This is not a sponsored post. But it is a post about sponsored posts.
The Mamamia Team understands that not everyone likes sponsored posts. Just like the way some people don’t like advertising of any kind in magazines, on radio or on TV.
We get that some people would prefer to live in an ad-free world but only the Government-funded ABC can afford to provide content without advertising. And if we thought we could get the Government to stump up for the costs of running Mamamia we would but so far they haven’t offered. Selfish bastards.
The commercial realities of running a website the size and scale of Mamamia means that we need advertising revenue to be able to function. To ensure that the many articles we post on Mamamia each day remain free for you to access – advertising in various forms will remain a fact of life around here.
Sometimes, this advertising will be in the form of banner ads. Other times, sponsored posts. Often, we will encourage advertisers to do giveaways. We’re always trying to maximise value for you – our readers. We know you like free stuff and we do everything possible to encourage our advertisers to give it to you.
Here are some answers to the most commonly asked questions about sponsored posts.
Q: How do I know if a post is sponsored or not?
Every sponsored post includes the sentence, “This is a sponsored post brought to you by [whoever]” in the caption of the first image included in the post. There is also a disclaimer at the end that explains who the sponsor is and a bit of information about their product. Transparency is key and you can always be assured of it.
Q: Who writes the sponsored posts?
Sponsored posts are conceived and written by the Mamamia editorial team or one of our great contributors, in conjunction with the client. The stories and anecdotes that these writers share are their honest experiences and are put through the same rigorous standards that all our content is: it has to be interesting and relevant to you, the reader.
Q: When Mia mentions a product, it’s means she’s been paid to do so, right?
Wrong. Mia’s opinion cannot be bought. She does often mention products or services she’s tried and love but never because she’s been paid to do it. If Mia raves about something it’s because she genuinely likes it and want to share it with you. She do this in her non-online life too.
Q: What are your ethical guidelines around the advertising and sponsored posts published on Mamamia?
Great question. And there’s an easy answer to it, although not one that will make everyone happy because ‘ethics’ are highly subjective.
Quite simply, we publish whatever we’re comfortable with. Some people think we shouldn’t accept advertising for baby formula. Others think Mamamia shouldn’t accept alcohol advertising. Some are outraged by advertising for chocolate or any product high in fat or sugar because they believe that will cause obesity. Others are opposed to advertising by weight control programs. Or banks. Or fast food. Or beauty products.
We take a different view. We believe that all the people who read Mamamia are intelligent adults who can make up their own minds after being presented with information. We don’t tell you what to do. Or not to do. We just present information and expect you to make up your own mind – just like with any other form of advertising you see in any other medium.
Q: Do you limit the number of Sponsored Posts you do?You can always choose to skip Sponsored Posts. We publish around 50 posts a week and usually a maximum of 3 or 4 are sponsored. Whenever we plan our line up of stories for the day, we always ensure Sponsored Posts are above and beyond the number of editorial posts we would usually have. They’re extras and not replacements.
Q: Aren’t sponsored posts just the same as cash-for-comment?
Absolutely not. The term cash-for-comment refers to the deceptive practice of journalists, bloggers or broadcasters secretly taking cash in order to spruik goods or services. The key here is non-disclosure. Mamamia will always disclose when a post is sponsored. Similarly, if Mia has any kind of commercial relationship with an advertiser seperate to Mamamia, that too will be disclosed in any relevant context in a post.
We do not publish comments about the IDEA of sponsored posts on sponsored posts themselves but you are welcome to come and leave them here. There is a link to this post on all sponsored posts and Mia, Jamila and the rest of the team will check in and respond to your queries or concerns regularly.
. on http://www.mamamia.com.au){kind=link}
Comments
99 Comments so far
How many times do your readers have to complain about non- upfront disclosure of sponsored posts? It’s obvious that you value your advertisers more than your readers. I really don’t want to sound snarky buti can’t help but feeling like you treat your many loyal readers like commodities you can just sell for a quick buck.
loading...
I understand the need for sponsored posts, and I do read them, and enjoy reading them, if it seems like a topic that would interest me.
However, I believe there should be more disclosure that the post is sponsored, in the article title maybe, or the first sentence in the article.
loading...
Hi Anonymous.
We always disclose a post is sponsored in the caption of the first image in the post, so you can see it before you start reading and scrolling. When there isn’t an image, we type it out in full as the first sentence.
Cheers,
Jam – Ed.
loading...
Love that the author of the book club is, Brought to you by Big W. That clearly says to me it is sponsored. Mamamia is working towards finding the happy medium, I like it
loading...
I too would like “SPONSORED POST” to be in the title of these posts. Most of the articles are great and I like what I’m reading but as soon as I get to the bottom of a post and realize it’s sponsored all credibility is tarnished. It’s very frustrating to read something thinking you are getting an unbiased account of information only to find that in fact what you have just read is very biased, no-one is going to write negatively about something they are advertising!
loading...
Hi GR
Thanks for the comment. When we run a sponsored post, it’s very rarely in the advertorial ‘you should buy this product’ style. Instead we create content that is interesting and engaging around the general theme of the product.
When we decide the content for a sponsored post it goes through the same process as all our editorial does: we ask ourselves if it’s entertaining or emotionally touching or informative for our readers. It’s not made up, our writers simply share an experience or some information that they think you’ll genuinely enjoy.
So please don’t feel a story is tarnished or that you’ve been ripped off because the post is one that meets our usual high standards for editorial. It just happens to have a sponsor attached.
Cheers,
Jam – Ed.
loading...
