If memory serves correctly, wasn’t there a bit of a fuss about STW refusing to show videos that were adverts?

Given that a few videos have started appearing recently, will the companies have paid to get their videos on the front page?

Like this one?

Video: In Between World Cups

I guess so.

Aren’t most MTB videos promos – who paya and how else do they get made ?

If you are not paying to see it, it’s advertising something

@scotroutes – yep.

Just in the process of trying to find the old news item

Any particular problem, guess they decided to pay for advertising.

That.

The old post was about promotional videos being sneaked in under “public interest” rather than as advertising.

My current bugbear is being spammed by STW on Twitter, even though I’ve paid for my P 🙂

http://singletrackworld.com/2016/05/a-statement-from-our-publisher/

Anything that we do publish that we are paid or otherwise compensated for ie. Branded Content, will be labelled clearly as a sponsored story on the front page of the site or in the mag so that readers can make an educated choice about reading it or not.

Stand down folks – I appear to have misunderstood.
Apologies

TBF, that one on the front page is categorised as “News” “Video”, not “Advert”. I’m not seeing the words sponsored story anywhere on that page.

Any particular problem, guess they decided to pay for advertising.

Theres a slight issue perhaps… laws are quite strict in the UK about where you place advertising and whether or not its clear that content is paid for. The ASA are getting a bit clamp-downy on websites, bloggers etc where they’re not making it apparent enough that ‘content’ is in fact paid-for advertising – even when payment comes in the form of freebies.

I can see why STW are wanting to charge for what is basically promotional material – everyone else in the chain is getting paid. But unless they are clear that its advertising or a promotion they could get a wrist slap.

EDIT – typed slowly while Dawson was typing quickener