Does Anyone Care About ASME Guidelines?

We don't live in a one-size-fits-all world anymore so it doesn't surprise me that your readers may not think Rock & Roll User Guides are the front line of any journalistic integrity fight. Why do magazines need universal guidelines that apply to any type of content just because it appears in a magazine format? For instance, do other media use journalistic guidelines for their sports or entertainment content? Would we be arguing that the sponsorship guidelines for a TV sporting event -- say, the All-State BCS Championship Game -- should be the same as the CBS Evening News brought to you by Bayer Asprin? I'm an advocate for transparency and clear disclosure when it comes to sponsorship of any form of marketing activity. And for news content -- including that which appears in B2B news media -- I think journalistic integrity is not only important, it's a business advantage. That said, we no longer live in a one-size-fits all world where one set of guidelines work for any type of content -- just because its presented in a magazine format. Most damaging: The one-size-fits-all approach also projects the message that magazines think marketers are the enemy. Advertisers and marketers are NOT the enemy: They are the clients. When you make clients the enemy, you encourage them to move onto media who are willing to explore creative -- and transparent -- ways to work with them.

Speaking of transparency, go ahead and admit it, Dylan: You're perpetuating this item so you can keep displaying that Fergie photo, right?

I was thinking a lot about the TV comparison when I was reporting this, just didn't have the time or e-column space to fit it in there. When college football fans are watching the All-State BCS Championship Game, I would guess most could care less that it's sponsored "editorial," that is, a four-hour version of a pull-out section, if we put it in magazine terms. (They do, however, care when 47 All-State commercials are shoved down their throats, but that's another story.) You make a great point about the "message that magazines think marketers are the enemy" -- the net result of guidelines like this. But I do think readers consider marketers as enemies. At least as a gut reaction. I mean, I do.

You know, I'm not really a Fergie fan. Then again, I'm not an Angelina Jolie fan either. But just because you said it, I'm going to look to perpetuate this and all future stories that can be illustrated with Fergie photos.

Dylan, here's where you trip up: In the first graf, you refer to ASME "guidelines." In your final graf, you refer to them as "rules." As Rex points out, "guidelines" is indeed the correct term here. And yes, people do care about them -- these guidelines are the bedrock of most important ethics-related decisions publications make. But they stop short of being "rules," and for good reason. Each publication worth its salt serves a niche that no other pub does. If all played by the same rulebook, they simply wouldn't exist -- at least, not successfully.

Thou Who Shall Not Needeth a Name, you are absolutely right in your distinction between "guidelines" and "rules." If I were one to use strikethroughs -- which I am not -- this would be the time. Also, here's another perspective from one of my musician-type friends: Say you're an indie rock band, sorta under the radar, and you get featured in this sorta guide. You're all psyched, you turn to your page and there's a big "powered by Toyota Tundra" emblem smack dab on it. Sorta cuts your "I'm in Blender! I'm in Blender!" high short. I think that's how some readers would feel, too.