Almost 50 percent (48.9%) of senior marketing executives reported paying for an editorial or broadcast placement – and almost half of those who haven't said they would, according to the results of the fourth annual PRWeek/Manning Selvage & Lee (MS&L) Marketing Management Survey. The survey, which polled 266 U.S. chief marketing officers, marketing VPs and marketing directors, focused on integrated marketing, the rise of new media and industry ethics.

According to the survey, 24 percent of senior marketing executives said their companies had paid for an editorial placement; nine percent said their companies had paid for a broadcast placement; and nearly 16 percent (15.8%) reported their companies had paid for both. Additionally, nearly half (45.6%) of all respondents who indicated their companies had never paid for a placement said they would consider it in the future.

"The question of editorial credibility is as critical for the future of the PR profession as it is for consumers and the media," said Mark Hass, chief executive officer of MS&L. "If people with big marketing budgets think they can buy a story, it rubs against the very premise of earned media – the notion that there is an objective brain filtering the information. The bottom line is that no reputable marketer should pay for a news placement. It must be earned."

The importance of maintaining a clear distinction between paid and unpaid media coverage has gotten considerable attention. Last year in Washington, Armstrong Williams, the conservative commentator and columnist, was heavily criticized for using his television show to promote the Education Department's "No Child Left Behind" Act, without disclosing he was being paid to do so. The U.S. government has also been under fire for its deceptive use of video news releases. Most recently, it has been accused of conducting broad-scale payoffs to Iraqi media for favorable U.S. coverage.

When the survey respondents were asked why they would not consider paying for editorial or broadcast placements, 43 percent said they do not feel it is ethically right; 32.4 percent said they are not convinced of the efficacy of editorial or broadcast placements; 25.7 percent reported that their companies don’t do editorial or broadcast placements (paid or unpaid); and 21.6 percent said they prefer advertising and editorial content to be distinct.

The results of this survey are consistent with the findings from a study done in October 2005 by MS&L's sister media firm, Starcom MediaVest, which found that 65% of consumers thought editorial mentions of a product had been paid for.

"These results indicate it is critical for PR professionals and corporate communications staff to educate their counterparts in marketing, advertising and media planning about the destructiveness of paid news placements to the integrity of the marketing mix," said Hass. "If 65% of consumers assume that the products, companies or services they read about are there because someone paid for them – and half of marketers have actually paid for media coverage – the press, PR industry and news consumers are all in trouble."

Rich Honack, the assistant dean and chief marketing officer of the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University and an MS&L client, echoes these dangers, adding that even the disclosure rules for product placement in the entertainment world need to be more clear. "I’m seeing more product placement in movies, TV and video games," he says. "Now, the question comes: Do I need to tell the consumer that the reason the person is drinking product X in a movie is paid advertising? I personally would like to see something in the credits that said, 'This movie was sponsored by…' because, from teaching my classes, many people don't realize the amount of product placement that's going on in media."

The 2006 PRWeek/MS&L Marketing Management survey was conducted by PRWeek and Millward Brown. Survey results were collected between April 7 - 23, 2006. Results are not weighted. Based on the sample size, the results are statistically tested at a confidence level of 90%.

About PRWeek Magazine

Launched in November 1998, PRWeek was Haymarket’s first weekly title in the US. Over the years, PRWeek has established itself as a vital part of the PR and communications industries in the US, providing timely news, reviews, profiles, techniques, and ground-breaking research for practitioners. This research includes annual salary, CEO, and corporate surveys, as well as key industry sector rankings and regional forums. The magazine also launched the PRWeek Awards to showcase and recognize the best practices in the PR industry. PRWeek is responsible for creating the largest advertising market place for products and services, as well as for jobs, in the public relations industry.