Partners: cash-strapped papers and dubious ads

Speaking of newspaper advertising, a ProJo reader recently pointed out to me some of the dubious ads that have been running in Rhode Island's statewide daily, such as a full-pager yesterday on A7, dramatically headlined, "Amish mantle and miracle invention help home heat bills hit rock bottom."

The come-on, complete with a news story-style byline for "Mark Woods" of "Universal Media Syndicate," makes this alluring pitch: "Saves money: only uses about 8 cents electric an hour; so turn down your thermostat and never be cold again."

An illustration shows the flinty Amish supposed makers of these miracle devices (and a small disclaimer notes "special advertisement feature" at the top of the page). So what's the problem?

Take it away, Daily Kos:

I have no data to dispute the origin of the Mantle (though I'm willing to bet a lot of money that it was not made by Amish craftspeople) but right in the ad, they gave me data that clearly indicates that heater within is no miracle invention. In fact, an electric heater should only be a miracle to someone who lived more than a hundred years ago. Electric heaters have been around a long time.

The ad claims that their heater will "help home heat bills hit rock bottom." But keep reading and you'll see how. You have to turn down your thermostat - duh. The only difference is that if you put one of their "miracle" devices in the room you spend your time in, you won't notice that your furnace or boiler is not heating the room or the rest the house..

Don't get me wrong. I'm not knocking the idea of turning down your thermostat and only heating the room you are in. That's smart - you will use less energy but you don't have to buy a $249 (plus shipping) "Miracle Invention" to do it.

In recent months, the Journal (along with many other cash-pressed newspapers) has also published ads for special coin-buying opportunities, "Universal Health Cards," and other would-be amazing deals, all with purported limited-time offers.

In some cases, abashed newspapers have performed self-criticism of sorts after publishing these ads. From the News & Observer in North Carolina, for example:

Noelle Talley, spokeswoman for the state Attorney General's Office, said the office has gotten several complaints about the Universal Health Card. She said people have been told that their doctors participate in the program and have paid for the card, then found that the doctors do not accept it. Some have dropped their insurance for the card because it's cheaper.

The program is not illegal, Talley said, but the Attorney General's Office has issued a tip sheet warning consumers about such plans. "It's an area where there seems to be some confusion among consumers about what they're getting into," she said.

The ad has been running in newspapers around the country this month. Jim McClure, The N&O's vice president for display advertising, said that he had reviewed the content of the ad and found that "it clearly states what it is and what it is not."

Maybe technically that's true, but to me the ad looks misleading and, from my brief research, promises more than it delivers. I'm concerned not only that it gives information to readers that is at best confusing, but also that it undermines the credibility of the newspaper.

The ad caused me to wonder whether the well-publicized revenue declines in the newspaper business have caused the paper to accept advertising that might not appear in flusher times.

I had a sneaking suspicion that ProJo publisher Howard Sutton would not return my call to talk about these kinds of ads, so I instead spoke with Tim Schick, administrator of the Providence Newspaper Guild.

"As long as it is clearly marked as advertising, we do not have an issue without it," Schick says. I asked whether these ads would succeed in appealing to some vulnerable readers. "There’s always that risk," he says, "but this is nothing new in the industry. It has been going on for a long time. Ultimately, it’s a business decision on the part of the newspaper whether to accept it or not. In most cases, from what I've seen, unless you're extraordinarily careless, what’s showing up in the Journal is fairly obviously an advertisement."