Newsvine Response

In the Newsvine story's comments, I asked:

Is there some reason that Newsvine is not naming the company? Not that I'm about to start a boycott, I'm just more interested than anything else.

Here is Newsvine's response, also found in the story comments:

Mike D. :I'm not mentioning company names because my goal is not to out anybody here. It's apparently pretty common and it's not illegal, so I just wanted to point it out for people who weren't aware of it, and point out the fact that we are against it.

While it may not have been what I was looking for, I do understand Newsvine's interest in not starting a finger pointing game.

BTW: I love a news organization that not only allows comments on its stories, but actually responds to them in a timely manner. Did someone say "two-way symmetrical"? J. E. Grunig what?

Newsvine how I love thee

So apparently Newsvine got approached by a big media company, offering them payment for placement of their articles on the site. It has turned into quite a little scandal in the Newsvine world.

But the one thing that surprised me, Newsvine skirted around naming the company that was playing this journalistic payola game. While I may still be partially covered in my bubble 'o academia, to me, paying journalists to sprinkle quotes from employees and executives throughout your article is likely the second easiest way to get fired short of plagiarism.

Let’s get back to the problem at hand. Wouldn't it be ethical for Newsvine to shine some light on this ethical disturbance and publish the organization that offered the payment as well as give them a chance to explain themselves and offer their side of the story to this discussion? If what Newsvine says is true, there is little doubt about the ethical problems that this company is dealing with, but perpetuating the raping of the news media isn't exactly the most ethical either.

I am by no means asking Newsvine to hang anyone from the gallows; I am merely inviting the accused to join in the discussion.