Old Port: a magazine or political action committee?

Courtesy of Maine Media Collective.

Courtesy of Maine Media Collective.

It’s funny. Just last week I was flipping through one of those glossy “lifestyle” magazines about Maine and wondering how their advertising salespeople get clients excited about each new issue.

“Well, next month we’ve got a profile of another rich white person,” I imagined them saying, “an exclusive interview with another B-list celebrity who summers here, plus more photos of really expensive houses and a review of a pricy new bistro.”

“Wait, don’t tell me,” the client interrupts. “Let me guess: the food there is delicious?”

“Bingo!”

Days later, an email sent to local businesses by just such a salesperson was forwarded to me, revealing an intriguing new tactic to entice advertisers.

“[W]e are on the brink of an unprecedented move for us,” wrote Karen Bowe, an ad rep with the Maine Media Collective, publishers of Maine Home+Design, Maine, and Old Port magazines. MMC publisher Kevin Thomas and other staff “believe strongly” in the redevelopment project proposed for the former Portland Company complex on Fore Street, and are “concerned about the negative impact” of a citywide referendum this November, intended to protect scenic views, that could affect that project and others.

In response, Bowe wrote, MMC plans to reprint a glowingly favorable “article” about the Portland Company project that appeared in the current issue of Maine Magazine in the forthcoming issue of Old Port magazine, and include “endorsements and positive opinion” urging the referendum’s defeat. In order to print more pages to fit all this additional political content, and print and mail more copies of the issue to Portland voters, Bowe asks whether clients would be willing to purchase “advertising/one-time sponsorship” for $1,000.

That is, indeed, unprecedented. While it’s common for publishers to pitch issues to advertisers based on an editorial theme, I’ve never known a reputable paper or magazine to explicitly promote its political position prior to publication in a bid to make more money for itself and influence the electorate. It’s like MMC is turning into a PAC, soliciting contributions from wealthy donors for a political cause and transforming its lifestyle magazine into a glossy piece of propaganda.

“This publisher has never displayed any particular concern about the ethics of journalism, so I guess this shouldn’t be a shock,” veteran Maine journalist and media critic Al Diamon told me. “But turning a magazine into a glorified campaign brochure goes well beyond anything I’ve seen before. … This comes off as nothing more than a cynical attempt to enhance profits.”

And, I’ll add, a stupid one. Why not encourage people on both sides of the issue to advertise and promote their opinion on this matter? The group backing the referendum, Save the Soul of Portland, was never approached to place an ad in the forthcoming issue of Old Port. Two businesswomen who support that group — rug designer Angela Adams and Pam Macomber, owner of the spa Nine Stones — have canceled their ad contracts with MMC in protest.

(Upon further reflection, maybe this isn’t so unprecedented for MMC. This is the same publisher that caused a stir last year with its scheme to charge artists thousands of dollars to show their work in its gallery and get exposure via ads and editorial content in its magazines. Offended advertisers jumped ship over that practice, too.)

I asked Thomas why MMC didn’t solicit advertising from Soul of Portland. “They should call me!” he wrote via e-mail. “We would welcome their ad, and any others, in this issue.”

“There is no hidden agenda,” Thomas contends. “We believe that our readers and advertisers will appreciate and honor that we are transparent about our hope for Portland’s future.”

Thomas said MMC will not be printing additional copies of Old Port, after all, but will be editorializing in favor of a “no” vote. Businesses that pay a grand for “advertising/sponsorship” will be “represented with their logos appearing in an ad indicating their support of the Nov/Dec issue of Old Port magazine,” he wrote.

Attorney Barbara Vestal, a member of Save the Soul of Portland, said this arrangement “raises serious ethical and legal issues that should be explored.”

“When any other corporation raises and spends money for the specific purpose of influencing an election, it is required to form a PAC to insure public disclosure and accountability,” she wrote in a statement sent to me this week. “We understand that legitimate media companies are exempt from campaign finance laws, but we don’t believe the exemption anticipated this kind of direct involvement by a media corporation to raise money for the express purpose of influencing a [referendum vote].”

Regardless of the outcome of this controversy, I predict something unprecedented will happen: someone will actually read the next issue of Old Port magazine, not just flip through it for the pretty pictures.

Chris Busby

About Chris Busby

Chris Busby is editor and publisher of The Bollard, a monthly magazine about Portland. He writes a weekly column for the BDN.