I am experiencing something that is really grating me. It is expected of me to send all stories I intend to run through to sales. They then phone up the respective companies and tell them that we are going to give them coverage and they need to support it with advertising.

They also have a look at the page plan before print, and occasionally they will detect a story that wasn't sent on to them (for whatever reason; not wanting them to pester a good contact; because I sometimes simply forget - heaven forbid, etc.) I need to please explain myself. I don't think that's on. I don't mind working together as a team and contributing to the greater (financial) good of the pub, it will be silly to have a negative attitude towards it. But what gets to me is the following:

- Laziness. Not taking initiative. Not being resourceful. Waiting around for editorial to provide leads.
- The fact that we are then 'stuck' with a story in the event that advertising comes through. A better story must then be sacrificed to accommodate the one with the cash behind it.
- Occasionally we'll even get lip for sending the lead on too late!

Are any of you in a similar situation, and how do you manage it?

Your corporate sales environment is not likely to change, it appears to me. I think you need to start looking for another job that respects editorial independence for the value that it can have to generate more revenue because of both the integrity and credibility the publication has.

The major journalistics organizations would back you up with their ethics codes. I'd also refer you to the Guidelines for Preferred Editorial Practices published by the American Society of Business Publication Editors. It's free on their Web site.

Here is the URL for the ASBPE ethics code mentioned:

http://www.asbpe.org/about/code.htm

I agree with Scoop, sadly. You need to leave, but I know that isn't always an easy thing to do.

You can push back by saying that the purity of editorial content is extremely important to the perception of a publication in the eyes of the readership, which translates directly into revenue. A publication held in high esteem by its readership is more valuable than one that is not.

Try a compromise. You'll let the sales team know the topic of the article and the company(s) involved, but only as a courtesy. The content is between the EIC and you. (If the EIC turns the material over that is a different matter.)

I'm quite surprised (and relieved) to find out that you guys feel as strongly about it as I do. Haven't been in the game for that long, and I sometimes question my opinions and reaction to things.

Smartalix - I completely agree with you and have tried this logic on the superiors. They always nod furiously in agreement, but that's about it. Like Ed&Design said, the corporate sales environment is not likely to change.

I try to keep my team as positive as possible, and always remind them and myself that no one is holding a gun to our heads. At the end of the day it is all about compromise - and indeed, when you come to a point where you can't do it anymore, it's time to get out. In the meantime I'm going to follow your advice and notify sales as a courtesy but keep the content amongst editorial staff.

Paul - thank you SO much for the link - a very comprehensive and well-presented guide to DOs and DON'Ts for our environment! Much appreciated.

What you are describing is not unusual in b2b publishing, but there are many ways to skin this cat to your (almost) satisfaction. At my publication, we cover all our topics with vendor-contributed articles, so your situation is actually less onerous. We do provide the sales team with a "storyboard" containing the list of accepted articles in upcoming issues, along with the vendors contributing those articles. Sales is then expected to call the vendors for advertising to suppport the article. However, sales never sees these articles. On the editorial side, we provide contributors with extensive editorial guidelines and edit these articles strongly to get the sales/PR out and provide useful information to our readers. We rarely have any negative reaction from vendors about this editing, although there are exceptions. The resulting content, generally, is not discernable as vendor-contributed material. And by the way, if a vendor that contributes an article also buys an ad in the issue, its ad is positioned as far away from the article as possible.