‘Rolling Stone’ Blurs More Lines Between Ads & Editorial Content
One of music and culture’s most iconic publications continues to blur the lines between paid content and objective journalism with the launch of a new program that allows individuals to pay for the opportunity to be published in the periodical. Rolling Stone is now offering what they portray as “thought leaders” the opportunity to write for its website if they are willing to pay a $2,000 fee to “shape the future of culture.”
Not only does this model undermine the traditional journalism model where publications are supposed to pay contributors for their work as opposed to the other way around, it also allows corporate propaganda from industry boosters and publicists to be presented as editorial content, with readers given little warning that what they’re consuming is a glorified ad, often composed by an individual who will directly benefit from the opinion or information being shared.
In emails obtained by The Guardian, individuals who pass a vetting process and pay a $1,500 annual fee plus $500 up front will “have the opportunity to publish original content to the ‘Rolling Stone’ website.” It is part of a program Rolling Stone is calling its Culture Council, which touts itself as an “Exclusive community for visionary leaders on the cutting edge of what’s new in culture.” The site goes on to say,“Being published in one of the best-known entertainment media outlets in the world sets you apart as a visionary, leader, and bold voice in your industry.”
We’ve already seen Rolling Stone‘s “Culture Council” in action. One article was written by a PR executive name Rosie Mattio, who promotes the cannabis industry. She published a set of positive predictions for the future of the cannabis industry in the publication. Another piece called The Future of Entertainment: How Sports Betting Will Change the Game was written Dan Healey, who is the founder of an online sports betting community. In other words, these are individuals with personal self-interests writing articles being passed off as objective takes on the industries they’re invested in.
A spokesperson for Rolling Stone‘s parent company Penske Media told The Guardian, “‘Rolling Stone’ does not allow paid content to run as editorial in any context whatsoever. Content created by Culture Council members exists in its own channel separate from editorial content and is clearly labelled as originating from a non-editorial, fee-based member network, which allows industry professionals to share ideas in a paid forum.”
However, readers have to click through or hover over a small notice at the top of such articles that explains they are part of Rolling Stone‘s Culture Council brand. Unless you interact with the notice, there is no specific notification the article is paid content. Furthermore, if readers simply click on a link from social media, they may not know they’ve navigated to the Culture Council portion of the website.
So far, Rolling Stone‘s Culture Council portal has published 36 total articles, with some being panel discussions among multiple experts. Quite a few of the articles surround the cannabis industry. So far, most of the articles dealing with music are focused around venues and the pandemic. For example, one article titled 4 Ways Venue Owners Can Connect with Audiences During the Pandemic is written by Gideon Kimbrell, who is the Co-Founder/Co-Chairman and lead technologist of InList, which is a concierge service for making event reservations.
The model Rolling Stone has adopted is similar to one used by Forbes as well. In fact, some of the members of Rolling Stone‘s Culture Council have been featured in Forbes too, including Gideon Kimbrell. By using the trusted brands of legacy periodicals, individuals in industries can bolster their own brands and standing within that industry, for a price.
Journalism professor Jeff Jarvis at the City University in New York said of the recent development, “I speculated recently that we might reach the point where one pays to write, not to read. I wrote about the fall of Forbes in 2014. It sold off a dying brand’s value to advertisers, making their ads look like content (they called it ‘brand voice’) and scaling content with ‘contributors’ (some OK, many crap). There goes ‘Rolling Stone.'”
Rolling Stone’s co-founder Jann Wenner sold a controlling stake in the company in 2017 to Penske Media, and then sold the rest of his ownership stake in 2019.
But Rolling Stone‘s Culture Council isn’t the only aggressive move the outlet has made into blurring the lines between paid and editorial content.
On October 2nd, 2018 Rolling Stone Country posted an article promoted on social media sites as, “Margo Price on her favorite pickup truck, getting pulled over and how she wrecked her first car,” with a picture of the artist sitting in the bed of a new truck beside a dog, and holding a chicken. On the surface it looked like a run-of-the-mill lifestyle feature on Mrs. Price, enticing readers to click and read more. But when you clicked, what populated was “Road Test: Margo Price Steers a Ford F-150.” As you read through the article, it became evident this wasn’t just a feature on Margo Price, it was an advertisement for the Ford F-150, at least in part.
