Covering your ass

When I got my latest issue of ESPN the Magazine in the mail last week, the first thing I noticed was that half of it was blank. It was folded over, with an adhesive material keeping a tab closed that said, on white background "you wouldn't settle for an incomplete cover".

Upon unfolding the tab, it was revealed to be a Powerade advertisement, which continued into the inside cover and first page, for a new Pepsi Powerade product.

I am aware of the recent trend of advertising on magazine covers, creeping slowly into the range of ubiquity due to financial constraints in these economic times. Closer to home, the latest issue of Macleans even pulled an Esquire, and features a large peel-back tab in the very centre of the cover.

Wittingly or unwittingly, the Macleans cover also seems to imply that by revealing the flap, more of the cover story (an article about teenage behaviour) will be revealed. Instead? The reader is treated to an ad for the Audi Q7. Tricky tricky.

A recent article on adage.com about the ESPN cover did manage to get quotes from the Mag: "In retrospect, we may have pushed the envelope in this case," [the ESPN spokeswoman] said, "but we continue to innovate and experiment, both editorially and in our advertising, to deliver one of the most compelling magazines on the market."

I am not willing, off hand, to simply throw stones at these publications. I understand the industry is being rocked. I know this because for the life of me, I cannot get a new job, and many, many colleagues have lost theirs. It hits close to home, and if these ads are the only thing keeping people employed, it becomes a matter that's not so black and white.

Yet still.

The cover of a magazine is the heart of a publication. It's what connects readers to a familiar brand. It conveys the spirit of a staff. It has historically been sacred ground.

I'm not averse to the idea of advertising on covers. But in both cases above, a shoddy job was done in drawing a line in the editorial sand.

If you're going to hawk wares on your face, make it apparent it is a cash grab. Do not insult readers and blur the line, insinuating that the editorial and advertising sides worked together to sell this product.

In other words, if ESPN wants to let Pepsi sell drinks on their cover, fine. But please, ESPN. Don't you try and sell me Powerade too. That editorial distinction is why readers buy your magazine. Because we trust what you're writing, we believe what you have to say and that your opinions are important, relevant, and most importantly, written with journalistic integrity.

Blurring that line might save a few jobs today. But in the long run, the reputation of your publication is worth more than a few zeros on a cheque. Sometimes, losing a limb is better than eventually losing your soul.

This is one case where some long, hard decisions are going to have to be made. I do not envy those who are in position to make these calls.