Can anyone police integrity?

Folio: The Magazine for Magazine Management, August 1, 1993 by Lorne Manly

Ten months after the American Society of Magazine Editors issued tougher guidelines on ad pages and special advertising sections, ASME and many publishers are declaring the guidelines a success. They say the voluntary standards help magazines withstand ad pressure, and that the nearly 20 violators cited so far have all pledged to comply with the guidelines in the future.

But some publishers find fault with ASME's decision to withhold the names of offenders, and they are pushing for more aggressive action against the increasing blurring of editorial and advertising lines.

The revised guidelines include regular ad pages for the first time, not just special advertising sections, and were devised in reaction to the growing incidence of ads mimicking editorial copy.

"By having uniform standards, editors and publishers who didn't have clout now have support to stand up to any pressure," says Henry Muller, Time Inc. editorial director and chairman of the ASME committee on special advertising sections/pages.

Under the guidelines, any ad pages or ad sections that possess an editorial appearance should be "clearly and conspicuously" identified with the words "advertising" or "advertisement"; should have a layout, design and typeface distinct from a magazine's normal look; may not be promoted on the cover; and may not be placed adjacent to editorial material in a manner that implies editorial endorsement.

The sanctions for these voluntary guidelines do not, however, have sharp teeth. Violations are to be reported to the Publishers Information Bureau with a recommendation that the pages in question not be counted as paid advertising. And any magazine that "willfully or repeatedly" violates the guidelines may be declared ineligible for National Magazine Awards for the year in which the ads run.

For Harper's publisher John "Rick" MacArthur, who went public with an ASME letter complaining about an Absolut Vodka ad that resembled the Harper's Index, these "puny" measures highlight the need to release the names of the offenders. "It's like human rights, where the only power a human rights organization has over a foreign government is the power of public embarrassment," he suggests. "That is the only enforcement weapon ASME has."

Although ASME refuses to divulge the names of violators, FOLIO: has learned that the magazines that were chastised include Us, Vogue, U.S. News & World Report, Newsweek, Forbes, PC World and McCall's. The penalties? An Oscar de la Renta ad in Vogue and two AT&T ads in Forbes were not counted in PIB; none of the titles, however, was disqualified from competing for the National Magazine Awards.

MacArthur has also used his run-in with ASME to call attention to the problem of editorial pandering to advertisers (see "Harper's publisher blasts enforcement of ASME sanctions," FOLIO:, July 1, 1993, page 13). But ASME leaders argue that to police such matters would run the risk of infringing on magazines' First Amendment rights. As ASME executive director Marlene Kahan wrote in a letter responding to MacArthur's points: "The dangers should be obvious. Who is to decide what constitutes pandering? What standard would you use? And on what grounds would you stop it?"

MacArthur says he is not calling for censorship, just an airing of the issues. Magazines still sell editorial and will search for new ways to subvert the guidelines, he maintains.

But as a voluntary organization, ASME says there is little it can do to enforce integrity. "You can't legislate every aspect of how a magazine regulates its relations between editorial and advertising," declares Muller. "In the end, you have to count on the integrity of people who run the magazines."