HP-FT spat throws light on media-corporate relations

Experts claim while restraint is essential, outright threats to media houses by advertisers could backfire

When UK's leading financial daily the Financial Times decided to take on technology giant Hewlett-Packard, the spat threw some light on the complex and symbiotic relation between corporate advertisers and media houses.

A month ago, FT columnist Lucy Kellaway, in an open letter in the newspaper, replied to an e-mail sent by HP Enterprises marketing and communications head Henry Gomez expressing disappointment over an article Kellaway wrote, which, Gomez said, "mischaracterised" the tech giant's Chief Executive Officer Meg Whitman's comments at the Davos summit. Gomez also wrote while he respected Kellaway's right to "poke fun" at the HP management, she still had an obligation to get it right and that the "FT management should consider the impact of unacceptable biases on its relationships with advertisers."

The e-mail was made public by Kellaway and the FT, which chose to publish it in full, along with a rebuttal. In her open letter, published in the first week of February, titled "An old-school reply to an advertiser's retro threat", Kellaway said she initially just replied to Gomez's email saying, "Thank you for your message, which I have read and noted." But later, "a wave of sadness came over me" and she decided to take the fight to the public domain.

She goes on to say: "My piece was not biased and I fear you misunderstand our business model. It is my editors' steadfast refusal to consider the impact of stories on advertisers that makes us the decent newspaper we are." Kellaway's original column published on January 31, 2016, trashed Whitman's comment at Davos: "You can always go faster than you think you can." Kellaway wrote that the idea was nonsense.

HP did also respond to Kellaway's open letter in the FT. Senior Vice-President (public relations) Howard Clabo said, "As you can see from the actual email, Gomez very respectfully expressed his concerns about what he felt was a serious mischaracterisation of Whitman's remarks. Gomez's email was sent to Kellaway and the FT's business management team. No reporter or news media outlet should be above hearing honest feedback from readers or advertisers."

The response from media observers was mixed. While some praised the FT for its bold action, others said while FT's action to take the disagreement between one of its journalist and a corporate entity that also advertises with them into the public domain may seem bold, the relationship between media houses and corporate have always been a bone of contention.

"This face-off as it were between media owners and advertisers is growing. It is visible in India, where there have been a few episodes in recent years involving blue-chip companies and publications. The solution to this is the use of caution on both sides. Journalists and columnists should at all-time be completely transparent and do their research properly before writing a piece because what they write or say has global implications. And companies must exercise restraint when speaking to media-owners. Down-right threats don't work," said Valerie Pinto, chief executive officer, Weber Shandwick, India.

For instance, twice in the past, the Tata Group has given advisory to group companies for not advertising with the country's leading media group Bennett, Coleman & Company. While the group did not want to comment on its relationship with individual media houses, the spokesperson of Tata Sons stated: "In our understanding, the separation of editorial commentary and advertising is a fairly well-established norm in the media. So when Tata companies choose advertising vehicles, they are really guided by their branding visibility needs and the media consumption practices of their customers."

In recent times, there was a fight between Jindal Steel and Power and the Zee Group. Though this is not comparable with the HP-FT spat, it did highlight how a corporate house went to court to allege that the media house wanted to extort money for airing stories against the company in the coal block allocation issue.

"Different companies take different approaches in dealing with publications. Most of the time it's made sure that situation never reaches this point." It depends on the extent of self-regulation a columnist exercises, which is the function also of the regulation that a publication exercises. In India we have never had this kind of aggression shown from either side ever," said Harish Bijoor, brand expert and founder, Harish Bijoor Consults Inc.

Media experts also point out that in today's age of 24x7 digital media, which is ready to react and consume everything at a faster pace, brands will need to be conscious of how they react to news.

K V Sridhar, chief creative officer, India, SapientNitro feels that since we live in a 24x7 world where everybody with a cellphone is a publisher, if you don't write about an issue, someone else will do it.

"So there are imperatives on both sides - the media owner/publisher and the company/advertiser. Brands must note that their every word will be interpreted in a certain way and quickly put up on the web. And in this digital world, people are analysing everything you say or do. So CEOs, politicians, actors and all public figures should speak responsibly and if a mistake has been made better to admit it rather than resort to threatening the media. That could backfire," said Sridhar.

LOCKING HORNS

• Jan 31: Lucy Kellaway's column "Boneheaded Aphorisms from Davos's windy summit" is published in the FT. She trashed HP CEO Meg Whitman's comments at the Davos summit: "You can always go faster than you think you can."
   
• Early February: Henry Gomez, head, marketing and communications, HP, writes an e-mail to Kellaway saying, among other things, that the FT management should consider the impact of unacceptable biases on its relationships with advertisers.
   
• Feb 7: FT publishes Gomez's email and Kellaway's response saying her piece was not biased and that FT editors' steadfast refusal to consider the impact of stories on advertisers that makes it the decent newspaper it is.
  

HP says no reporter or news media outlet should be above hearing honest feedback from readers or advertisers.