I received a dozen emails today inviting me to check out Jalopnik's new sponsor. Sure enough, the words "Presented by Acura TSX" are now prominently displayed next to the site's name. While searching for the footnote "no definite article need apply," I noticed that Jalopnik is festooned with ads for the Acura TSX. So I called Gawker's main man, Ray Wert. I asked if the new deal is a New Deal for the site's editorial independence. Ray assured me the Acura gravy train would have "no effect whatsoever" on his ability to run "positive or negative coverage" of the manufacturer in general, or the model in specific. Ray pointed-out that "presented by" is not the same as "sponsored by." And Jalopnik launched with Audi's sponsorship (the TT reflected in the logo lollypop sucker's sunglasses). He said Audi never yanked Spinelli's chain. Only they did. And, eventually, after a negative review, bailed. Ray's got integrity all day. But it's not enough to BE independent. You have to avoid the APPEARANCE of being Acura's bitch. Those of you who know Ray will know that the aforementioned comment will assure the man's fierce examination of everything we do to sniff out the slightest whiff of hypocrisy. We welcome the scrutiny.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Ironic how the Prius is getting a bigger, more powerful engine and Audi’s RS4 and AMG are downsizing hxc. Who would’ve thunk it? As long as both stick to their promises of high mpg or high power, I think they’ll do fine.
Robert, you neglected to mention I gave the TSX a negative review. As a reminder and in the interest of fairness, here’s a link to my preview:
2009 Acura TSX
In it, my exact quote is:
competent yet remarkably boring
In addition, in the full review (linked below) I said:
“The 2009 TSX may be the entry-level for the Acura brand, but frankly we expect more from the bottom rung of the ladder from any luxe brand…”
I’d hope that would serve to make clear our editorial opinion on the vehicle — in much the same way that your past reviews of GM products make clear that the Buick ad I see up top on the page right now doesn’t indicate for even a moment that you’ve lost your editorial independence or even the appearance of a loss of editorial independence. In fact, I’ll even go so far as to say I don’t even think that you’re in any way GM’s “bitch.” If I take your argument to the infinitely regressive end point, wouldn’t it be advocation of no advertising by automakers whatsoever? And if that’s the case, isn’t this an example of the pot calling the kettle, you know, something?
And btw, here’s the link to the review:
2009 Acura TSX, Reviewed
Good pt. Ray!
Fair is fair!
I truly like the idea of disclosure and transparency.
However, we do not live in an ideal world. In fact, I’d venture to say damn near EVERYTHING is “brought to you by” someone/some group who has a political agenda and/or other ulterior motives.
One thing on everyone’s mind (anyone who watches tv) is the election. Who’se (sp?) it gonna be…Hitlary, Obama, or McCain (and Abel)?? We in America believe we really DO have a Democracy.
If you scroll down the webpage about half way there is a very good ebook. I highly recommend reading it. You will TRULY be amazed..and I don’t say this lightly. You can print it out at work and read a few chapters a night.
http://blackboxvoting.org/
What you’ll learn is that “This Election is Brought to You by”…name your favorite e-Voting company (Diebold, etc). Yes, it’s true…and the president of the company even stated as much when he said he’d “Hand the election over to” such and such candidatem
So, in the name of truth, your supposedly free society is “Brought To you By”…
Let’s not forget Television (all of it, including the news), magazines, Hollywood Movies, and in fact…we even have an entire CITY “Brought to you by”…Disney of all companies. It’s in Florida:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celebration,_Florida
Oh, and your child’s education? That too is brought to you by someone/something …corporate and/or government interests with their idea of what your child should be trained to do.
When they (school districts, the government, etc.) give your child an “assessment” (no longer “testing”)…they mean the true legal definition:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assessed
The idea is control…from birth to grave.
You should not be surprised at this one iota.
Outraged? Yes…that is a healthy sign that you are alive and awake :)
I’d venture to say the whole idea of “against-the-grain, non-mainstream-news/websites” is ALSO “brought to you by”…
There is very LITTLE non-corrupt sources of news. That’s why the few which exist are highly regarded and respected.
Man, was Ray just sitting there reloading TTAC over and over again waiting for this? He got a comment in quite early.
However, was that comment also presented by the Acura TSX? Just wondering.
Looking at the Jalopnik site, it’s a bit too much. There’s a “presented by Acura TSX” right next to Jalopnik’s main graphic, a square ad right at the top next to the title, and a vertical banner ad down the side.
Any one of those is fine, even two might be tolerable if it were temporary, but all 3? I refreshed the site several times to make sure that it wasn’t by chance.
