Having been an avid and voracious mystery fiction reader for so many years, I think of the words of Dashiell Hammett, "Being shot at... is one thing you never get to like." While my name isn't Mike Hammer or Sam Spade, as a publisher, I dodge a lot of bullets. My opinion is that it's tougher for a publisher than a detective since I've got no place to hide.
What I'm talking about is editorial integrity. Who ever questions that a magazine should sacrifice editorial integrity? Hey, it's like Motherhood and Apple Pie. Besides, no righteous publisher will ever admit that his soul was sold to an advertiser. Yet it's done: it's like cheating on your taxes. It happens but nobody talks about it.
Of course there is pressure; constantly. Admittedly, we are a fully committed "for-profit" organization (although sometimes I wonder) so one does not have many qualms about story requests from companies that you've never heard of. Since our primary readership is all controlled (sent no charge) we do depend on advertising revenues. However, this is totally tempered with the knowledge that if our 22,000 readers are not, in fact, readers, we won't have any ads.
The first real test came early (29 years ago) when one of our largest advertisers (Studebaker) lodged a vehement complaint about our coverage of the Pittsburgh taxi firm that said their cars were lousy and it was forcing them into near bankruptcy. The veiled threat was there. Consciously, we refused to retract a true story (it was in litigation) and we lost the account. I can tell you it was a major financial blow to us at the time.
From that time forward, we've never regretted our decision.
We've refused ads that were not in good taste or were directly negative to either a competitor or the industry. Through the years we've reported on "sweetheart" and "rifle shot" deals, "hold-back monies" and dealers' net-net pricing. Virtually nothing was sacred, and while it may appear routine to you today, there were a host of fleet managers who were oblivious to the real world. Eddie Dame, who ran one of the most effective leasing companies at Avis, was a late and reluctant advertiser with our publication; he didn't really support the full dissemination of knowledge to his clients. We gave bouquets to NAFA when they deserved it; and we issued barbs when they went astray.
You won't find many "puff" stories in AF these days. Oh, they still want them; i.e. the history of their company; the addition of another bay to their service area; the new building: how their computer software is years ahead of everyone else.
Our philosophy is that those kind of news releases may be somewhat newsworthy and reported if they truly have a direct benefit to our readers. Our kind of mission is to Support, Educate, Protect and Represent the nation's fleet managers: and the industry as a whole.
A recent bone of contention was when a leading lessor insisted that they be referred to as a major fleet management company rather than merely as a '"fleet management company."
No, you won't read about the well-known sales manager whose amorous escapades led him to change companies with some frequency (it's a heck of a story) or subjective test rides of new vehicles; or who lost the most accounts last year. We do promise to report on technology and operations to help you do your job more effectively.
And we're trying hard to make it better each month.
