should you ‘pay to play’?

I was recently invited to be a guest on a podcast (which shall remain nameless). When I expressed interest in participating, I was sent a calendar scheduling link and a credit card form to fill out to pay $200 for my participation. This raises an interesting question – should you ‘pay to play’??

‘Pay to play' is a practice where individuals, businesses, or organizations pay for media exposure. This is sometimes also called an advertorial or sponsored content. Unlike traditional advertising, which is always paid for, it’s often meant to come across as organic. It also differs regionally. In my experience, it is a very common practice in many parts of Asia. In Europe, it is common that press trips are ‘sponsored.’ Versus in the United States, where several publications have a cap on how much their writers can accept (i.e., $20 or less) from a third party to prevent any potential biases.

So, let’s explore the pros and cons…

The Pros

Guaranteed Exposure

One pro of ‘pay to play' is the guarantee of visibility. Companies can reach their target audience without relying on the unpredictability of traditional media attention.

Control Over Messaging

It also gives you more control over the narrative. These advertorials are often written by the company’s in-house PR or marketing team to ensure that their key messages are highlighted, reducing the risk of misinterpretation or biased reporting.

Quick Turnaround

Traditional media placements can take time to materialize, given editorial schedules and news cycles, while 'pay to play' arrangements often offer quicker results. This can be advantageous for businesses that need to capitalize on timely events or promotions.

Access to Niche Audiences

Smaller or niche media outlets might be more accessible through 'pay to play' arrangements, allowing organizations to effectively target specific demographics or industry sectors.

SEO Benefits

Online press coverage can improve search engine rankings and online visibility, enhancing an organization's digital presence.

The Cons

Ethical Concerns

The practice of paying for press coverage raises ethical questions about the integrity of journalism. It blurs the line between advertising and news, potentially eroding the public’s trust.

Quality Control

Not all 'pay to play' opportunities are created equal. Some media outlets may lack credibility or have low editorial standards, diminishing the value of the coverage obtained.

Costs

Securing press coverage through payment can be expensive, especially for smaller businesses or individuals with limited budgets. The costs often outweigh the benefits.

Limited Objectivity

Journalistic objectivity is a cornerstone of responsible reporting. 'Pay to play' arrangements may compromise this objectivity, as journalists may feel pressured to deliver favorable coverage to paying clients.

Transparency Issues

When readers are unaware that a piece of content is paid for, it can lead to confusion and mistrust. Transparency regarding sponsored content is crucial but not always maintained.

Risk of Negative Coverage

While organizations pay for coverage to be positive, there is always the risk that the story takes an unexpected turn, leading to negative publicity.

If you feel ‘pay to play’ is right for your business, go for it! As small business owners, you need to do what you feel is the right move for your company and clients.

In the case of this podcast, I chose not to proceed. It was not clear to the audience that the interview was a ‘pay to play’ situation, and I didn’t feel right about that. I’ve been hearing lately that this is becoming a more common practice for podcasts, which is interesting.

What are your thoughts on ‘pay to play’?