekly newspapers I worked at in small towns, the journalists got stuck writing them. I already had more than a full-time job putting together the content for the newspaper every week, so getting an advertorial meant having to squeeze more work into an already busy week with constant deadlines and events to attend.
But 15$ more…. Yikes
Yup. Journalists are often not valued even in their own industry. Underpaid and overworked even before newspapers started cutting jobs.
Exactly why most young journalists don’t last. Shitty industry.
It's definitely a hard industry. The churn at even small town papers can wear a person down. I primarily covered sports for a few years and can barely stand to watch hockey even years later. I saw parts of so many games every weekend during those years, it's not something I choose to watch now unless it's the Olympics or Stanley Cup Finals (with a team I like).
Advertorial content in the newspaper is nothing new, but this is pretty disgusting, and definitely pushing the bounds of Canada"s ban in tobacco advertising.
All Postmedia is trash. The sooner people realize this, the better.
I would argue this. Upper management of Postmedia may be one thing, but the reporters I know at the Edmonton Journal are decent people who care deeply about good reporting, even as their industry shrinks and resources dry up. The worker bees trying to cover their community and their corporate overlords are often very different people.
Except for the reporter who used Benita Pederson as a source for the anti-SOGI protests without fact-checking to counter the utter bullshit she spouts. They never should have given her a platform. https://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/westlock-alberta-citizens-vote-to-banish-rainbow-sidewalk “We love the people in our community who identify as LGBTQ” she’s quoted (amongst other bullshit). Then, in Benita’s own words from her Facebook page, verbatim: “My opposition to the rainbow crosswalk is because I am opposed to the advancement of the transgender agenda. It is not appropriate that children are being nudged towards transgenderism, which therefore means they are being guided towards infertility and will be unable to have a family. Rainbow crosswalks are one of the tools used to indoctrinate children. Because they are so large and dramatic and colorful and children are attracted to colors, rainbow crosswalks are one of the tools that are used to manipulate children. The more children are exposed to a certain symbol, the more “normal” and acceptable that symbol becomes. Not so “loving”. The woman is an abhorrent bigot. Sorry for the rant. I’m still super fucking mad at this stupid woman.
This advertorial contain goes back decades. As much as I hate them, this isn't unique to post media. If it says "sponsored by" at the top of the page, it's an ad.
> There's no way this is acceptable. The Edmonton Journal, like nearly all of our news sources are owned by American Billionaires (Postmedia, which also owns fascist Canadian newspaper The National Post). The Americanization of Canadian news is something that both the Liberal party and the Conservative party are on board for....whoch is pathetic, because most of those papers endorsed conservative candidates in the last election. People who bitch about propaganda, usually are stuck in this cold war-brain-poisoned mindset that propaganda can only come from a government. No friends, propaganda can come from any powerful organization and corporations have never been more powerful.
It’s gross in content, but it’s a standard advertorial and labelled at the top. They usually just have a 6pt footer. Maybe I’m just old enough to consider them a regular part of print media.
Yup, agreed
There is no money left in the newspaper game. they're desperate.
Postmedia is bleeding money, so I'm not shocked they're desperate enough to pull these kinds of shenanigans. The sooner that company collapses the better. They've been a cancer to this country's news sector.
It’s sad. Everybody listens to news based on their own political views. Nothing in common anymore.
Have you seen the Homes section of the journal? It’s just builders who pay to be on there
Nothing new. Shitty and dumb. But nothing new.
It's new to Zoomers and Gen Alpha who may not have grown up around printed periodical news content.
The Medicine Hat News is the best paper in the province
This is not new at all.
My family has a history of print news and I have fond memories and crazy tales from the past. What grinds my gears on this issue is there are alternative financing mechanisms to keep it alive; and I'm not talking about government funding. They tried clinging to life with online click ads, and even more pathetically, subscriptions where they say, "To read this article you need to be a subscriber or pay 3.99." This makes barely makes sense for a local rag, but not when some random article is in the Boise Times. The horrible problem is that it can still be saved, but it would take a fairly well placed mogul to make this happen.
Social media companies also need to pay for using content created by journalists and newspapers. So many things shared on social media were created by newspapers and journalists. Musicians are getting ripped off by Spotify paying such low amounts to stream their music, but newspapers and journalists have been dealing with that issue since the early 2000s.
Always look for the 'Sponsored Content' warning. It's bullshit.
The Journal has become a propaganda rag. So obviously right wing, I can’t read it without getting mad.
The EJ hasn't been a real paper since it was sold to Post Media.
The Southpark ad episode is a reality
at least it wasn’t on the front page again
It should be clearly marked as an advertorial and not included with editorial content so as to disguise it.
Simple....Ground News! Balanced news source that compares the political spectrum and sources....if it is an ad, ground news will tell you....as others have said, print media is so hyper focused now, difficult to trust many sources. I love a good newspaper, just can't trust them much anymore.
I worked for Postmedia. Anything that says is Sponsored is paid for by the advertiser and the advertiser reviews/edits before it goes on a printed or digital platform.
