« Previous Story | The Industry Report Home Page | Next Story »

Journalists And 'Freebies' - C'mon, Get A Grip

By Craig Altschul
September 18, 2006

The "journalist" calls. "I'm doing a story for the magazine about a family ski vacation. I want to bring my family to your resort Dec. 25-30 when the kids are out of school. There are five of us." You gulp when you hear the name of the magazine.

It's like the lady and the tiger. Behind Door One is the "yes" answer. You'll need to be prepared to explain away to "the boss" why you gave away the nicest slopeside condo, five daily lift passes, lessons, childcare, and equipment , and oh yes, a dinner at Le Gourmet during the holiday week."

Or, behind Door Two: "We're sorry, but we don't offer complimentary visits." Ah, well, there goes that publicity.

It's a debate that's gone on - to that extreme or less - as long as there have been ski and travel writers. We recently wrote about the new realities of providing lawmakers with complimentary visits to resorts. The same rules might apply here.

"I suppose we all have our price," veteran freelance ski and travel journalist and author Claire Walter told The Industry Report. "But, I'd like to think my price is a lot higher than a lift pass, hotel room, or airline ticket." Walter has long been active in groups dealing with journalists' rights and ethics.

She points out there really is a dichotomy among both publications and journalists, including a good dose of hypocrisy.

"There are really three types of publications. The first doesn't care if their writers take complimentary offerings - don't ask, don't tell. Then there are those like Skiing Magazine used to be when I worked for them. Their rule was 'no begging.' They would gladly pay for whatever wasn't graciously offered. Then, there are publications like the major travel magazines such as Travel & Leisure,Town & Country, Gourmet, and others who simply pay writers' costs and there are no questions asked," she said.

Some publications, such as The New York Times carry the issue to extremes, Walters says. "Not only can their writers not accept comps, they must never have accepted comps." Are there NYT writers who have accepted comps? "Of course, but they won't admit it." The hypocrisy.

There is another side to the issue. "Let's say I get an assignment to cover a story in India, where it's likely to cost me $2,000. The fee for the story is only going to be $500. It's ridiculous to assume I'll do the story," she said.

Walter says "most of us try to be objective. If a place is horrible, who wants to read about it anyway? If a place is very good, we are still obligated to use caveats if they apply. If the base lodge needs more bathrooms, it needs more bathrooms. If the lodge has a loud bar in the lobby you can hear in the guest rooms, we should point that out."

Finally, she notes that if she visits a mountain resort, whether complimentary services are offered or not, she is there to do "her story," not necessarily the story resort management or the Marketing Department wants her to write.

The mountain resort world has its own challenges. Walters and others are quick to note there are those who write simply to obtain free lift tickets for their families or buddies and join writers' groups for low-cost winter vacations.

Paul Robbins, long time journalist and "pro's pro," concurs. "Some of today's professional PR people in the travel business are smart enough to take a close look at every request and then base their decision case by case. You simply have to be professional today in this business and understand how it all works."

The Industry Report took a look at the subject in April 2005. Phil Johnson, still president of the North American Snowsports Journalists Association (NASJA), said at the time, his organization's official policy is "that it is okay to accept hospitality so long as it is not offered in return for, or is a condition of, favorable coverage." He added there is a "symbiotic relationship between the industry and the media that covers it." That would be debatable.

USA Today's Gene Sloan told us, also at the time, "My sense is no matter what destinations say, they do expect a positive story when they are paying to bring journalists in to the destination."

Crossing the line now between journalism and blogging (another dilemma for journalists), my own opinion as someone who has toiled on both sides of the fence in mountain resort front offices and as an editor/writer, is there is too much fuzzy thinking on the subject. The consumer deserves better. For every solid pro like Claire Walter or Paul Robbins, there are a dozen abusers of the privilege.

The winter sports industry would do well, I believe, to do what the travel industry has done for years for writers whose publications are concerned with the "comp issue." Simply offer a pro rate. But, no more comps. Period. Use your group rate (that is low enough for a guideline) and make it apply for lift tickets, equipment rentals, lessons, and even resort-owned lodging. Let outside lodging properties, airlines, and restaurants do whatever they please, but make your own policy widely known.

Will you lose the freeloaders? Probably. Do you care? Probably not. Tell us what you think.

« Previous Story | The Industry Report Home Page | Next Story »

Email To A Friend

Comments

Craig - your points are well made. You are correct, professionals like Claire and Paul are pleasures to work with, and few in number. We've had the opportunity to work with Claire and her resulting article was honest and truthful. My only comment to ski resorts is to work closely with their local community CVBs or chambers. We represented the community when hosting ski/travel writers but worked very closely with our local ski area. We had a budget to host lodging and meals, so the cost to the mountain was only a lift ticket and perhaps an on-mountain meal. By working together, we were able to share the responsibility and both the community and the area benefited. We also put strict policys in place regarding peak periods - no comps during that time. We carefully screened writers, asking for samples of published articles, etc. The best writers offered those in advance of their request. It is a fine line we walk as public relations professionals and media hosts! Thanks for the article...nice to hear we're not alone in trying juggle issues like this!