I cannot stress enough how much I detest the fact that the words ‘SPONSORED POST’ are not included in the title of the post. I guess it’s a sneaky way of getting me to click on the post so that the numbers of those who have ‘read’ the post increase, even though when I realise it’s a sponsored post I often stop reading and go on to something else.
I feel deceived and annoyed. I feel that the writer may not be sincere about what they’re writing because they are being paid to write it.
You have every right to advertise however you choose, but I have the right to choose whether to click on that post or not, and I feel that you should be transparent enough to disclose this in the title of the post because I don’t like posts that I find out are sponsored only after I’ve clicked on that post!
It’s a bit like the old ‘you sound professional on the phone, let’s meet up for a drink because I have a business proposition for you’ and you meet the person only to find out they’re trying to suck you in to sell Amway or Tupperware. Gets my back up in a big way.
loading...
Hi Gail
Thanks for the feedback. I just responded to the comment immediately above yours, which basically addresses the same concerns you raised. So, if you’ll permit me – I might direct you up there! Hopefully that helps.
Jam – Ed.
loading...
I love Kate Hunter I will click on anything she writes. So I clicked on the “I’ve become my father post”. I was super engaged until I read this: ”So when is the right time to talk to kids about money and bills and family expenses?” And then I thought. This is a sponsored post. Scrolled down. Sponsored post. I always get a little annoyed when this happens but not enough to mention it. But this time it really, really annoyed me. Everyone in this thread says the same thing: The sponsored posts are not appropriately labelled. You would not get away with such poor advertising labeling in any any other arena of publishing. I would have clicked on Kate Hunter’s post even if it said ‘Sponsored Post’. I do not have a problem with ads that are clever and awesome. (I quote ads to my family and friends. My current favourite is the Rams ad: ”Toby, let’s RIDE.” He’s wearing a blue helmet. It’s amazing.) I know Kate Hunter is clever and awesome, ergo I still would have clicked on it. But today I left the post halfway through with a sour taste in my mouth. I felt like I’d been tricked, I guess. And that’s not a nice way to feel.
loading...
I wish MM would make the ‘sponsored post’ disclaimer more obvious earlier in the piece. Deliberately making it small and easy to miss lowers my goodwill towards the site significantly. Also having a disclaimer at the end makes me, as a reader, feel like I’ve been duped. Yesterday what I thought was a group therapy post was actually a sponsored one. After reading that post I was sure the entire article had been fabricated to fit around that product, which made suspicious of the truth of all the other ‘personal essay type’ or group therapy posts on this site.
I understand the need for sponsored posts and don’t object to them. But if another media site or television show did the same MM would up outraged.
To give a comparison, and I’m sure Mia is sick of hearing about her, but I think it’s valid. Sarah Wilson’s site clearly labels sponsored posts and any perceived conflicts of interest in bold type, often in a different colour, at an early stage in the article. It goes really far towards maintaining goodwill with her readers and I typically read every one of these articles regardless of it being sponsored.
loading...
Hi Anon
Thanks for your feedback. We try and standardise the way the sponsored post is disclosed. That way if you choose not to read them, you can look straight to the caption of the first image. I think it’s generally understood amongst regular readers of the site that this is the case. But I take your point and we’ll discuss your suggestions with the team and see if we can come up with a better solution.
Jam – Ed.
loading...
I realise you have to pay your bills. It’s a reality of this modern world. Therefore I don’t complain about you running ads on your page. the need for revenue is a fact of life
BUT, To use a situation like the “It was never hard to talk about anything” article as a “sponsored post” lowered the credibility of your site in my eyes by about 50%.
“Every sponsored post includes the sentence, “This is a sponsored post brought to you by [whoever]” in the caption of the first image included in the post.”
Yeah right, in 10 point type in a place where people don’t look. If you were fair dinkum, the disclaimer would be included in the article header and with equal size type and boldness. Not to do this brings you down to the same cheap, sleazy level of ads for beauty and weight loss products or “work at home” ads, where the disclaimer “Results not typical” is in such small print that the definition of the TV is struggling to show it.
Run sponsored posts if you must, but please make sure they are labelled with the same visibility that you as a consumer would demand from TV or another site.
I await with interest your next “Pro-consumer” rant. I want to see just how hypocritical you can get.
loading...
I work in the media industry and understand sponsored posts are a necessary evil and as such I have no real problem with them, (other than hating writing them myself).
But I was very disappointed to see Universal Music has decided to capitalise on Tommy Fleming’s loss to sell records. I know it’s over a year ago now, but I’m sure it’s still sensitive for the artist, and to think that a record company is trying to capitalise on grief is just appalling. As a MM fan I was quite shocked to see this published. The story had merit on its own and was well-written, but then seeing that both MM and Universal were making money out of it was just upsetting.
loading...
Hi Anon
The topic of this post came from Tommy himself, who wanted to share the story of his incredibly sad loss. I too would be uncomfortable if I thought someone was being pressured into speaking openly about their grief. But this was his call and I think we need to respect that.
Jam – Ed.
loading...
I think there has been a very big mistake made in connection with the Electrolux sponsored post about vacuuming. It says above that sponsored posts “are put through the same rigorous standards that all our content is”. I don’t think that can be true in relation to the Electrolux piece – it was neither entertaining nor authentic. Although I missed the “sponsored post” notation under the first photo, it became obvious straight away that I was reading a paid ad. Very disappointing!
loading...
I am writing in response to the sponsored by Jo Abi about vacuuming. I object to sponsored posts which are written by regular Mamamia columnists, and where i have to clink on the article and start reading it to realise it has been sponsored.
