Analyzing the new “Wall Street Week”

Thomas Walek of Peppercomm examines the new “Wall Street Week” television show for O’Dwyer’s.

Walek writes, “That said, maintaining the legacy credibility and independence of the ‘Wall Street Week’ brand is difficult in today’s media environment.  Built on the now shifting sands of advertising and subscriptions, media companies in all formats are going to great lengths to stay alive and relevant. That can translate into so-called native advertising, content generation and other sponsor-driven tools that blur the lines between independent media and commercial interests. That reality is one that audiences are often willing to accept, and can hardly avoid, as long as the results provide useful, topical and accurate information.

“The fine print reality of the new ‘Wall Street Week’ is that it ‘accepts cash advertising, sponsorship, paid insertions and other forms of programming compensation’ that ‘may influence content, topics and (web site) posts.’ Further, ‘participants may pay SkyBridge to be on the program’ and ‘participants, advertisers and sponsors may have service or other business relationships with SkyBridge Media or its affiliates or parent company.’

“Like Mr. Scaramucci, Mr. Rukeyser was no stranger to success or commercialization. (Disclosure: I worked with Mr. Rukeyser, Maryland Public Television and  ‘Wall Street Week’ to promote various anniversaries and other events in the 1980s.)  Beyond ‘Wall Street Week,’ Mr. Rukeyser authored successful books, sold newsletters, gave expensive speeches and was paid to shill investments, all (mostly) accepted activities of a journalist in good standing of his day.   Likewise, Mr. Scaramucci is acting in concert with his times.”

Read more here.