On this late July evening in Nashville, the country singer is climbing behind the wheel of a 2018 Ford F-150. She grins when she fires up the diesel engine. This F-150 is the tricked-out King Ranch edition — air-conditioned seats that massage your ass as you drive; a cab that could fit a small band; leather trim — and Price wants to go for a joyride.
As the article continues, it mentions the Ford F-150’s Bang and Olufsen stereo system, and its 3,200-lb. towing capacity—things that would normally not be included in a lifestyle article, calling into question if this was a piece of independent journalism, or what is often referred to in the publishing industry as a “native ad,” meaning an ad for a consumer product or service that is made to look like an article as opposed to a standalone advertisement. The term “native” comes from how the ad is made to look similar to the other content native on the media platform, hoping to inhibit the consumer’s recognition of the content as advertising, and making them more receptive to engaging with the ad copy.
Native ads are not uncommon on the internet and in print publications, even from major publishers, though they remain controversial both in the publishing industry, and among consumers. With ad revenue dwindling and competition increasing, outlets across the publishing spectrum have been forced to get creative with advertising to compensate. But guidelines from the Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, expressly state that such content must be disclosed to the public if there is a possibility that readers may be mislead about the nature of it, which Rolling Stone did not do in this case.
Even if the native ad includes other information not directly tied to what it is being advertised, disclosure is still required. The regulations were put in place when print media began adopting native ads, and consumers were being increasingly mislead into thinking they were reading objective articles as opposed to advertising content.
In the case of Rolling Stone, consumers weren’t just possibly misled once, they were misled four times. Along with the Margo Price feature, Rolling Stone also published articles with Quavo from the band Migos test driving a 2019 Mercedes G-Wagon, Taylor Goldsmith of the band Dawes driving a Volvo XC60, and Luke Spiller of The Struts riding around in a Rolls-Royce Phantom. Similar to the Margo Price feature, each article is peppered with promotional copy and bullet points for the vehicles, while to the average consumer, it may just look like a feature on the artist.
As the FTC guidelines clearly state, “Disclosures that are necessary to avoid misleading consumers must be presented clearly and prominently. Whether a disclosure of a native ad’s commercial nature meets this standard will be measured by its performance – that is, do consumers recognize the native ad as an ad? Only disclosures that consumers notice, process, and understand can be effective. Inadequate disclosures can’t change the net impression created and won’t stop consumers from being deceived that advertising or promotional messages are something other than ads.”
Saving Country Music spoke to representatives at the FTC specifically about the Rolling Stone posts, and though the agency doesn’t speak publicly on specific cases, they verified the concern for the Rolling Stone ads/articles.
“Even if a significant minority of their readers would not know that it was advertising, they need to be disclosing that, and making that clear,” a FTC representative told Saving Country Music. “If they are disguising advertising as content in the guise of a portrait or profile of on a particular musical personality, then that would be deceptive and violate our guidelines.”
It’s the fact these posts from Rolling Stone with advertising copy were totally undisclosed, and written in such a surreptitious manner that makes them a potential violation of ethical standards in journalism, and of FTC rules.
Saving Country Music reached out to Rolling Stone for comment and clarity on if any money had been exchanged between the auto manufacturers highlighted in the articles, and the publication or artists featured. Rolling Stone did not respond. Perhaps the periodical was trying to probe how far they can go into the native ad territory by stretching the tenets of the FTC’s rules.
Regardless, the ultimate goal of the articles was not just to highlight music artists, but brand new vehicles for sale, and not in an objective manner such as a review a magazine such as Car and Driver might post about a new model vehicle. Even if the outcome is amicable for the outlet, artist, and auto maker involved, and even if money didn’t change hands, the practice is a further blurring of the lines between objective journalism and obvious advertisement that works towards eroding the integrity of the entire publishing industry.
Meanwhile Rolling Stone is also moving forward with disclosed paid advertisement as well, and using music artists and celebrities to entice readers to interact with the content. On February 4th, Rolling Stone published an article titled, “Shooter Jennings on the Bold Journey That Took Him To L.A.” Though the article and accompanying video does convey the story of Shooter’s California move, it is heavily branded for Can-Am. Though this is a more common use of conjoining lifestyle content with advertisement, it signals that Rolling Stone is looking to exploit all fronts from branded content and additional revenue, even as the outlet partners with once rival Billboard, and erects paywalls around most of its articles.
