Publicity Feud

Every so often, newspaperdom becomes agitated over Free Publicity, which is the game between producers and publishers. When the two sides are evenly matched, producers get themselves or their products or services mentioned in public print, without charge, in exact proportion to their news value. Determining that value is, of course, almost entirely up to the publisher. A potent factor, however, is retaining the producer's goodwill so that he will buy advertising space. Feuds arising out of the Free Publicity game are often as not entirely within the publisher's province, between the advertising and editorial departments of publications. But when publishers as a whole feel they are losing ground to the producers, out bursts a larger feud in which the publishers assume a militant defensive against the producers. Such a position was taken last fortnight by the Publishers' Association of New York City, and reported at length in newspaperdom's trade weekly, Editor& Publisher. As is customary at such times, Editor & Publisher talked bitterly about "a growing evil" and a "deluge" and the "mushroom-like growth of free publicity." Then it told of a committee formed by the Association to "stem" the evil, forestall the "space-grabbing attempts." Placed in active charge of the committee's work was Andrew Ford, onetime managing editor of the New York Telegram. With a corps of assistants he was to examine and investigate the publicity releases of should-be advertisers, to weed out the real news from the "hand-outs." After weeding, weekly warnings will be sent to all Association members, to all newspaperdom. Whenever possible, Weeder Ford will scotch unworthy publicity schemes at their sources. First a few "offenders" were singled out to be mentioned, and then the list grew and grew until it seemed to include most of the famed producers of the whole U. S. But no mention was made of two of the oldest, most experienced groups of players in the game--the cinema industry and the hook publishers.