I would support a policy where sponsored posts are clearly indicated on the home page where you usually identify the author. This was an incredibly weak article by a usually crisp and interesting writer which made perfect sense when i got to the bottom and saw it was sponsored. I then went back and saw yes, it was identified under the photo. Only I had such faith in Jo I was too busy reading her words to bother with the text under a file photo.
loading...
Hi Napoleon
When we have a sponsored post we need to write, our usual on-staff writers are our first port of call. We like to ensure that the posts have the same integrity as our usual editorial, which means we do go to external writers if we don’t have a suitable story or experience to share amongst the team.
Of course, advertisers like readers, tend to have their ‘favourite’ writers from Mamamia. It’s not unusual we have specific requests that one of our team write a sponsored post and where we can, we try and deliver on that.
Hopefully that gives you a bit more explanation.
Jamila – Ed.
loading...
Jamila and the Mamamia team,
In response to my comment asking for “SP” or “Sponsored Post” in the title of sponsored articles, you wrote “we at the moment are still comfortable with the disclosure in the caption of the first image and then again at the end of the post”. You are but your readers aren’t, otherwise half the comments on this page wouldn’t exist.
It’s not because we’d “like to see a site that was straight editorial – but we live in a commercial world”. I personally found that response very condescending. I’m fine with sponsored posts – I just want them disclosed before I click on the post!
You have still avoided my question – why would it hurt to have disclosure before not after readers click on the article?
loading...
They don’t do it because they know if they did, NO ONE would bother to click through.
loading...
As a reader and commentor (and occasional contributor a long time back), this is the first time I have been incredibly disappointed in an association the site has had. Whilst I am totally on-board with the idea of sponsored posts, I think associating your site with a company of herbal ‘remedies’ is totally at odds with the generally anti-woo stance you have taken in the past. And no, this is not a personal peeve about the company, but a reflection of how this brand jars so strongly with what I thought Mamamia had come to stand for. Have you actually looked into some of the ridiculous claims that this company makes about their products? How can you be so on the side of science in so many ways (vaccination etc) and then publish such a strong supportive piece on a company that is so contrary to any scientific methedology?
I am also incredibly disappointed that you have chosen not to publish the three or four comments have written on the post – which although no doubt not nice for the brand to hear, certainly fit with the commenting guidelines. I will be surprised if this one sees the light of day either!
loading...
Hi Kate,
Thanks for the feedback, we really do appreciate it. We like to make sure the products we’re advertising are relevant and interesting to readers, so it’s good for us to hear you weren’t a fan of this campaign.
We’re running a survey right now to try and get some more feedback about the kinds of brands and products you do and don’t want to see advertised on the site. We’ll most certainly be taking into account that feedback moving forward.
Thanks,
Jam – Ed.
loading...
Hi MM, Yes, I’m getting on the bandwagon again about sponsored posts.
Briefly (this time)… Jamila writes (in this post, below, 18.03.2013): “We approach our sponsored content in the same way we do every post – it has to be interesting, relevant and truthful.” Yet today, reading the Fusion Health supplements sponsored post, Jo Abi writes the following: “Libido, Constipation, Weight Loss, Detox…anything you can think of and they have a brilliant herbal medicine designed to fix it.”
So, I wonder how this can be a truthful statement? Jo has apparently taken this list from the Fusion website. She hasn’t tried and tested any of them at this point! Even knowing this post was sponsored, I read it, hoping for some kind of real information about the efficacy of herbal supplements – I know very well that some are useless, yet others can have real clinical benefits. But I was dismayed to see that no real information was offered… apparently they are all ‘brilliant’ and can ‘fix’ anything. Disappointing, not relevant nor truthful.
loading...
Hi Jimmy’s Girl,
Thanks for the message. You know, that’s an excellent point. More advertorial style sponsored posts aren’t things we do very often on Mamamia – so this is new for us.
I take your point that it’s writing not run past the usual editorial standards because it is more of a product-trial type of post. We’ll make sure that’s disclosed upfront in future.
Appreciate the feedback.
Jam – Ed.
loading...
“We’ll make sure that’s disclosed upfront in future” “More advertorial style sponsored posts aren’t things we do very often on Mamamia – so this is new for us”
I’m confused…I thought Mia committed above to sponsored posts with the highest standards of integrity, “the stories and anecdotes that these writers share are their honest experiences”. Does this mean Mamamia’s standards have dropped in relation to standard posts? They no longer have to be “truthful”? (as Jimmy’s girl brought up?)
loading...
Hi, I am completely fine with sponsored posts, but I usually read your site on my iPad and am struggling with the ‘green underlined hyperlinked text’ – that links to ads. I was just reading a post about O-Week at Sydney uni and when i flicked across a word ‘entertainment’ an ad for a weekend at a grand-prix came up that i had to get rid of. Then it came up again and again and again. I just didnt bother reading the rest of the article.
Also, there seems to be a banner ad on the RHS of the homepage, next to the article about photo-shopping, for a photo-shopping product. That was a surprise!
loading...
Hi Gracie
Thanks for the feedback. It’s a new style of ad we’re trialling but we certainly don’t want it to impact on the user experience. Thanks for the iPad feedback – will chat to the tech team and try to sort it out.
Jamila – Ed.
loading...
One very simple question: why can’t we have “sponsored post” in the title of sponsored articles?
Obviously it is what a lot of readers want because the current system is not working!
loading...
I very much agree.
loading...