Still, this is nothing compared to what some video game websites have had recently. To those who don’t know, some games basically paid some prominent game review sites to completely re-skin the entire site (including a huge, loud background) for a while. That was way too blatant for me. This is nowhere near that, but it’s good to be held accountable.
What exactly is the difference between “presented by” and “sponsored by” ?
Any idea if this is fallout from the obviously massive amount of readers that religiously follow Jonny Lieberman around?
RayWert Thank you for posting on TTAC. You can be assured that you can do so at any time without an enormous picture of a douche or a man with his head up his ass (see: comments section underneath the post about our encounter with Bob Lutz) or any other type of flaming by any of the people replying to your comment. That any such personal degradation will be removed, its originator warned and then, if they persistent, permanently banned. A courtesy you did not extend to me despite my personal request. Ahem. There is a line we must all draw. Accepting ads is one thing. Allowing the entire site to be “presented by” a manufacturer is another. I would also point out that your review was tepid; hardly a shot across Acura’s bow. Not the kind of thing likely to stir an advertiser's ire. But fair enough. Let's assume it's your honest take on the car. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. IF Jalopnik publishes a more "bracing" review of an Acura/Honda, or posts a Honda/Acura critical blog item, THEN we shall see. In fact, I'll be sure to email you a link should TTAC publish any such material, to see if you post a link to it. (And no, that's not a cynical ploy to boost TTAC's traffic.) Speaking to that point, it may be helpful for our readers to know that your Acura review was written before the sponsorship– sorry, “presentation” deal went down.
There’s a very large body of evidence which demonstrates the ENTIRE “Green” movement (with its Cataclysmic Global Warming scare) is brought to you by the financial powers who are playing these earth-friendly, Birkenstock-wearing, African-color-nit-stalking-cap-wearing hippies like a fiddle.
Trust me…
And you can guess who this “War on Terrorism” was brought to you by…assuming you are willing to pull your head from one of those dark holes.
To Ray Wert:
I will vouch for the impressively civil nature of the discourse on this website. I think it makes the discussion about cars much more interesting, because people who have vastly different opinions on issues such as global climate disruption, when forced to avoid getting into flame wars over these issues, put their energy into interesting discussions. It makes the site a hell of a lot more enjoyable for those of us who aren’t interested in taking anger out on those we disagree with.
Re the Prius news: I don’t remember the details of the new CAFE rules, but could it be they are trying to keep the fuel economy from going up so much that it reduces their ability to produce guzzlers under the new regs? They do, after all, have some very thirsty trucks. I agree w/ Mr. Berkowitz that branding-wise, and reputation-wise, it’s a dumb move to up the size, instead of just going for a big jump in economy.
Hey Wert, anybody, if you’re listening, who is that lollipop sucker at the top? Is he anybody who’s important, or is he just a model or somebody? I’m just wondering.
Robert:
Although I’m all for entertaining reviews, I don’t like to expand reviews beyond reality for the entertainment’s sake. I understand if others want to do so, but that’s just not how Jalopnik rolls. Thus, I draw fallacy with any argument that requires a “bracing” review where one doesn’t exist as some sort of test of purity of heart. That wouldn’t be the truth — that would merely be playing to an entertaining punchline.
That being said, the TSX is a rather tepid car. Thus the rather tepid review. If the TSX was a steaming pile of horse manure, I know you’d trust that I’d say just that. But it isn’t — it’s just a bland and uninspiring car. And that was what was said in the review. I know it’s not “bracing” but it’s certainly critical. I mean, I wish I were as talented a writer as Dan Neil — a writer with the ability to create masterful entertainment from epic blahness (all while still maintaining the integrity of the information he wishes to present), but I can’t. I can only tell the truth about the car I’m reviewing, because if I expand beyond that for purposes of sheer entertainment, I run the risk of doing exactly that which I despise — telling falsehoods. So my reviews (not my talented writers who work for the site — they actually can write compelling and entertaining reviews) may be tepid at times, but they’re honest and truthful. Given the nature and name of this site, I’m sure your readers can respect that.
Also, for what it’s worth, I don’t know when we signed a deal with Acura for advertising — so I don’t know whether my review came before or after that. Our advertising team doesn’t talk to us about such things. As I told you over the phone, I found out about the Acura ads when I saw them live on the site this morning.
[For those who don’t know — as it wasn’t included in Robert’s original post — Gawker’s network of sites have a dedicated ad sales team independent of the editorial side of the company. I and my staff know about advertising when our readers do — when we see it live on the site. In fact, because I have ads turned off with Firefox, I usually don’t even see them then. In this case, I did notice the “Presented by Acura TSX” bug near the site’s logo this morning.