Rolling Stone is also posting many more articles whose primary purpose is to advertise products, and to entice readers to click on links where the periodical earns a percentage for every item sold, and a user’s personal cookie data can be collected by sellers. An article posted on February 3rd titled “Tom Brady’s Health and Wellness Brand Scoring with Fans As Super Bowl Approaches” is little else than a list of recommended fitness products. It is preceded by the disclaimer, “Products featured are independently selected by our editorial team and we may earn a commission from purchases made from our links; the retailer may also receive certain auditable data for accounting purposes.”
As legacy periodicals such as Rolling Stone face depreciating brands and business models, it presents a challenge for editorial teams and sales staff to keep the business profitable. Branded content and paid advertisement is essential for many publishing business to stay afloat. But a name once tied closely to progressive values, an independent approach to journalism and music, and transparency in media is continually graying the line between what is an ad, and what is an article. It does not bode well for one of the recognizable brand’s in music journalism, or consumers as they try to delineate objective journalism from a paid advertisement.
February 15, 2021 @ 9:26 am
So now people can pay to falsely accuse college students of rape?
The Rolling Stone really knows how to hit every bump in the road.
February 15, 2021 @ 10:52 am
You know an organization or publication is a sham when you have to pay them to work or volunteer for them. When writing for Rolling Stone has the say “pay to play” criteria as your Facebook friend from high school’s MLM scheme, you might as well toss RS to the vulture capitalists already.
February 16, 2021 @ 1:50 pm
They devolved into social justice nonsense soon after the Bush years ended…
When they put that Boston bomber kid on the cover I never read them again.
February 19, 2021 @ 2:09 pm
The fact that this is the first comment on this article is peak Saving Country Music comment section.
February 15, 2021 @ 9:56 am
This move is the definition of flailing to stay afloat, however I don’t think most consumers in 2021 care about “delineating objective journalism from a paid advertisement.”
February 15, 2021 @ 10:07 am
“I’ll tell you what the public likes more than anything, it’s the most rare commodity in the world – honesty.”
— Merle Haggard
Reading most of what’s on line that’s music-related just feels fake or feels like it has a hidden agenda. As a reader it makes me skip a publication like Rolling Stone because it feels plastic. As a huge fan of the movie “Almost famous”, I dove into old Rolling Stones articles. Those articles from the 70s were fun to read and quite informative.
I think Rolling Stone’s vision took them away from being a true ejective music source. They now have veered so far off course that to keep themself in Business they have to rely on the above-mentioned tactics. I would guess that 50 years from now their material will feel just as plastic.
I don’t always agree with SCM. But what I enjoy about this site is that you offer the most rare commodity in the world. And that you have opened me up to music that I never would’ve checked out if not for your site. My favorite band is Mike and the Moonpies. I would argue that if things were right in the country music world these guys would be selling out Arenas. I’m just blessed and happy to be alive, enjoying their music while in their prime.
February 15, 2021 @ 2:21 pm
Well said, Chris.
February 15, 2021 @ 11:10 am
Back in the dark ages (pre-digital), a publication–newspaper or magazine–was a physical product that you would hold in your hands, and you’d usually be able to get an indication of what was editorial and what was advertising from how and where it was situated. Ads were on their own pages, or occasionally a company would buy a multipage advertising insert in, say, Sports Illustrated, but they would leave a lot of tell-tale signs. (Sometimes it would be on heavier weight paper than the whole mag, or it would even be glued in, and not bound via the staples that went through the spine of the magazine.
Now, publications don’t exist as unified products. Any article that I’ve read in Rolling Stone in recent years has probably been via a link from some other site. Its almost impossible to tell whether this is “editorial” product or advertising or some joint marketing venture.
February 15, 2021 @ 11:55 am
Hah! The irony. RS has now fully embraced capitalism!!
February 15, 2021 @ 12:23 pm
Not sure whether this is serendipity, or karma, for rs, but your comment is hilarious.
: D
February 15, 2021 @ 12:12 pm
Rolling Stone’s still around?
Huh.
Who knew?
February 15, 2021 @ 12:25 pm
What a joke of a publication.
February 15, 2021 @ 12:31 pm
I’d pay Trigger if he would quit censoring my posts on this website.
February 15, 2021 @ 1:25 pm
I’d be somewhat concerned by this if I hadn’t written RS and most “journalism” off years ago.
February 15, 2021 @ 2:19 pm
I will pay you fifty Australian dollarydoos for the opportunity to write a Boomswagglers review
February 15, 2021 @ 3:39 pm
Once again, Trigger’s keepin ‘em honest. Thanks for the insightful article. Country music or not, SCM does excellent coverage on the industry at large. I don’t know any other music site that does this, at least with anywhere near the same detail and integrity. Keep it up!