Absolutely – then I would choose not to click on it. I never enjoy those articles and frankly find them a little condescending. I generally feel a little deflated and cheated after having wasted my time reading them. Also, as a matter of principle I wouldn’t want my extra ‘click’ to contribute to advertising revenue on a sponsored post (sorry mamamia!!). I’m fine with ads on the side, but the advertorials bug me.
loading...
I Agree. The sponsorship notification should be at the top/in the title of the article.
Therefor your readers can make a better informed decision on whether they want to read the post of not. I was just caught out by the on the herbal remedy article by Jo Abi.
loading...
Hi everyone
Thanks for the feedback. We monitor this stuff pretty closely and at the moment are still comfortable with the disclosure in the caption of the first image and then again at the end of the post.
But I recognise you’d like us to go further and that’s helpful to know as we keep trying to improve the reader experience.
I know ads can be a pain – and you’d like to see a site that was straight editorial – but we live in a commercial world and it’s sponsored posts and banner ads that allow us to keep the site running.
Thanks.
Jam – Ed.
loading...
Oh Jamilla – this is your PM advisory know-how coming through…so, just to confirm: you’ve listened and understand what people are upset about, but MM has no intention of actually implementing these recommendations (ie – labeling SP in the title so we don’t click on the link under false pretenses?
I don’t mean for this to sound snarky….but perhaps be a little more upfront and admit the reasons why MM is choosing not to do this. I understand MM is a commercial enterprise I I generally do enjoy lots of material on the site – so am grateful it exists.
Keep up the good work:)
loading...
Don’t look at the pictures, did not realise the green tea post was sponsored until I was halfway through – so disappointing! Why can’t you say its sponsored in the first paragraph or in the heading? The notification at the end and under the picture is not sufficient.
Also, why not just have sponsored posts for things you believe in? Sarah Wilson only promotes products she loves, and she explains that she is being paid or received the product for free at the top of the post, so I don’t feel like I’m being tricked or the integrity of the blog is compromised. If it was something you truly recommend, I wouldn’t mind reading it even if it is sponsored.
Just some thoughts! Thanks for providing a forum for feedback on this. Unfortunately while you have to be able to make money to keep running your blog, your credibility is everything to your readers.
loading...
Hey Anonymous,
I totally agree with you re: credibility being everything and that’s why I ABSOLUTELY would only ever write a sponsored post about something that I genuinely used/ would try or use etc. I have said no to LOADS of sponsored posts and companies who have sent me products, samples, etc etc. I would never, ever write about something that wasn’t aligned to me and my blog’s philosophies. My Green Tea post was written from the bottom of my heart and I truly hope you took it that way. As you say, my readers are so valuable to me, they are what keeps me cooking and writing and I would never write about or endorse something I didn’t believe in just to make a few bucks. It’s not who I am and it definitely wouldn’t be worth it.
Phoodie
loading...
Thanks for the response!!
loading...
Hey Anonymous, Along with Phoodie, I’d like to say I’ve turned down a number of Sponsored Posts because I felt I couldn’t write them authentically. There’s never any pressure put on writers to do SPs if they feel they can’t write them honestly or well.
loading...
Why aren’t the Dilmah posts declared as sponsored? The strange zooming in on cups of tea in the videos? Come on.
loading...
I actually thought the Dilmah videos were a really effective way of doing a sponsored post: the ‘ad’ message was part of the experience, it wasn’t like “DRINK DILMAH and you too will be one of our favourite women!”. The tea drinking was the backdrop to the conversations. Yes there were some slightly awkard “and now I’ll drink my tea” moments, but they didn’t jar too much with the way the chats ran. Plus, the production standards were high, so the whole thing looked good.
I think most people are inspired to comment by sponsored posts they dislike – and certainly I’ve found many of them to be a bit annoying – but I think it’s important to also point out when they hit the right notes too.
loading...
Thanks AT! Really appreciate the feedback.
X
loading...
It takes away all credibility. There are other ways to advertise. I’m a runner and was excited mm was posting a running blog, until I got Halfway through and realised it was an ad for the athletes foot. This could have been easily written without the sponsor. Hated it. Takes ads but don’t let them infiltrate your bloggers
loading...
I feel a little bit violated when I have to read half an article and then get the sponsors spin like I did with the Athlete’s Foot piece today. I’m sorry but how many people read the image captions? Please be more transparent it’s the least we should expect from a site we trust/\.
loading...
I don’t mind sponsored posts on your site if the content is still good…a recent one sponsored by cleaning products was okay as content still engaging.
But the athletes foot one i just read was really just commercial and i felt a bit cheated after clicking the link…think you should be a bit more selective. .
Other than that thanks & keep up the good work.
loading...
Sponsored posts in newspapers and publications are *always* identified by the words “ADVERTISEMENT” or “SPECIAL PROMOTION” or the like, as the VERY FIRST item, shown isolated, at the top of the page. Many publications will also specify a minimum font size for this text. This is so that readers will not be misled by the intent of the piece if they happen to miss smaller cues such as taglines to pictures, or indeed if they stop reading three-quarters of the way through and thus fail to read the disclaimer at the end. It also draws a line between editorial and ‘advertorial’ as such, and I believe it is very important to not confuse the two, despite MM not being a ‘traditional’ media form.
So, I strongly believe similar policy should be applied to online pieces. Obviously this is not occurring effectively here at MM, because so many readers below are saying they have been ‘duped’ into reading a piece they believed was unsponsored. With this level of feedback on your policy, surely it suggests the policy is not working and is in need of clarification. Not doing so, and claiming that ‘interest, relevance and truthfulness’ are enough, is really quite disingenuous. There should be absolutely no doubt in a reader’s mind of what they are reading.
