The pendulum has swung too far. The technology used to power “brand safety” was imprecise at best, resulting in a significant injury to the only profession called out in our Constitution for its vital and unique role in our democracy. Let’s hope it’s not irrevocable.
I am compelled to do what I can to right this wrong. Working as chief strategy officer of Ad Fontes Media, I now also have a bully pulpit to advocate for more enlightened thinking around advertising that reaches the best audiences in whatever channel they happen to be—and not cut out the news category because it’s too nuanced or complicated. And the technology exists today to do precisely that while still protecting brands from unsavory associations and cringeworthy adjacencies.
We must rise to the challenge of advertising in quality news, confident that it’s the right thing to do for our employees, our shareholders, our customers and our board members. We must do this in a way that minimizes the risks to our brand reputation, and with the confidence that we can grow our businesses and prove, once again, that doing good can be very good for business.
Marketers who understand their unique role in underwriting quality news journalism should relish this challenge and embrace this hard but essential work. By restoring investments in news, we can help an informed electorate make the best choices they can in our upcoming election and not be left vulnerable to agenda-laden misinformation peddlers that are tearing at the very fabric of our nation.
This is indeed a larger issue than marketing alone cannot solve. Like DE&I and sustainability before it, why shouldn’t supporting quality journalism be the next leaf in marketers’ environmental, social, and governance (ESG) portfolios? The need is obvious; the benefits perhaps more so. ESG brings a different calculus, one that has a societal remit, not incremental profitability.