Posted by: Laura Doth | September 18, 2006 09:44 AM

	Until publishers of vertical interest magazines raise their editorial rates (and adjust expense accounts to reflect the real costs of travelling and skiing), freelance writers will continue to depend on industry support to do their jobs. Given the nosedive in advertising income among most of these publications, the chance of that happening anytime soon is highly unlikely...
	Posted by: Michel Beaudry Michel Beaudry Communications | September 18, 2006 09:44 AM

	As always, Craig has hit the mark. The industry needs to adopt a press rate policy that is across the board and stop dispensing comps. The media must discard the hypocracy and pay for its content. Freelancers and journalists should refuse to accept assignments that are below a reasonable working wage.
	Posted by: Bill Clapper WJClapper & Associate | September 18, 2006 10:36 AM

As a relatively new entrant in the catskiing industry, I look at comps as a pretty cheap way of getting our name out there. It is important to ask whether they've already sold their story idea, or if they are just coming out in the hopes of writing a story and selling it afterwards. If they don't have a website showing their previous work, or otherwise market themselves professionally, I don't take them too seriously. If I have standby spaces, I'll take as many journos as I can get. But you, Michel, may come anytime.

Posted by: Paula Gaul | September 18, 2006 10:54 AM

As the former editor-in-chief of Powder Magzaine and now a member of the marketing department at Aspen/Snowmass, I have a very close and intimate knowledge of both sides of this coin. The fact is, from an editorial standpoint, we quite often did not have the funds to do the bulk of the stories without the tremendous discounts and/or 'freebies' offered by resorts. The short answer to this conundrum is that we simply couldn't do our jobs effectively or accurately without resorts, hotels and restaurants offering comps. Now from the resort side, I think it is our responsibility to work on a case-by-case basis, as suggested in the article. We help out when we can, in instances where a valuable member of the media cannot do the job without our assistance. All this aside, understanding that the media has an objective job to do is imperative and never demanding or expecting favorable press is paramount to this aim. The onus falls on us as a business and a community to set and meet guest expectations that will deliver favorable accolades by visiting media.

Posted by: Steve Metcalf | September 18, 2006 11:23 AM

Perhaps there's another way to look at this issue. Given the slough of desk-bound ski stories these days (I call it list-making journalism) that do very little to get the reader's hearts pumping, shouldn't we consider those writers and photographers who actually do their stories "in the field" as our industry's version of "embedded journalists?" Which begs the next question: when "serious" journalists are embedded with the US army, do they pay their own expenses?

Posted by: Michel Beaudry | September 18, 2006 12:12 PM

perhaps your solution would weed out freeloaders but it would also weed out freelancers- the ones that have the potential to reach hometowns, those beyond ski magazine subscribers. Those journalists are just as legit as your NY mag staffers but instead of making six figures, they're lucky to make five. They write this way and live modestly because they prefer to live outside of large cities and corporate mentalities. They prefer to meet deadlines while wearing pjs or holding their son after he stubs a toe in the middle of the day. The clothes they wear and the location of the computer doesn't make these writers any less professional or capable of telling travel stories. Can they afford a 'group rate' or media rate? Using Walters' example- making $500 to spend even $1000 on that $2000 India trip just doesn't cut it. There are still bills to pay, and food to eat and printer ink to replace. Let the PR dept. decide an article's (and writer's) worth instead of trying to standardize some media policy- the way it's commonly done now. There's nothing wrong with facilitating a visit that would not occur without the comp. And while we're on the subject, how is this any different from editors 'massaging' content based on their advertisers interests? At least writers have their integrity to protect. Mags will run all sorts of puffery just to lure and maintain advertisers. Now THERE'S the hypocrisy!

Posted by: peter | September 18, 2006 12:55 PM

Perhaps there's another way to look at this issue. Given the slough of desk-bound ski stories these days (I call it list-making journalism) that do very little to get the reader's hearts pumping, shouldn't we consider those writers and photographers who actually do their stories "in the field" as our industry's version of "embedded journalists?" Which begs the next question: when "serious" journalists are embedded with the US army, do they pay their own expenses?

Posted by: Michel Beaudry | September 18, 2006 01:19 PM

Have enjoyed reading about this issue, lots of good points. In a perfect world the issue would be easy to settle?. no comps! Everyone treated the same and play by the same rules. Those of us on the PR side must walk the fence with reality. There are some absolutes like no comp lodging during peak periods, period. Several of the participants in this dialogue have articulated why there are no set rules. On the PR side, the professionals in our field only want the media to respect what we do for them and don't abuse privileges. Both sides have a job to do. It is our job to help whoever is interested in our resorts to do theirs. True professionals on either side understand that the truth and factual information is what is key to a successful story (and future stories) even if it isn't exactly what you want to have said about your company.

