News

Industries

Companies

Jobs

Events

People

Video

Audio

Galleries

My Biz

Submit content

My Account

Advertise

Marketing News South Africa

Ad revenue versus public interest?

On SABC 3 news at 7pm the other night (6 June 2006) an item was broadcast about staff from a "national hardware chain" getting down and dirty completely repainting a primary school at Bizana in the Eastern Cape. What I wanted to know was what hardware chain it was that had decided on this magnanimous gesture.

It was a real feel good item showing mostly white employees all clad in gaily coloured overalls as busy as bees sprucing up the school much to the delight of the still clearly disadvantaged black schoolkids.

There was nothing visible on their overalls to give me a clue and the SABC presenter started off the item by referring to a "National Hardware Chain."

My first reaction was that the SABC were being childish, churlish and dog-in-the-manger by not naming the firm.

But, on the other hand I can understand the notion of not giving away free advertising on the national news. Not only would it mean loss of ad revenue but could be a horrible precedent in terms of all sorts of companies wanting to get a mention.

Which incidentally, a lot of them do. Which suggests that there doesn't seem to be any sort of firm policy at SABC news but rather depends on the whim of the news editor of the day.

Childish or circumspect

Now the point is quite simply this. Was the SABC being childish or circumspect in not identifying the hardware company? Could one not argue that like me, millions of viewers were very interested in which company was doing all that renovating?

How many more schools would benefit from this largesse if the donors could rely on getting a mention on national news? Of course they should be doing it for publicity but, what the heck, if a few mentions can get a dozen more schools renovated, I say go for it.

If the SABC considered this sort of thing newsworthy enough to make its main bulletin of the day then surely it is obliged to present all the facts which in this case, I reckon, include the name of that company?

Is public interest not more important than advertising revenue considerations?

Viewer perception

Looking at it from the viewer's perception, and maybe this is something SABC has to take into account, it does look very dog-in-the-manger when names are not named. Particularly in this day and age of product placement where soap operas and game shows blatantly feature products, not to mention sports broadcasts trotting out the names of sponsors at the drop of a hat.

Independent radio stations and a lot of newspapers have ditched this habit of not giving away free publicity, isn't it time SABC did the same for its own good?

About Chris Moerdyk

Apart from being a corporate marketing analyst, advisor and media commentator, Chris Moerdyk is a former chairman of Bizcommunity. He was head of strategic planning and public affairs for BMW South Africa and spent 16 years in the creative and client service departments of ad agencies, ending up as resident director of Lindsay Smithers-FCB in KwaZulu-Natal. Email Chris on moc.liamg@ckydreom and follow him on Twitter at @chrismoerdyk.



Let's do Biz