On the media
I regularly see articles on websites that are blatant advertorials. I used to be bothered by them, and occasionally i’d bring the articles to the attention of the Advertising Standards Authority, which requires all advertorials to be clearly marked as such.
Here is one such example. Today whilst reading what I suspected to be one advertorial here,
I noticed a similar recommend story on the right hand side of the page. Here is the link.
This was even more interesting because I remembered feeling something towards this waste of time before. The article was apparently written and published by Emma Munbodh on 21st February 2017 and updated on the 22nd. It was high on the recommended list in the section i was browsing, so to me it is clearly being pushed as a recent story.
With my interest perked I searched for the image on Google.
Right at the top, you can see the image was used in a similar article on the Mirror way back on the 3rd June 2015. This similar article was written by James Andrews.
Not just that, rivals The Daily Mail also used it in June 2015 and it featured on the Sun a few days ago (is it a campaign?).
Some questions then…
Are the Mirror Group being very generous towards MuscleFood.com in devoting fresh resource, for free, by keeping this story going for 18 months?
Was the Mirror group paid for running this story in the past, or will it be paid in future based on traffic directed to MuscleFood.com?
Do MuscleFood.com know about this?
I will try and find out.
