Why ‘branded journalism’ is a contradiction in terms

Journalists, media companies and brands are all feverishly seeking new models for creating content. A magic phrase often encountered in this context is branded journalism. Both established media companies and brands appear interested in this form of ‘journalism at the behest of brands’. But in that case, is it still really journalism?

The starting point of branded journalism is the fact that brands have to earn the attention of their public, and they can do so by offering content of a journalistic level. ´Journalistic level´ generally means that the tone is neutral and that the content also actually has genuine substance to it. But branded journalism is not, and never can be, independent or objective. Therefore the term is misleading and we prefer to talk about branded content. Frankly, branded journalism is an example of doublespeak and it only generates confusion.

Branded versus independent
Most people who consume content of brands understand perfectly well that what they are getting did not spring into existence independently. It is true that there are companies which let journalists write without interference about a particular subject, but does that mean the latter work in complete independence?
Even if there´s no censor wielding a red pen, there might well be self-censorship at work. Because what company wants to pay journalists for contributions that amount to shooting itself in the foot? Not one, and therefore branded journalism is a long way from critical, independent journalism. Practitioners of branded journalism who don´t believe this should just try writing a puff piece sometime about their principal´s competitors . . .

Not independent, but solid
Branded content doesn´t have to be objective or independent. Makers of branded content simply have other ambitions than the independent press. If you’ve got a strong vision and mission, then you´ll want to let that shine through clearly in your content. Think Quarterly from Google is a good example of this. The magazine doesn´t deal with the company’s products, but rather with Google´s vision of the world and its belief in open technology. You don´t read Think Quarterly for its critical or independent voice, but rather because you’re interested in Google’s vision. It ain´t journalism, but it is thought leadership.

Branded versus native journalism
Things only begin to get tricky when brands conceal themselves inside the journalism. Then we’re dealing with what is currently called native journalism, but is actually old wine in new bottles. Native journalism is the digital version of the old advertorial or publireportage: a commercial message that tries to give the impression that it’s part of the editorial content.

Most half-way critical readers experience this as an attempt at deception, and it hurts the brand’s image. Adepts see native journalism as heralding a complete fusion of news media and brands. That’s a dangerous trend, because truly independent media have a vital role to play as social watchdogs. This watchdog function is also important for companies and marketers.

So let´s keep journalism and marketing separate. Strong branded content doesn’t need the journalism label anyway. Branded content wants to be engaging, while journalism, due to its striving for objectivity, is usually far more detached.

Journalistic techniques
All of which doesn´t mean that branded content can´t be created making use of certain journalistic techniques. On the contrary, a journalistic approach promotes the readiness to read and increases the credibility (even if journalism tout court has taken some major hits in recent years).
Therefore there must be room in branded content for real people with real opinions and real stories, as well as for an exchange of views; facts must be checked; there has to be a clear separation between promotion, facts and commentary; uninterpreted transmission of policy positions or other unilateral information (“stenography”) must be excluded, … And the reader’s interest must always be the central concern. 

Within the limits of branded content, these journalistic rules can bolster credibility and thus improve the information transfer and strengthen a feeling of connectedness.