Masculinity and Ethics: A Look Into the "Macho Man"

Julia Gogol
jg152015@ohio.edu

The conversation around the ethics of the "macho man" has been on the rise ever since the election of our infamous "grab her by the pussy" president.  Are ethics different for men, and should they be different?  And how does the media's portrayal of men lead us to accept and even encourage these differences?

Wilbert Cooper, senior editor at VICE Media, pointed out during his interview at Ohio University's 90 Minutes series that the black man in particular is in a sort of limbo of ethics.  As a man, he is supposed to be masculine, but as a black person, he is oppressed.  The in between, he said, is where the anger and frustration emanates from.

"[My father] always tried to speak to me like I was a little man," writes Cooper in his article, Dead or in Jail: The Burden of Being a Black Man in America.  "And not because he was on some cheap machismo trip or because he had a taste for the macabre—it was because he legitimately thought if I didn't understand this lesson early on, I might not make it to age 25."

Men of color in particular have a unique take on different ethical questions.  As Cooper said, they are taught from a young age to be masculine and not to show any emotions.  During the interview, he recalled one of his college girlfriends telling him she knew he wasn't mad at her, but that it was the only emotion he ever put out for the world to see.

Men should not, under any circumstance, feel forced to hide their emotions.

Our society has put men on a pedestal where they watched and judged.  Cooper relates the situation today back to slavery.  In plantations, white men were the masters, their wives were property, and the slaves were less than property.  Cooper believes this is the reason why so many black men today feel the need to take over that "master" position and treat their women as property and be the boss.

Take, for example, this image below:

Image courtesy of Patheos

The Ugandan Minister of Ethics literally said rape is okay as long as it is men raping women.  How does this mindset become ingrained and accepted within a society?

Cooper has worked to change this type of mindset in his own life.

With the help of his fiancé and friends, Cooper has worked to achieve and is still working on his mindset that it is okay to cry and show emotion, and it is okay to tell someone you love them.  That isn't weakness — it's strength.

In an article by the National Review, Tallahassee mayor Andrew Gillum talks about how he believes Republicans are using his ethics scandal to "reinforce stereotypes about black men."

Whether that be true or not, I think we can all agree the media plays a huge role in what society believes about any person or group of people.  While we all have our own personal codes of ethics, the rules should be the same for any person of any gender or skin color.  No man, white or black, should treat women like property, and no man, white or black, should be afraid to cry.

Readers Beware

Maureen O'Brien
mb163416@ohio.edu

The world of online journalism is reliant on advertisements and sponsorship, that is assured. However, the integrity of journalistic stories is in peril due to the increasing use of "native advertising," stories or ads that are almost indistinguishable from news stories. Readers need to be wary of where the content they read comes from.

According to ShareThrough, "native advertising is a form of paid media where the ad experience follows the natural form and function of the user experience in which it is placed." Because of the convincing format of these ads, readers may not be able to recognize that what they are reading is actually paid advertising or sponsored content. This lack of transparency goes against what good journalism stands for.

Journalism exists to inform the public about important and newsworthy information. When ads are presented in a way that seems like a news narrative, rather than a push to buy a product, it is a misuse of the trust that readers put in newsroom employees.

According to Word Stream, there are good and bad examples of native advertising. Good examples are ones that have content that users would still find interesting, and fit with the magazine or paper's overall content scene. For example, Vanity Fair teamed with Hennessy to create a written and video piece that fit the brand image they had already created for themselves. The piece is still genuinely interesting to their users, and has a distinguishable "SPONSOR CONTENT" above the title.

Not everyone can display native advertising at this standard. It is imperative that guidelines are set to avoid the blurring of the line between real news stories and paid content. The agenda behind sponsor content needs to be clear to readers from the beginning so that they can have all of the facts to make an educated decision about how to approach the article. When consumers look at an ad that they KNOW is an ad, they have a veil of skepticism. This skepticism isn't present when users don't know they're trying to be sold a promise, so they are more able to be duped.

