LA Times Takes Heat For King Kong Advertisement Disguised As News

The LA Times is taking some heat from the local blogosphere this morning for running a four-page wraparound ad promoting Universal Studios' new 3D King Kong attraction, disguised to look like news items in its "LAT Extra" section.

Featuring fictional headlines like "Universal Studios Hollywood Partially Destroyed" and "Dodger Stadium Heavily Battered" the stories are labeled as advertisements, but LA Observed's Kevin Roderick notes that the Times coverage of the ride is not confined to the advertisements:

On the real Times website, though, there is a story gushing about King Kong returning to Universal -- and a travel section review that calls the new attraction "riveting," with links to a package of five other LAT blog posts or stories about...the new King Kong ride at Universal Studios. It all brings to mind the editors' expressed desire to "own Hollywood coverage"...or is it the other way around?

This is not the first time the Times has sold its front page to advertisers. In March, Disney paid $700,000 to promote "Alice In Wonderland" on the front page of the LAT Extra section. A spokesman for the Times told The Wrap:

"We worked very closely with Disney to come up with an exceptional and distinctive way to help them open 'Alice in Wonderland...It was designed to create buzz, and to extend the film's already brilliant marketing campaign. "

Similarly, the Times ran a controversial front page ad for NBC's Southland, which resulted in strong protests from the staff and the exit of executive editor John Arthur.

Comments

[Uproar]

08:50 PM on 07/06/2010

I keep reading it as "Latex Extra"

[Swami Salami]

02:38 PM on 07/05/2010

zzz...

[GrownupStewie]

06:47 PM on 07/05/2010

mustache ride!

[Bil-Zai]

05:08 PM on 07/04/2010

Why not ! if both parties are satisfied. if readers are not let them stop reading and LAT will realize sooner than the King Kong fires of return that they made a wrong marketing decision that will make them pay much! i doubt such a think to happen though. Indeed, i think such advertising solution and the Alice in wonder land special operation would trigger some followers interest soon. maybe this will even make us think as readers consider again the importance of reading well before spreading noticed texts out of context amongst our peers as factual news, or else we will become a real joke !. discourse is back.

[niceguysneverfinish]

06:04 PM on 07/05/2010

I'd get used to it, I don't mind them trying to make more money, the Internet is hurting them.

[larce1948]

01:13 PM on 07/04/2010

Corporate interests rule American "news"? I'm shocked.

[Soulsurfer]

11:12 AM on 07/03/2010

Hell, why not? I have advertising spewed at me from a TV disguised as a gas pump, pay $10 to sit through 45 minutes of ads before the movie I wanted to see actually comes on, don't know the name of our local stadium because the corporate sponsors change regularly, and recently found out my German car was made in Mexico and my Korean phone was made in China.

[penjai]

10:29 AM on 07/03/2010

News..advertisements....whats the difference?

[Tunghoy]

07:51 PM on 07/02/2010

There is at least one precedent for this. In the late 1980s, Bob Guccione, who published the now-defunct Omni Magazine, made the magazine run an ad disguised as the front cover. There was a big spit storm in Omni's offices, and the result was that editor Patrice Adcroft resigned in protest. The whole event caused the magazine to lose a lot of credibility.

[Hardbull]

04:31 PM on 07/02/2010

This is a new low for the great minds of the Tribune Co., which has slowly chipped away at the depth, quality and journalistic integrity of one of the country's great newspapers. Obviously, print media has to be creative in generating income, but this was just sloppy. The same effect could have easily been accomplished without misleading readers into thinking Universal Studios had been destroyed. When they put a wrap around the front page recently that had Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter beneath the LA Times banner, it was much less offensive because it was obviously an ad. This one really crosses the line.

[Bil-Zai]

05:12 PM on 07/04/2010

friend, but definitely it wont generate the same amount of PR and WOM it generated here. I am not saying this is a proper action, i am just saying "why not!". readers should protest if they consider this misleading just as they did in 1980s that led to Patrice Adcroft resigning.

[angrymanspokane]

04:08 PM on 07/02/2010

A news source that makes advertisements look like news stories, hmmm, that sounds strangely familiar...

[raker]

04:06 PM on 07/02/2010

Is Latextra a fetishist newsletter?

[BabaLou7]

01:45 PM on 07/02/2010

The media is really a circus.

[middleoftheroad]

11:58 AM on 07/02/2010

If papers are to survive, they need to do things that will bring them in $. Since we all get to real THEIR news for free via the internet, and craigslist has pretty much destroyed the classifieds, how else will they make it. I say good for them.

[WildTango]

11:54 AM on 07/02/2010

Anyone else read the newspaper title as "LATEX EXTRA"?

[PunKinPai]

02:18 PM on 07/02/2010

Every day.

[RarianRakista]

02:46 PM on 07/02/2010

Whats a newspaper?

[Suzee23]

10:07 AM on 07/04/2010

They're what generate most of the news you read on the Internet.

Or perhaps you thought it all comes from a little colony of elves in a workshop at the North Pole.

[Clem2]

10:10 AM on 07/02/2010

Well, it said "advertisement" right on top of the page, so I was puzzled then realized it was an ad. They did this once before, on a smaller scale, but did not mark it as such, and THAT annoyed me.

The LA Times has done some great stuff-- their series on all the junk in the oceans; their series on how awful LAUSD is and how you cannot get teachers fired no matter what.

But, yes, having laid off at least half their news people, it's not going to be the newspaper it was.

But I think it's important that newspapers DO act as the fourth estate and so I support them. After all, HAD they been doing better-- IF more people read the news-- they would not have had to lay off good reporters. A vicious circle...

[yourmotherwasahamster]

09:24 AM on 07/02/2010

Why not? Advertising and other forms of manipulation disguised as news is nothing new. PR firms have made a science out of crafting a version of reality for consumers that serves the goals of corporations, usually to the detriment of the public. If you want to know more read "Trust Us, We're Experts" by Rampton and Stauber.