In fact, I believe that many (most?) readers, including myself, would continue to read the piece and even comment, if it met the claimed brief of interesting, relevant, and with a ring of truth, in the full knowledge that it was sponsored.
But readers left feeling manipulated by lack of disclosure will ultimately result in a negative reaction to the sponsor. I would suggest that a policy change to a more overt method of disclosure would benefit both readers and sponsors on this website – it would be a win-win across the board.
loading...
This post is by me – somehow I lost the name at the top. Cheers
loading...
I’ve been a reader (and sometimes commenter) on this site for years, however I’ve now made then decision to not come back after the inclusion of advertising from The Biggest Loser.
One of the reasons I enjoy this site is because it covers topics surrounding body image and eating disorders, I strongly feel that advertising from TBL is counter-intuitive to many of the posts and topics you cover. I could write a thesis about why TBL is so damaging (physically and psychologically), however I’m more so writing this comment as a way to give you feedback (which hopefully along with feedback from others might contribute to you denying advertising rights to TBL).
loading...
Hi Jodie,
If you’re still reading, thanks for taking the time to leave us this feedback. Mamamia is a website that publishes many different views, so there’s no single position on any issue really. It’s a bit like saying a dinner party has to have a single point of view. In my opinion and experience, different people have different views and they often evolve and shift over time. Having one view doesn’t necessarily exclude you from having another – there are many shades of grey. Many advertisers wish to communicate with the Mamamia audience and we facilitate that communication in a way we feel is most engaging and will connect.
I won’t pretend this subject – The Biggest Loser and obesity and weight loss – has not sparked some passionate discussions and disagreements among parts of the MM audience.
But we have published a wide variety of comments that reflect those opinions and allowed the debate to occur because we feel that’s important.
We’re always listening to feedback so once again, thanks for providing it.
loading...
Hi Mia, thanks for taking the time to reply. I can completely understand that everyone will have different view points on this issue – some will love the Biggest Loser posts, just as some won’t.
I guess for me personally, I’m very strongly against TBL, so it’s almost the same as if you were to put ads that were homophobic or racist on the website. It’s upsetting and triggering for me to be seeing those posts and adverts (even though I’m not reading them).
I am interested to know if you allowed to publish a post with all the reasons why TBL is detrimental to physical and psychological health – or would that be in breach of a contract you might have with TBL?
loading...
Don’t mind the concept of sponsored posts, you gotta make a living! But the number of biggest loser posts appearing now are starting to annoy me, it feels very aggressive and a bit fake. I guess I can just click on something else but just wanted to provide my two cents
loading...
Hi Ez,
We appreciate the feedback. It’s good for us to know when you feel there’s too much of a certain kind of content. We’ll take that into account for future.
Jam – Ed.
loading...
I am really really disappointed that you are allowing the show biggest loser be a sponsor.
The healthy eating message gets wasted and lost on all the good articles that have been written by supporting this show.
It appearsto be degrading to those involved and sensational.
I will not be allowing it in my home
I sincerely hope there is enough outrage that it will be pulled off the air and I hope the individuals involved will be supported.
It is really sad to see Mamamia is part of the exploitation and warped portrayal of what are extreme measures to achieve a look.
It should be about fitness and wellbeing not weightloss.
So wrong, so so disappointing.
loading...
I like that the I Give a Gonski post today had a caption under every photo that it was sponsored. Given the placement of the photos, there are 3 in different places throughout the post I think it was very clear it was a sponsored post, without being in your face. This seems like a good compromise to the varying views on the disclosure of sponsored posts. Good work MM, something so small shows you are really listening to your readers
loading...
I am a reader of Mamamia.com.au. I read a wide variety of everything on MM, I read a wide variety of articles anywhere really. I like to hear a point of view and whether by the end of the piece I agree with it or not, or whether I found it beneficial to me, that’s for me to decide.
But the fact that it may have been paid for or not, to me, it doesn’t matter.
More often, if content has been paid for, readers are alerted to the fact, without of course, putting it up in big neon flashing lights. Because that’s just tacky, and I’m not dumb.
On MM, more importantly, I find the articles that are paid for are written in a tone of opinion and are actually quite entertaining! I don’t quite understand why readers have such a problem when they get to the end of a piece, have probably had a laugh, and then feel deceived that they’ve been tricked into reading the article!
If the article was enjoyable and you got to the very end, then take that simple fact away from it – clearly you liked reading it.
If it was an obvious boring plug on product then surely, you would have just stopped reading and found something else to read!?
Opinion, paid or unpaid is just that – it’s still an opinion. I find that few articles on MM aren’t paid for. I find that when I’ve clicked on an article that has an intriguing headline, opened it and realise it’s been paid for, I generally keep reading because the topic is quite intriguing. I really enjoy the current articles sponsored by CBA, it’s not just stock standard ‘how to save money: take $20 every week, save it away and over time you’ll be rich’ … it talks about the ideas of pocket money and the good old bank book saving schemes at schools – I can relate to each one of those topics! And I don’t even have kids that I’m trying to teach how to bank!
Sponsored Posts are not deceit. They just another form of opinion.
loading...
Could we please have “Sponsored Post” or “SP” in the title of each sponsored article? A little caption under a photo is not clear enough. I hardly ever read the caption and I’m sure that’s true of the majority. So many times I’ve read an article and really connected with it and been moved only to get to the bottom, see the statement from the advertiser and feel horribly decieved by Mamamia. In the interests of maintaining the integrity and decency of the site you should be alerting people before they click on the advertising not afterwards – especially as you’re getting paid for how many people clicked on the piece/will view the piece. You promised transparency above and I don’t think you’re making enough of an effort following through on that.
loading...