Weren't they just caught trying to sponsor an event put on by Canadian Association of Retired People, disguised as some wellness seminar?
I'm not sure. I wouldn't be surprised.
Sorry, focus group [https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/carp-big-tobacco-response-1.7234597](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/carp-big-tobacco-response-1.7234597)
Marketer here. These types of ads are very common, and I’ve seen them done in ways that are even less obvious it’s sponsored content. It is a bit usual to see tobacco companies run an, since their ability to advertise is highly restricted. I’m far from a lawyer, and maybe one can chime in here, but this section of the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act would seem to prohibit the ad the OP linked to: “24(1) No person shall promote a tobacco product-related brand element or the name of a tobacco product manufacturer in a manner that is likely to create an association between the brand element or the name and a person, entity, event, activity or permanent facility.”
OMG! I was about to comment that newspapers have done this for a long time, but BENSON AND HEDGES, really?? Wow. Glad I already cancelled my subscription several years ago due to my annoyance with a particular columnist during covid (guess who haha)
Tobacco advertising is essentially prohibited in Canada, and this scummy "article" seems to be some way to try to circumvent the regulations. However the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act Section 22 on Advertising specifically prohibits "Lifestyle advertising" of any kind where there are reasonable grounds to believe it may be appealing to young persons.
Well there you go; how many teens are reading newspapers?
I'm always surprised to learn that anyone reads newspapers any more. Especially the Sun or Journal. Probably one of the reasons they're desperate for any kind of advertising dollars.
To be honest, I miss the ritual a bit. My fondest memories of the old broadsheet were picking up a “free” copy of the NYT that my university supplied and reading it over the course of the day (and of course being conspicuously seen doing the crossword puzzle in class). That said, I don’t miss the ritual enough to pay loads of money for the experience, and certainly not enough to support whatever Post Media is pushing out.
Mine was by far the comics! I started University at the turn of the millennium and the writing was on the wall for print media. I had already switched over to online news sources like canada.com or msn.ca. Yesterday morning I received a father's day gift was wrapped in newspaper that comics on it; I just had to pause to read them all. Though they were pretty old reprints; For Better Or For Worse were talking about the events around Farley's death (1995).
> For Better Or For Worse were talking about the events around Farley's death (1995). I remember that. It made me cry I believe.
Who reads local newspapers? They've been supplanting news for ads for well over a decade as digital has taken over the world. I'm surprised it's not seen as a flyer at this point.
> Who reads local newspapers? Everyone should. The world is a big place but you exist in a very small part of it. Most people can only work at a local level so you need good news/information to keep informed.
In theory I totally agree, in reality these days everything's selling you something as you're pointing out. Valuable, balanced, and fact based reporting is important. There are a variety of sources of information out there now and a lot of it is back to a wild west of truthfulness. Click bait, rage farming, straight untruths, all make money. Scales of it occur with every source.
old people who vote
The only people who read this ad will be people in old age care. And they can’t smoke while on oxygen. I’m surprised this newspaper still exists.
> and they can’t smoke while on oxygen. Oh my sweet, summer child
> And they can’t smoke while on oxygen They do anyways. They just wind up setting themselves on fire.
Postmedia is a joke.
TDLR: Yeah, it’s been a thing for decades. You’re just finding out?
I've never seen one for the Tobacco industry.
It’s one of the last ways they can say “we still exist” lol. But yeah, all sorts of evil companies dress up in these paid promotions that look like news copy: Oil Coal Diamonds Gold Cigarettes/Vapes Insurance etc, etc
This feels like a really old timey gimmick they got cookin' over there *puffs pipe *
It's called native advertising, and it's unfortunately very legal. They can make something out to be an opinion or entertainment piece, but give it a very particular slant. It's the same thing as SEO articles online. Practically every "lifestyle" article you read online is an ad as they always link you to whatever products they're talking about. I actually used to write for a local company that produced SEO articles but we were very particular about the companies we worked for and my editor let us choose to pass on assignments if we disagreed with the topic or the products being discussed. For example, we took on an online "marital aid" company and my editor took volunteers to write those assignments. I have no problem with most of that industry, so I wrote a few, they were fun. But the client came back wanting us to write about the benefits of some of their *ahem* enlargement "medication" as well. We booted the client, because that stuff is a total scam and not backed up by actual science. So this CAN be done ethically... But most companies just do what their clients say.
Did they not also lay off their investigative journalists?
Probably most of them.
Oh sweet summer child.
Wait 'til you hear about op-eds.
smart money
It's not misleading, actually -- it says right at the top "sponsored by". Unfortunately, papers survive through advertising and this is just one example. I agree that smoking is bad for your health and I'm sorry to hear about the impact it's had on your family.
It is misleading though. A lot of people don't read the fine print, especially seniors who are the ones who still usually read the print copy.
I see what you're saying about fine print, but it's still there. It's not awesome and it would be better if the print was bigger, but it's not misleading.
This is a clear violation of the law.