Posted by Henry on June 01, 2003
In Reply to: Re: Minor aspects of good manners posted by Bob on June 01, 2003
: : : : Hi,
: : : : I don't quite understand the bracketed sentence? Could anyone do me a favor?
: : : :
: : : : Advertisement formed a paet of each newcast and in the case of The Camel News Caravan went even further. The newsreader, John Cameron Swayze, sat at a desk to read the news, a packet of Camel cigarettes and an ashtray strtegically placed beside him. Further sponsorship 'distortions' took many forms, as Barnouw elaborates:
: : : : Introuduced at the request of the sponsor,( they were considered minor aspects of good manners rather than news corruption. )
: : : : Thanks.
: : : These references to the sponsor did not corrupt/distort the news. They were considered to be small breaches of good manners (etiquette).
: : I think it means doing the sponsor a minor favor. It was "good manners" to display the sponsor's product on the news show.
: The separation of those delivering news content from the commercial messages, long observed in print publications (and known as the "Chinese Wall") was late coming to broadcast news. It's less blatant now, but those ethical sins still exist, diguised as "features" about the performers on programs shown on that same network. One notable American "journalist," Paul Harvey, goes from his radio stories to commercial announcements with barely a pause, giving gullible listeners the impression that whatever he's peddling is news. He has great "credibility" with his followers, but one can hope there's a simmering place in the afterlife for his crimes against journalism.
And now we are subject to 'product placement' in films.