February 15, 2021 @ 4:10 pm
Margo Price reminds me of the “hippies” I knew in college who drove Land Rover Defenders.
February 15, 2021 @ 7:43 pm
Both of them?
February 16, 2021 @ 2:51 pm
You must have went to the University of Colorado. My favorite facebook communist friend bought a new Range Rover on her dad’s credit card in college. She now crows the propaganda from a Park City mansion bought with help from Mitt Romney before the Olympic announcement, because her dad was a President of Deutsche Bank at the time. No job, but plenty of opinions.
February 15, 2021 @ 7:00 pm
Thanks for pulling back the curtain on this greasy practice, Trig.
My feelings toward RS have been mixed for many years.
It is, after all, the same publication which should now be owned by a fraternity at UVa.
And it’s the same publication whose editors thought that it would be a good idea to put one of the Boston bombers on the cover, because he looked like some hipster you would see at Starbucks.
From my perspective, though, Matt Taibbi is the best journalist on the planet and he has carried RS on his back.
But your revelation of this new highly deceptive practice removes the last scintilla of credibility that the magazine had.
You can put a fork in it now.
February 15, 2021 @ 7:59 pm
There was a time, long, long ago when RS was a moderately good publication (before it turned into a leftist propaganda rag). They even printed excellent essay-length music articles between ads for the latest shit you didn’t want or need. The reviews section was pretty solid, as well. This is another nail in the coffin for the ragazine. It’s not surprising, really: the mainstream news media are paid shills, why not music sites and publications?
February 16, 2021 @ 12:35 pm
Its been a long time since PJ O’Rourke was funny. Sometime in the late-80’s or early 90’s. That was the last time RS was funny.
February 16, 2021 @ 5:18 am
I’ve got some old copies from the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s. Totally different publication during those times. It’s a true shame trees have to die for RS to print these days. Nothing but out-of-touch NYC nonsense in that rag.
February 16, 2021 @ 5:49 am
“We keep getting richer but we can’t get our picture on the cover of the Rolling Stone.”
Apparently that’s no longer the case; just fork over the cash and you’re good to go.
February 16, 2021 @ 6:31 am
This seems like a good time to reiterate my comment from previous articles.
Margo Price sucks.
February 16, 2021 @ 10:48 am
Rolling Stone was once well worth a read as its music coverage was good. Sadly, it is a publication like many others that has lost its way and many readers along the way. It lost me years ago.
February 16, 2021 @ 11:02 am
Everyone is – rightly – mocking Rolling Stone, of course, but I have to say it’s a really sad sign for journalism as a whole that this practice is apparently growing more widespread. Journalism is a very important thing in any free society and it appears that natural, incontrovertible forces are undermining its existence. Rolling Stone debasing itself this much to stay afloat is kind of funny, yes, but it’s also a very worrying sign for the future of the industry. We may be on our way to an era where the only journalism that exists is corporate propaganda.
February 16, 2021 @ 4:38 pm
Look up Andrey Mir’s “postjournalism.” Trigger is actually in a really good position. The rest of the media world is in a complete shambles and is circling wagons into little paywalled fortresses where their entire business model is to preach to little tiny choirs of like-minded angry people.
Hats off to Trig.
February 19, 2021 @ 2:32 pm
Thanks for that recommendation. Ordered the book after reading the lengthy Intercept review.
February 16, 2021 @ 7:37 pm
“We may be on our way to an era where the only journalism that exists is corporate propaganda.”
Hello! We’re already there. Do a quick search (don’t use Google, use DuckDuckGo or something similar) and see who owns 90% of the mainstream media. Real journalism (not your type of journalism Trigger, I’m talking the news) has been dead for many years.
The brainwashed masses are brainwashed for a reason.
February 16, 2021 @ 8:57 pm
Oh lemme guess, the ones who you blame for owning 90% of the media are the same sorts of people a certain Austrian painter from the 1930s didn’t like either, right?
February 17, 2021 @ 4:23 pm
Oh lemme guess, your head is shaped like a dildo and you get your information from the MSN, right?
February 18, 2021 @ 7:28 am
What is it with you and dildos?
February 19, 2021 @ 6:53 am
Rolling Stone is only good for lining bird cages, and starting bonfires in the backyard. it’s not a real publication. hasn’t been for years.