While online journalism is reliant on paid advertisements and sponsorship, it is also important to remember that the highest quality online media needs to hold is integrity. 

Misleading Ads Allow Accusations of Fake News

Tee Willis
tw532416

Let's be honest: we're all tired of hearing the phrase "fake news." It's everywhere we turn, and as journalists, we can't escape it. Our very own president has infamously accused the people of the press time after time for reporting fake and misleading stories. As sickening as it is to hear, it really makes us stop and think about it. There truly are misleading stories, information and posts coming from all kinds of different sources.

This problem most recently has translated to advertising. We are now at the point where advertisements have become misleading in the way they appear, especially online and in digital journalism. While ads now are typically what keeps a lot of publications going, they have become somewhat damaging in our ability to trust certain sources.

This new journalistic epidemic is what has become known as "native advertising." This new wave of ads are often disguised in the content of a page and is designed to look as if it is a part of the story or news being presented. This new practice slows the progress we've made over time in trying to become more credible journalists. It's hard to seem credible if our readers feel as if they're being misled. The major dilemma here is that readers aren't always being explicitly informed that they are viewing an advertisement and these ads have become hard to distinguish from real news.

Another ethical issue that many are trying to navigate now is branded content. Many brands and companies now sponsor and pay for specific types of content to be put out. This has mostly become a PR strategy for advertisers looking to get their brands out on another platform. PRSA sets up some helpful guidelines to help with these issues It is helpful in a few ways to publications as well. When the news organizations are looking for both stories and people to pay for those stories, they typically turn to this practice of branded content. It's a win-win for the organization, but some people do have criticisms.

image from Netimperative.com

Personally, I don't believe that branded content is unethical if done right. I feel that sponsoring a story or series can sometimes allow readers and viewers an opportunity to experience that brand in a different way or become more familiar with them. And on the positive side for the publication, there comes money from someone who knows you have an influence on the way that people think and consume content. This is especially important when looking at print journalism because the industry is changing so vastly. Many people aren't reading or consuming print in this day and age. This leaves many publications struggling for money and relying on ads to generate revenue. As advertisers begin to sponsor stories and content, it gives the publication a story and the funding to carry it out.

Guideline to Advertising and Branding

Ethan Sands

es700016@ohio.edu


The world has turned digital, and every outlet is trying to find their way into the peoples' hands. There isn't just one way to do it so these platforms strategize and determine the best way to sometimes publish the best content, but in most cases, get the most clicks on their content.

The most recent ways we've seen outlets create and post content that is accessible and interesting to the viewer is through advertising and branding. These two have become extremely intertwined in the media as publishers have used various ways to sneak content into their pieces without being penalized.

Advertising and branding have always been a common theme, but the way that it is being done now can be seen as skeptical or anonymous. This can come off as unethical because of the rules that still must be followed as journalist to retain loyalty and fairness to the reader. Forbes has created a scapegoat for themselves. They have begun to use links or prominent statements that can encourage the reader to understand that it is branded content or native ads, but it is not necessarily clear for the reader.

Branding may have been around for athletes and musicians, but this is a whole different necessity. Branding for advertisements has been brought up the because of the need for editorial content. Though like every new tool in the journalism industry, this comes with ethical dilemmas. There needs to still be a process which journalists follow to ensure that PRSA lists. A key rule that is listed is, "Don’t let it become a substitute for earned media. Just because you post branded content doesn’t mean that you should stop working with the PR community to develop stories that deserve publication." This rule can play a huge role in the amount of branded content the media uses because they don't want to be seen as single-minded.

Overall, these new tools will have an immense impact on the media community and the freedom, creativity and access they can have and will receive because of these options.