If you reply to my comment please don’t leave the stock standard response – either commit to change or admit that you don’t want to alert people clearly that it’s advertising because it’s in the advertisers interests and therefore your interest. The standard response just compounds the feelings of being tricked – I wouldn’t mind/would definitely prefer if you just came out and said “we’re not changing because we know the harder readers have it in discerning what is advertising, the more profit”
loading...
Hi Alana
Thanks for your comment and the feedback. As you’ve noted I’ve written several times below about why we identify in the caption of the first photo and at the end of the post. We believe this is a clear indication of the sponsored nature of the post.
But let me go to your point about enjoying an article then being upset to find out it was sponsored. We approach our sponsored content in the same way we do every post – it has to be interesting, relevant and truthful.
When one of our writers shares a story or an anecdote for a sponsored post it isn’t concocted, it means they’ve actually experienced that and are willing to share it. We come up with topics for sponsored content like we do any story, by sharing ideas and thoughts and experiences as a team of writers.
So if you enjoyed it – that’s great! You’re under no compulsion to buy the product, you’re welcome to read and enjoy. And you can be confident in the integrity of the content because it’s run through the same filter as all our other content.
Cheers,
Jam – Ed.
loading...
Not liking the Biggest Loser sponsored post today. The content itself is mostly fine but I’m surprised Mamamia, which openly supports healthy body image, would feature a post from a program that takes such an unhealthy and extreme approach to weight loss. I wholeheartedly support people wanting to lose weight for health reasons, but the Biggest Loser is the worst example of how to go about it. Their temptation challenges, making people exercise for hours a day, every day, and making people cry for eating too much FRUIT (2 pieces! gasp) or for putting on a couple of kilos, have completely put me off the show.
loading...
Hi there Ophobo
Thanks for your comment, we really appreciate the feedback and you taking the time to write to us about your concerns on this one.
The post on the site today is about teaching kids’ a healthy approach to food and with the obesity crisis in this country, we thought it was an important topic for discussion.
All the very best,
Jamila
loading...
Thanks for the reply Jamila. I fully understand the importance of the topic and agree it’s important for discussion, it’s just the choice of sponsor I have a problem with (which is why I commented on this post rather than today’s post). Many other weight loss programs take a much more sensible approach. Thanks again
loading...
I agree with ophobo. Apart from the fact that the biggest loser promotes unrealistic, unhealthy and extreme weightloss, routinely humiliates contestants and place the focus firmly on winning the competition rather than health, it has absolutely nothing to do with promoting healthy eating for children. I don’t mind sponsored posts as long as they are clearly labeled as such and the sponsor is actually a reputable authority on the topic of discussion (rather than the publicity department trying to increase ratings for their show.)
loading...
Hi Jamila
I wholeheartedly agree that teaching kids a healthy approach to food is an important topic. But I got so sick of the continued discussions I established a business and a food education charity to actually DO something about it.
Despite our minuscule capacity to attract sponsors, the Board of my charity has nevertheless followed Mia’s example and drawn a line in the sand. We don’t accept direct sponsorship from food related brands that may create the perception of compromise or whose products promote behaviours that may cause harm or be detrimental to the children and young people we care about.
As Ophobo & Jordie suggest, your readers might feel that Mamamia condones the bullying behaviour exhibited by mentors on the show and the derision of obese people – because of the sponsored link.
I’m sure Ch10 thought that a link from your well respected site may help their target audience believe that a commercial TV station would air “not just a television event, but also a social movement, a movement that aims to break the vicious cycle of generational obesity.”
I’m also surprised at this particular link given the article by your very own Amy Cheney whose 7yrold daughter was on a “diyet” and the emotional responses it evoked from your readers.
(I could go on a rant right now but it’s been a long week…)
Maybe next time Mamamia decides a topic is important enough to warrant a sponsored link, ask your readers to nominate a small (relevant) NFP or volunteer community group creating positive change that could also be awarded a % of the proceeds.
loading...
I think if there are three separate locations where it says that a post is sponsored – then readers must take at least some responsibility in taking notice of what they are about to read or reading. Not just blindly accept that each post is unsponsored. I am new to Mamamia after developing a love for Mamamia Today, and I have just read my first sponsored post. I only read it, because I specifically saw that it was sponsored and wanted to read it. Its really not that hard to have a look around the screen and see if its sponsored or not.
loading...
I am curious – what would make you consider changing your policy of identifying sponsored posts? Your consistent response below to the complaint that you don’t clearly identify sponsored posts until the end of the article is: that you identify a sponsored post under the photograph at the top of the article. Clearly, this is not enough for those who choose to comment here; however, there are only 35 comments. Not many considering a passionate response to an article normally gets hundreds of replies. If you had 500 comments about the need to clearly state ‘sponsored post’ above or immediately below the headline – so there is no confusion whatsoever that the post is sponsored – would you change?
loading...
Hi Ronny,
Of course we are always open to feedback from our readers and take all of it on board. We’re comfortable with the way we identify sponsored posts at present, which is at both the top and bottom of an article page.
I understand not everyone loves the ideas of sponsored editorial but we ensure that it is subject to the same high standards as all of our content – we make sure it is fun, engaging and interesting to read.
And in the end, advertising is what allows us to deliver so much fresh and interesting content on the site every day. We couldn’t operate a website of this size without it
Cheers,
Jam – Ed.
loading...
