Promoted Content

[ManFromDelmonte]

We have seen threads before that openly advertise the fact that they are promoted content, for example here:

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/promotions/promote...
http://www.pistonheads.com/news/general-pistonhead...

Is this applied consistently across all your front page articles? I ask as there have been times where an article, that doesn't mention that it was paid for, really seems that it was (or at least that it was done in exchange for something).

If I owned a company that made, I don't know, wooden garages (I don't), and asked you if you would like to come and write an article about them in exchange for me building one for the author, would that be marked as "promoted content"?

[Rouleur]

No, it would be marked as PistonHead/Adrian Flux Partnership

[ManFromDelmonte]

Consistently?

[slk 32]

Rouleur said:

No, it would be marked as PistonHead/Adrian Flux Partnership

Or the tyre giant special PH member non discount discount incorporating the non price match pricematch

[ManFromDelmonte]

I see no-one from PH is interested in answering this question. Too busy writing adverts articles?

[LordGrover]

Apart from the forums, it feels like PH is no more, just another Haymarket product.

[ManFromDelmonte]

Just bumping this as I'm still interested in the answer.

[Ollie_M]

Sorry I must have missed this thread so thanks for bumping it up.

In answer there are many degrees of sponsorship that would result in promoted content. This could range from a financial agreement such as the Audi campaign, which i'm not sure if you saw, : ) through to simply a company offering a prize a competition.

You raise a valid point though and we will discuss things here and explore ways to make it more obvious and defined for you the members to identify which is which.


We do try our best to reduce the impact that these have however we are a 'publication' that does require revenue from advertising to remain commercially viable.


Ollie

[ManFromDelmonte]

Thanks for the reply Ollie. I think we all accept that you guys need to get paid and that will result in adverts/promotions etc. But it's hard to take an article reviewing a product seriously when there is a suspicion it may not be entirely unbiased.

Some clearer labeling or some such would be a good step forward.

[Ollie_M]

We know it has been mentioned a few times in the past on here and there a few email circulating as we 'type' about suggested ways to improve the reader's ability to identify the difference between, promoted, sponsored and Haymarket approved content... so it hasn't fallen on deaf ears.