Advertising can play a role in the connections that the media makes with other campaigns that they advertise but also it can show the focal interest of the organization. This has been done by media outlets like Nike with their Colin Kaepernick campaign. This not only connected Nike to Colin Kaepernick but to the African American that his movement is affiliated with. This was huge not only for the movement but for the rest of the community because for such a long time there was such a disapproval of what Kaepernick was doing. After this advertisement, it seemed as if the people who were in the shadows, but were in agreement, surfaced. The advertisement did numbers for Nike as well. As many people burned their Nike apparel against their support of Kaepernick, the number seemed to be outweighed by the people in support of Nike for their stance. The Guardian gave a closer insight to the numbers of how well Nike really did after the Kaepernick ad, "According to Edison Trends, a digital commerce research company: 'Nike sales grew 31% from Sunday through Tuesday over Labor Day this year, besting 2017’s comparative 17% increase.'"

The digital era has sprung. These advertisements and branding strategies can put organizations and platforms on to the next level. They have the potential to be more interesting and increasingly influential, but only if these tools are handled correctly by the journalist who use them.

Strengthened Connection

Cassidy Selep
cs743115@ohio.edu

Whenever I tell people that I am a strategic communication major, they always assume that I am in the School of Communication Studies. In reality, I am a student in the E.W. Scripps School of Journalism. I am then bombarded with questions as to why a major focused on public relations is in the journalism school. I sometimes struggle with the answer, but the connection between public relations and journalism is stronger than one might assume. In fact, the connection is only getting stronger.

The emergence of "native advertising" is a factor that strengthens the ties between the two studies. Native advertising is sponsored content on a news organization website that looks and reads as if it is a journalistic article. Native advertising can be seen in various forms.

Ava Sirrah's article on Media Shift highlights the partnership between The New York Times and Samsung to bring their readers the Daily 360. Michael Sebastian's article on Ad Age also highlighted the steps that news organization like The Atlantic and New Yorker have taken to inform their readers that an article is actually an advertisement.

In light of this new addition to the communication world, the American Society of Magazine Editors has released a set of guidelines for organizations to deal with native advertising. These guidelines recommend that native advertising uses a different font and format than the typical journalistic articles. It also recommends that the news organization put a disclaimer at the beginning of the article to alert the reader that it is an advertisement.

Photo courtesy of ASME

The idea of native advertising can be beneficial for both news organization and public relations firms. The news organization will receive revenue, and the public relations firm will receive press for their client. However, both organizations need to be careful. Ann Willets warns organizations about this in her article for the Public Relations Society of America.

News organizations need to be careful not to post too many native advertisements and risk losing their audience. Public relations firms need to be careful to be truthful to the public. It is also important that the reader be active in figuring out whether what they are reading is native advertising or not. The reader, however, should not be a detective; do not make this task difficult for the reader.

The Effect of Native Advertising

Katherine Vermes
kv266915@ohio.edu

Being able to make a clear distinction between news content and advertisements is an aspect of news websites that is becoming more and more difficult to define with the rise of "native advertising." With this fairly new concept, marketing content is made to look like the articles on websites, and often uses vague or misleading wording to make it a challenge for readers to recognize the difference. As explained in this LA Times column from 2016, the main contrast is that "the goal of journalism is to inform and enlighten," but advertising aims "to influence your thinking and behavior," usually for the purpose of selling a product.

But how does this affect the trust that readers place in media organizations? According to Mediashift, this kind of advertising "jeopardizes the editorial independence of newsrooms as journalists become aware of what advertisers want them to discuss." And if this content is influence by an outside company or organization, then news sites need to make the difference between sponsored content and their own more clear, not less.

Blurring the Line Has Become a Trend

The following graph portrays the projected spending on "native advertising" around the world, comparing 2015 spending to that of 2018.

Photo courtesy of statista.com

Why is "native advertising" becoming so popular? One significant reason is the money that comes from it. If advertisers want content to look like news, and will pay more for it, then struggling newsrooms will be much more easily influenced to do so. This means the media companies that are suffering the most financially could be the most influenced, and that is usually smaller, more localized news sources, which also happen to be the more trusted sources of content among audiences.