Posted by: Chip Carey | September 18, 2006 03:30 PM

As a professional freelance journalist for last ten years, I must say that it's extremely unethical and unprofessional to pander for freebies. "Journalists" that do so should be politely sidestepped, no exceptions. They have lost their objectivity, creative conflict resolution abilities and did I mention objectivity? Are they writers or prostitutes? Quid pro quo? Ink for snow? Screw that. The reason I subscribed to this list was to keep abreast of industry trends, since I'm very, very new to the area. If I see something that I want to cover (something new and different), I will approach my editor at the Colorado Springs Independent about it. If he's interested, we'll discuss budgetary constraints. If the budget falls short, I reassess: how much does this story drive me? Does it really light a fire under my ass? If so, then I'll work around a short budget. I'll push the trip to the ski resort back until I can afford to multi-task it with a camping trip for the family or another story, etc. If time doesn't permit that, then I'll do the story over the phone, web and if necessary (often the case with larger publications), with the help of a stringer. This is the way it's supposed to be. If the ski resorts want to pay for positive inkslinging, they can get a saavy PR guru and some smart media buys. It's a better investment than a condo for a family during high holy week (and why should the family tag along, anyway? This is WORK). Forget the amateur and unethical hacks! Stick to your guns. Limit the comps.

Posted by: Ashley Boudreaux | September 18, 2006 04:12 PM

(Editor's Note: PR pro Pat Peeples was on vavaction when Craig requested her take on the subject. Her response just caught up to us: Here it is:) I think PR pros should always respect the policies of the news organization or freelancer. In the hospitality and leisure industries, it’s important to honor the comfort level and what is acceptable to the customs of the guest. I’ve always been of the belief that comps don’t buy favor but rather allow access for unbridled research and the ability to experience for oneself—and write or report honestly of that experience. Comps are still used, on a case by case basis…and mainly for freelancers. Many news organizations don’t allow them. SATW sets policies. Individual news outlets set policies. We, as PR professionals are good if we both know and honor those policies and don’t create a sense of discomfort nor expectation in doing so or not doing so. Media rates and guest rates are now becoming more the norm than not. Three day ski ticket limits of access are becoming the trend. I’ve always subscribed to the notion that, in PR, and in news coverage, “you don’t keep score.” You don’t punish for what management and ownership may perceive as “negative” coverage and you don’t have expectations for glowing coverage all of the time. Journalists report. PR practitioners facilitate their reporting. Relationships are key. Having a reservoir of good will is key. Both of those come over time, with experience and with mutual respect for each other’s ultimate goals of getting a compelling story (on the part of the journalist;) and telling the audience what to expect in the guest experience (on the part of the resort.)

Posted by: Pat Peeples Peeples Ink | September 20, 2006 01:18 PM

Some interesting comments, here. Craig goes a bit far, to be quite honest - I don't think ANY resort would abandon a 'freebie' program. I've done PR work with two resorts here in BC and frankly, we don't really get 'hit up' very much at all; and people are pretty easy to screen. It's the PR manager's job to be on top of these things, and figure out whether hosting the writer is in the resort's interest or not. We've hosted writers who are A or B list, who aren't necessarily on assignment, but whom we know are 'players' in the industry. Any resort would be crazy not to do that. When even A-List newspapers are paying, what, $500 for a feature if you're lucky? - and the writer is signing away all resale rights to whatever chain the paper might belong to, it's pretty easy to sympathize with the writer. It's a very tough business - we don't ask for guarantees, but we keep our eyes open. From what I've seen in the broader travel field, the problem many CVBs and resorts have is actually attracting decent writers to resorts to deliver a story. Michel is absolutely correct 'laundry list' journalism (thank you, USA Today - who pioneered this trend) is rampant. Compelling travel stories are few and far between; that's been the reality for at least a decade now and it won't likely change anytime soon. And once writers are there, my policy is that it's like a sportswriter or theater critic covering an event - you can show and suggest ideas to a writer, but it will always be 'their story.'

Posted by: Steven Threndyle | September 21, 2006 10:46 PM

I'm flattered by some of the kind comments about my efforts to shoot straight. Beyond that, there are different levels of ski-resort hospitality when it comes to comps, freebies and media rates. It's no big deal to any mountain company to be generous to the press with lift tickets. The lifts are running anyway. Accommodations and airline tickets are a whole other matter. I believe that the paying guest comes first. It is not good business to comp a room or condo, or upgrade a press person to first class, in place of a real customer. And my travel/ski writing colleagues who make unreasonable requests taint us all. Hospitality that is offered is one thing; demands for hospitality are quite another.

Posted by: Claire Walter | September 26, 2006 05:55 AM

Let's give credit as to the source of the problem where it's due: the bizarre notion held many media outlets about the propriety of accepting comps. These holier-than-thou policies are nonsense. US media outlets should simply adopt the methods the Brits use: a credit box. Even the Times of London takes comps for its journos - they simply make it clear who paid for the goodies in a small sidebar. The reader can make up his/her own mind as to whether that colored the coverage - but of course, it's unlikely to; good editors will NOT allow poor coverage to impact overall circ. As to the idea that a no-comp policy can weed out freeloaders - any ski area that has this issue has PR people who aren't on the ball. Part of the flack's job is vetting writers and ensuring that the expense of hosting them will be a good tradeoff for the ink.

Posted by: Skip King | October 30, 2006 12:57 PM