I have to admit, there are moments when I watch the news and a deep sense of bewilderment washes over me. Not over global conflicts or political scandals – those, unfortunately, are often expected. No, my recent bemusement stems from something far more mundane, yet, in its own way, deeply unsettling: the media's obsession with Amazon Prime Day sales figures.
Full disclosure: our parent company is in the news business. It's why the Buff Boys consume more news than we ever have. There are TVs around the building tuned to the news all day -- including in the broadcast studio where programming is recorded.
Every year, as this much-hyped "shopping holiday" descends, I find myself staring at headlines and news segments breathlessly reporting on Amazon’s alleged sales performance. “Prime Day Sales Soar!” “Record-Breaking Numbers for Amazon!” It’s bizarre. I understand, truly I do, the need for financial news.
When a publicly traded company releases its quarterly earnings, when stock prices plummet due to poor performance, or when annual sales figures indicate a significant economic trend – that's news. Those are metrics that impact shareholders, employees, and often, the broader economy.
But a company having a sale and then broadcasting its internal sales numbers – often while the sale is still ongoing – strikes me as something entirely different. And when news outlets pick up these figures and present them as legitimate news, it’s not just odd; it feels like an explicit, unvarnished advertisement.
Let’s be honest: of all companies in the world, Amazon hardly needs free advertising. They are a multi-trillion-dollar behemoth with an advertising budget that could likely fund several small nations. Their ubiquitous presence in our lives, from package deliveries to streaming services, already ensures they are top of mind for most consumers every other day -- if not every.
So, why are our trusted news sources dedicating valuable airtime and column inches to essentially parrot Amazon’s PR messaging?
What truly solidified my unease was a recent experience on my local news here in Los Angeles. I was watching, expecting updates on traffic, local politics or perhaps a truly meaningful human interest story.
Instead, what unfolded on my screen during the 3 o'clock news could only be described as an infomercial masquerading as journalism.
There, sitting at a table laden with various consumer goods – echo devices, kitchen gadgets, headphones – was an Amazon PR representative. She wasn't being interviewed about worker conditions, environmental impact or data privacy. No, she was there to showcase products that were "on sale" for Prime Day. The on-the-scene reporter, playing along, gestured to the items and asked a question along the lines of, "What are some of the best deals viewers can grab today?" At the end of the segment, the reporter -- I shit you not -- pointed out the dress she was wearing was from Amazon and on sale for Prime so she was going to get another. What luck!
I remember thinking, as I watched this surreal spectacle, "What is newsworthy about this?" Is it news that Amazon has products on sale? Is it news that a company wants you to buy its products? If so, why aren't we seeing similar segments for every major retailer's weekly flyer? Or for Target's "Deal Days"?
The answer, of course, is that we wouldn't, because a logical viewer would immediately identify it for what it is: an advertisement. Yet, because it was Amazon, and because it was during Prime Day, it was packaged and presented as a legitimate news segment. (If it was an ad, the station is expected to disclose that to viewers. There was no disclosure for that segment.)
This isn't merely about personal annoyance; it's about the blurring of critical lines. Journalism, at its core, is meant to inform, to scrutinize and to hold power accountable. When news organizations become de facto marketing arms for corporations, even indirectly, they erode their own credibility. They teach the public that corporate press releases, particularly those designed to drive sales, are equivalent to unbiased reporting. This isn’t a trivial distinction; it deeply impacts public trust and our ability to discern what is truly important and objective.
One might argue that it’s simply filling airtime or that a large segment of the audience genuinely wants to know about these deals. And perhaps there's a kernel of truth to that. Plenty of people are interested in sales. But that interest doesn't automatically elevate a shopping event to the status of critical news.
If news outlets want to provide consumer advice or highlight sales, they should do so with clear labeling – perhaps as editorially independent "best deals" segments, or, if compensated, as clearly marked sponsored content. To present it as news, with a company PR person directly promoting products, is disingenuous at best, and a profound disservice to the tenets of journalism at worst.
I believe we, as consumers of news, have a right to expect more. We rely on journalists to filter the noise, to investigate and to deliver information that helps us understand our world, not just what a mega-corporation wants us to buy.
When I see Prime Day sales figures reported as if they were a major economic indicator, or a sales pitch disguised as a news story, it signals a disheartening capitulation. It makes me question not just the judgment of the individual reporter or producer, but the integrity of the institution itself. It's time for news organizations to remember their primary mission and to resist the allure of easy content that ultimately serves a corporate agenda over the public's right to genuinely newsworthy information.