"Native advertising" can effect how media organizations cover certain brands that sponsor them. If a newsroom is being largely supported by the money of an outside source, this will create a bias when it comes to stories about that brand. And with the fading line between types of content, any potential biases can become hidden to audiences.

Using Labels

Clearly portraying to audiences what is advertising is not always clear on social media websites and apps either. According the the LA Times, Facebook only uses "small gray print to say, ambiguously, 'sponsored,'" while Twitter just says "promoted." I have noticed this in my experience with using Twitter, and have often read this branded content seriously before recognizing the easily-overlooked "label."

Even the most respected organizations have to be careful with this new trend. For example, when The New York Times began, according to NiemanLab, "partnering with Samsung, which gave the Times the equipment to produce" videos for a 360-degree video series. But labeling the two companies as "partners" could also be seen as misleading to readers, especially with Samsung giving the newsroom equipment for a project, promoting itself in the process.

The Audience's Responsibility

Ultimately, readers need to be more careful in how they view the content on news sites in order to avoid being mislead. If audiences can be trained and educated on media literacy, then the trend may begin to slow down. If advertisers do not see the amount of profit coming from "native advertising" that they do now, then they will begin pushing for more lucrative methods of media marketing. Pushing for clearer labels on content could be a start for this, as well.

It's Always About the Money but What About Transparency?

 Murphy Patterson
 mp385915@ohio.edu

We like to think that we know an advertisement when we see one, right? Well, like the great Bob Dylan said, these times they are a-changin'. Whether you call them native ads, branded content or sponsored content, these ads are made to look like editorial content and have readers everywhere thinking they are reading an article written by a journalist. There are many ethical concerns when dealing with this type of advertising, but money seems to be taking attention away from the ethical issues.

People are not paying for online journalism and that is hurting newspapers and sites that rely on subscriptions. This is the main reason for the rise of native advertising. Since the ads look so much like real editorial journalism, people pay attention to them and rarely realize they are reading an advertisement. Readers have begun to turn a blind eye to advertisements and with ad-blocking technology, advertising companies have to find new ways to get their message out to consumers. This has forced them to be creative and find ways to reach readers, and to have readers actually pay attention.

This type of advertising has created an economic boom for the advertising industry. According to the Pew Research Center, native advertising created $4.6 billion in revenue in 2017. When putting up such big numbers of revenue, advertising companies will pay newspapers to run their ads because they know native advertisements are working better than banner ads or other forms of online advertisements.

When talking about advertisements in print media, ethical challenges come up. With native advertisements there are many ethical issues, and the biggest one is transparency. As journalists we should pride ourselves on reporting truth and being transparent. The lines get extremely fuzzy when journalistic publications are allowing ads that readers are unable to distinguish from actual news stories. How is this being transparent? Comedian and host of Last Week Tonight, John Oliver, talks about how advertising and news should be looked at like we look at church and state. We want to keep the two separated for specific reasons. The reason we should keep ads out of our news is so we do remain transparent.

                                          Video Via: Last Week Tonight (HBO)

With major publications, such as the The New York Times and The Los Angeles Times using native advertising, there is risk for readers to become less trustworthy of their sources. Journalists can lose credibility from these ads. As journalists, we should stand up to these ads and demand some sort of guidelines that guarantee readers won't be mislead and will be able to tell what is and advertisement or sponsored content, and what is true editorial content. One thing I believed to be a good rule for native ads, is to have the ads use a different font and style than the main editorial content of the publication. ASME is implementing many guidelines such as this to allow readers to know what is advertising and what is not.

Journalists' credibility has been at risk for a decent period of time and native ads aren't doing us any favors in regaining our credibility. We have to be able to stick to our main values and continue being transparent with our readers. Readers want to be able to trust news sources, but will have trouble doing that when advertisements are being made to look like news stories. We as journalists need to take this more into account and stand up for guidelines to make native advertising more recognizable.