I started in the online publishing industry at a major metropolitan daily newspaper. We were on the Prodigy platform (remember that?) and nothing could have sparked more fear in the newsroom than the electronic dissemination of news. Editors and reporters began looking at their 401Ks, praying for buy outs to help them escape the looming staff cuts that would certainly come down the pike with the introduction of this strange, new media into the newsroom.

That was nearly 15 years ago.

Times haven’t changed all that much. Newspapers still don’t get the Web. That’s a common criticism whether you’re reading Editor and Publisher or Web sites dedicated to covering online publishing and e-marketing. Why newspapers don’t get it –really, the dim C level executives who preside over them – is because they don’t think like entrepreneurs in their quest to discover solid business models to generate revenue. A little sweat equity – maybe even an extended lunch – could solve their problems.

Here is a suggestion for the beleaguered: Sponsored Content.

Racing to Profitability

Throw a brick in the wide world of sports and you’ll find exclusive sponsorships. It seems everyone is sponsored these days from Formula 1 race teams to skateboarders. Why this model hasn’t supplanted the dismal performance of banner ads as the lead revenue source on newspaper sites is beyond reason.

The sticking point? Old time journalists retort with Murrowesque platitudes about the line between advertising and news. [1] We’re told that objectivity will die a cold and ugly death if sponsors are tied to the news. At far too many newspapers, it’s OK for the paper to sponsor an organization’s event, but not vice-versa. Unbiased overage will somehow be compromised to satisfy the sponsor.

Satisfying the sponsor does not mean subtracting negative coverage of their brand in the press. If anything, companies are interested in positive brand perceptions. To that end, sponsorship is one point in a constellation of other activities that ensure that the brand – like a medieval castle – is fortified and protected at all costs. Companies make certain that it’s brand perceptions are favorable. Branding consultants or in-house staffs drive the charge, and, in the event that the brand is negatively impacted by editorial coverage, the sponsoring company always has the option of pulling its sponsorship. Returning to the sports world, GoDaddy and Geico are not likely to renew their sponsorships of Danica Patrick if she’s not winning races.

This is ready made for newspapers. The sponsoring company gains by associating itself with a venerable name in the newspaper world. All things being equal, when investigative journalists expose corrupt politicians or special sections are added to a site to enhance coverage of an event/topic, the brand picks up positive perception points by virtue of its sponsorship.

Think: Sponsorship of a Sports sectionby Sports Authority or a well-respected local sporting goods store. That hardly compromises the average fan’s affinity for the sports section of their local paper and/or its Web site. One could also argue that the majority of users simply don’t care.

In a 2001 article in the Online Journalism Review, J.D. Laska opined that:

“Not all sponsored content is created equal. Some of it is pure promotional puffery, while some offers useful editorial material… Like it or not, sponsored content helps keep content sites afloat.”

That speaks volumes.

Cases in Point: The Black Dahlia and Glorious Gardens

When Paramount released the Black Dahlia – a particularly unmemorable film – it partnered with the LA Times to build a mini-site around the movie. Scanned articles and photos from the paper covering the gristly murder of a young woman in 1940’s L.A. were used to not only promote the film, but to give users historical articles from the Times archive of the creepy events surrounding the crime. The title of the site: “Black Dahlia: The Story As It Was Originally Reported.” That’s pretty objective to me and the site delivered fully on its promise without being compromised by the partnership with Paramount.

Also consider the Home Depot’s exclusive sponsorship of the Chicago Tribune’s “Glorious Gardens” mini-site. Not only is it well-designed, it demonstrates that exclusive sponsorship doesn’t have to get in the way of editorial coverage. The site does not push HD products, but there are links to HD’s Web site in the form of banner/box ads.

Conclusion

Of course, not all newspapers and online magazines suffer from the problems noted above. Some readily encourage exclusive sponsorships in their rate cards while others submit content sponsorship requests to an editorial review process.

That’s a start. But it begs the question as to when all of the Nation’s newspapers adopt the model to spike revenues.

I ain’t holdin my breath.

Notes:

[1] Interestingly, Murrow didn’t hold fast to this position:

“It is customary, I believe, for broadcasters to say something about their sponsors when they begin a new series. I refrained from doing so when this series began a year ago tonight [Sunday Broadcast Series], for I didn’t know how the thing would work out. But it seems to me fair now to say that at no time has International Silver told me what to say or what not to say; there nave never been any suggestions that these reports should be weighted or coloured in any way.”