It’s pretty obvious that your readers would like sponsored posts identified on the top of the article and not in small print under the photo, so why can’t this be done? I understand the concept of advertising and sponsored posts, this blog is a business after all, but why not have it identified on top like requested numerous times below?
loading...
Lots of comments have been posted asking for sponsored posts to be identified at the top, and on Facebook when posted there. Would be great if someone from Mamamia could let us know why this isn’t being done…
loading...
Hi Jruth
Actually, sponsored posts are identified on social media pages using the SP symbol. We also note that a post is sponsored in the caption at the photo at the top of the post.
Thanks for your comment,
Jamila
loading...
Thanks for responding Jamila. I do see that at the bottom of the accompanying photo there is a disclaimer on each sponsored post noting that it is sponsored. But what so many readers are asking for is greater ease of identification of sponsored posts – and for the disclaimer to appear immediately under the title of the article. Obviously mamamia may choose to address this issue in whichever way it chooses, but I’m asking you to please let your readers know why you haven’t taken on board the requests about the disclaimer which I had highlighted in my post above. Thanks
loading...
Dear Mamaia staff,
Could you please consider clearly identifying sponsored posts at the TOP of the article. I’ve lost count of the times I’ve read through an article, halfway through it thought something smelled fishy, then got to the end and learned it was advertising. This experience certainly doesn’t leave me with good thoughts about either the advertiser or Mamamia. It acts as a deterrant to readers to click on other articles as it’s quite possibly advertising and not an article.
loading...
Hi Kate,
We always identify if a post is sponsored in the caption on the first image in the post – the one that sits next to the opening paragraphs. If reading sponsored posts concerns you, then just keep an eye out for that disclaimer.
Cheers,
Jamila
loading...
Thanks for the reply Jamila. I realise that is the position where Mamamia has chosen to identify sponsored posts, however it seems that myself and lot of other readers don’t think this is at all very clear (particularly to non-regular visitors). A blurb at the top of the article (i.e. under the heading) or a different format/style for sponsored posts (as you see in some magazine advertorials, for example a coloured background) would much more clearly identify the articles for what they are. Just some feedback from an avid Mamamia fan…
loading...
As suggested in the comments below again and again – i understand and accept that advertising is part of the world today and an economic reality.
However, it is deceptive to state it at the end and this NEGATIVELY affects my response to the brand.
I enjoy this site, but I am less likely to spend my money on something that resorts to working that way just for a little attention. I much prefer when it is listed on FB and i can choose to read it or not (and sometimes i do anyway).
I feel the same way when there is things such as product placement on tv.
Really, if ethical management is your goal and you take action to maintain it by not posting the nude shots of celebrities, not having the call from 2day fm, not having your opinion be bought and moderate comments to ensure intelligent discussion on the website, then why not also make it a rule that all sponsored posts are identified in the title and FIRST line of the article?
loading...
Hi Bec – see some of the comments I’ve made above, which answer your question about the alerts we give that a post is sponsored. Thanks, Jamila – Ed.
loading...
Sponsored posts are no different to advertorial in your favourite magazine or newspaper. I do agree however that they should be identified clearly at the top of the post rather than a note at the bottom. Perhaps in smaller font and within brackets next to the title of the post would be more appropriate and help to avoid any misunderstanding. That way if a reader clicks into the article they are doing it knowing full well that it is sponsored and not an opinion piece by Mia or her team.
loading...
I just read the post sponsored by Hesta and I wanted to say that I think they’re a great organisation. I have a little to do with them through my work, and they are very generous of spirit and seem to genuinely care about people.
loading...
Just read Anne Young’s piece about childcare, and was happy to read about her individual experience and opinion. However when i realised it was a sponsored post, i was disappointed the post didn’t include any research or evidence supporting the idea in the title that childcare is good for kids. I guess i expect more if you’re getting paid for the article, anecdotes don’t cut it.
loading...
I agree. I am also disappointed that because it is sponsored, I was apparently not allowed to have an opinion on Goodstart Early Learning at all. We all know that Goodstart used to be ABC which went under because of poor standards of care and hygeine. Goodstart are non-profit and have good intentions to turn it around – they have backed increased and professional wages for (qualified) early childhood educators which is great. But they are doing so because they are struggling to retain staff and enrolments, still. We need honest discussions about child care in this country, not fluff.
loading...
I love your site but I really don’t like sponsored posts and I think it undermines the integrity of the Mamamia brand.
I understand that you need advertising as part of your business model but please leave it to banner ads etc. I disagree with it in the same way as I would disagree with reading SMH only to find (at the bottom of the article) that one of the articles has been sponsored by a company and was not a news article at all. I love Mamamia for the authenticity of its opinions – having sponsored posts (that aren’t obviously branded as sponsored at the very start of the page) makes me feel manipulated and like I’ve wasted my time reading a fake opinion to sell a product or an idea.
loading...
Hi Jemma,
I’m sorry to hear that. As you note, we need advertising to be able to run the site in the first place. Mamamia is a free access site – we don’t charge readers through a pay wall model or similar and nor do we wish to. The support of our advertisers is what means we can keep serving up great content each day.
In terms of the actual sponsored posts. When we commission and write these, we apply the same publication standards and rules as we do to ANY other post. The content has to be interesting and relevant to our readers and the writing has to be persuasive and engaging.
We also don’t do ‘fake’ opinion. We propose topics TO the advertisers and not the other way around. This means we’re suggesting stories or issues for discussion that our writers already feel strongly about, have a story to relate or a point to make.
Thanks again,
Jamila – Ed.
loading...