I don’t know how TTAC does it — but my guess (and hope) is that it’s done similarly — with editorial separate from ad sales.]
seoultrain:
I’m very glad we’re always being held accountable at such high standards — it’s what sets Jalopnik apart from the rest of the crowd. Much like TTAC.
Samir:
To be clear — although I think Robert was clear in his original post above — I made the statement of “sponsored by” vs. “presented by” to Robert as a means of pointing out the verbiage he claimed our site was using was incorrect, and that the two words do have slightly different meaning. It was not a means of refutation of his argument and I don’t think he claims as much in his original post.
Secondly, although we miss Jonny, we’re glad to see he’s re-found a home here where we all can continue to enjoy his particular brand of wit and personality. I don’t know what you mean by a “fallout” of the “obviously massive amount of readers that religiously follow Jonny Lieberman around.” But, feel free to take a look at our writer-by-writer stats yourself at the link below and let us know if you’re able to glean anything from them:
Jalopnik Stats Page (Scroll all the way over to the right to see month-by-month)
beetlebug:
I first saw the post when a TTAC staffperson IM’ed me a link to it — and e-mailed it to me — and texted me with it. I’m assuming he sent it to me fairly shortly after it went live.
All:
I enjoy the vigorous and entertaining debate over here at TTAC, which is one of the reasons it’s on my feed list. I also appreciate your concerns. As all of our readers know, they can e-mail me to ask me questions at any time. I’d hope all of you would feel free to do the same. My e-mail is ray@jalopnik.com, drop me a line if you want to chat more on this topic (although I fear the horse may be soundly beaten at the moment) or even if you just have a question or tip for me or the site.
Thanks again,
Ray
And so, these are the Days of Our Lives.
…As performed by Elvis Presley himself:
Memories, pressed between the pages of my mind
Memories, sweetened through the ages just like wine
Quiet thoughts come floating down
And settle softly to the ground
Like golden autumn leaves around my feet
I touched them and they burst apart with sweet memories,
Sweet memories
Of holding hands and red bouquets
And twilights trimmed in purple haze
And laughing eyes and simple ways
And quiet nights and gentle days with you
Memories, pressed between the pages of my mind
Memories, sweetened through the ages just like wine,
Memories, memories,
Of holding hands and red bouquets
And twilights trimmed in purple haze
And laughing eyes and simple ways
And quiet nights and gentle days with you
Memories, pressed between the pages of my mind
Memories, sweetened through the ages just like wine
Memories, memories, sweet memories, memories…
Religiously?
And none of you jerks are tithing? Tsk tsk.
I will say one thing however — when I was at Jalopnik, the site was presented by Subaru. We never received a single instruction from anyone at Jalopnik (or Gawker) to do anything different whatsoever because of Subaru’s Sponsorship. In fact, lots of emails and IMs flew back and forth which were concerned with making fun of the ad.
Seriously, nothing happened at all. And believe me, I’d tell you.
So, Herr Wert has a point about ads being separate from editorial. They just try and sell whatever they can.
And thanks for the backhanded compliment, Ray.
Yeah, I think I also saw some BMW M3 ads before that on Jalopnik, and at that time there were many, many Down on the Street BMWs featured…
Did BMW force Jalopnik to promote 1602s I wonder…
Anyway,
I, too, was going to buy a PS3 solely for Gran Turismo 5 Prologue (and GTA IV)…but then I read the prologue version is not quite worth it. Apparently there are only 6 tracks. Also, there is no car damage yet, although some say you will be able to update the game later on when the real GT5 launches to feature car damaging, but that isn’t sure.
Meanwhile, I hear good things about ‘Race Driver: Grid’, so I think I’ll wait for GT5 “the real deal” and play that game instead in the meantime.
Still hating the fact that Europeans are getting ripped off by Sony when they buy a PS3 though.
So, Herr Wert has a point about ads being separate from editorial. They just try and sell whatever they can.
This inside baseball stuff aside, the TSX presence at Jalopnik was [sic] way over the top. It wasn’t in Gawker’s best interests or Acura’s best interests. I don’t recall prior ad campaigns being so pervasively embedded in the home page. I have little doubt that the Jalops felt the same way. From this outsider’s perspective it came across as a Gawker golden shower from on high.
There should be some communication between advertising and editorial. For example, you may have noticed some offensive “How good a kisser are you?” type advertising on TTAC over the last few days. They have been removed.
To quote that great philosopher and leader Rodney King, ” Can’t we all just get along?”
Either I’m doing something right or wrong (you determine), but I’m not seeing the adverts on either site. *shrugs*
Not that I’m complaining – the sites certainly aren’t free and a little funding can go a long way.
Robert,
I am a pretty good kisser…
Ewwwww
Boo squabbling.
Yay kissing!