As a reader I have to disagree. When reading the Biggest Loser article I was wondering why Mamamia was covering a topic that was clearly not newsworthy – THEN I noticed the huge banner ads next to it. When this happens, readers feel duped.
loading...
Hi, I’m a big fan of Mamamia but hate that sponsored posts are only disclosed at the end of articles and in very small print via photo captions. I feel very strongly that the disclosure should appear at the top of the article.
I really love Mamamia and find its posts candid, funny and/or moving. That’s why I feel a little manipulated when I reach the end of a post and find out it was sponsored. I loved the Dr Marie article but was annoyed that I only discovered it was sponsored after reading it. It’s all about context. Although I still enjoyed the article now knowing it was sponsored, I read it believing it was sent in by a reader or written by someone on the Mamamia team.
loading...
I’d rather not read anonymous sponsored content. Didn’t realise it was sponsored till the end.
loading...
Hi Jill,
I understand and normally we wouldn’t run sponsored content that was anonymous. But on this occasion, the writer had written a great piece about her experience with a very private and intimate topic and we needed to respect her wishes that her name not accompany it.
Best,
Jamila – Ed.
loading...
I’ve just read the Dr Marie post and while I did miss the sponsored post tag line at the beginning, and was momentarily taken back when I saw it at the end, I want to thank mamamia for choosing to run an advertisement from this group. Specific abortion providers are so rarely heard about that it’s good to see a media outlet willing to let women know about one. I see the post as group letting women, who may one day chose to use their service, know that they exist in a respectful
way and thank this site for allowing them to do so.
loading...
Thanks for the feedback Anon.
loading...
When we have a sponsored post from marie Stopes, a provider abortion, I;m not surprised mama mia is always running pro abortion pieces. How Pro “choice” are you when you are paid money by abortion providers? How about a sponsored post from an agency which offers help to women facing unwanted pregnancies who want to keep their babies? or offers post abortion counselling?
loading...
Regarding the sponsored post from Marie Stopes.
I am fine with the idea of sponsoring abortion posts because I think it’s important to demystify the practice but I don’t like that I’m not sure I can trust the experience “Anonymous” shared. I commented saying that I was very grateful she’d shared her story but then read the guidelines on sponsored posts and saw that they are conceived and written by your editorial team, in conjunction with the client – i.e. Marie Stopes. So, whose experience are you sharing in this story? Did a patient of Marie Stopes provide you with her story? What happened there?
I don’t expect Mamamia to be an “oasis away from all advertising” but I do expect to feel safe in the assumption that soul-baring, apparently personal accounts aren’t penned by a room of copywriters.
loading...
A sponsored post written by ‘anonymous’ doesn’t sit write with me. How do we know its true if you can’t put a name to the story?
loading...
I am pissed to read a post on a personal abortion experience to find out it is sponsored.
It shows little respect for your readers.
Having ‘Sponsored Post’ in fine print and then at the bottom is misleading at best.
You need to be more transparent about sponsored posts if you want to write them this way.
loading...
I really didn’t like reading a sponsored post on abortion. I wish you had put ‘sponsored post’ at the top of the story – I was bitterly disappointed when I got to the bottom to find it was a sponsored post. I am pro-choice and was interested in reading a different perspective – but the story was cheapened by the fact it was merely advertising.
loading...
Agreed. I’m so sick of seeing a note about the sponsor at the end of the article. It needs to be at the top, in plain sight – not hidden under a stock photo.
loading...
I just read the post that was sponsored by Marie Stopes. My God it felt so wrong to read this.
By all means, have a story that is about a womans choice, the thought process they had to get to the point of terminating a pregnancy. Have another story about someone who was unsure what road to take and kept the baby. Give people the raw truth about how they felt and how the decision was reached. I am pro-choice, but I really felt that the sponsored post by Marie Stopes was so incredibly wrong, just as I would feel a sponsored post by a pro life group would be wrong too.
I understand why sponsored posts are vital to your website. But this, is totally wrong.
loading...
Completely agree. A very awful feeling came over me when I reached the end of the article and read that it was sponsored.
loading...
Hi Siobhan,
I’ve replied to NotReally above and hopefully that eases some of your anxiety. We do disclose a post is sponsored in the caption of the first photo, so that you know what you’re reading.
Jamila
loading...
I just read the Marie Stopes article and did not realize that it was sponsored until I got to the very end. I felt a bit duped. Now that I’ve gone back to the article, I see that the SP status has been disclosed in the photo caption but this isn’t very obvious unless you are specifically looking for that message.
loading...
I thank you for your response Jamila.
I realised it was a sponsored post, I saw your disclosure. That wasn’t my issue. My comment was that I was very uncomfortable that you decided to run a sponsored post on this topic. Many other commenters, it seems, also feel the same. With something this important I do not believe a sponsored post is appropriate. I am more than happy to read posts about Hyundai genuine parts, Kmart etc, I know they are sponsored but you guys have got to make some revenue and they are (sometimes) good reads and informative.
Not this issue though. This is too important to have any sway of advertisers.
loading...
Agree with Rebecca, very annoying when they are not listed as such, the Hyundai one was not shown as SP at all.
And, although the post written by ‘Anonymous’ about abortion was listed as SP on Facebook, it was not shown as a Sponsored Post until the bottom on the website.
loading...
Hi. Is it possible to make clear when an article is sponsored on facebook? I thought there was normally an SP to identify it but there didn’t seem to be one on the Hyundai article just posted?
loading...
Hi Rebecca,
We do put an SP on posts that sponsored on Facebook and Twitter. It may have been an oversight on that one if you didn’t see it there, and if so I apologise and thanks for the reminder.
Jamila
loading...