"On the Town" ON THE TAKE?

[201test]

As if the wafer-thin editions of On the Town were not scary enough these days, they have apparently taken to completely mixing advertising and "editorial" content to make the definitions completely meaningless.

On page 30 of the August issue, there is a dining review of The Clique...fair enough. But right next to it on the same page is what looks like a review of Corez...it is even written by OTT editor, Joanne N. Bailey-Boorsma, but beneath her byline it says (paid advertising).

I know things are tough in the media game, but wow! Is this OTT's way of just giving up? Seriously, is Joanne now the George Costanza of editors, walking around in sweatpants and writing fake "reviews" for money to anyone paying?

Attention Corez, why on earth would you PAY for that, when Clique got basically the same pablum-y praise for free?

No more "On the Take" mags for me. I'm full.

[fotoman311]

As if the wafer-thin editions of On the Town were not scary enough these days, they have apparently taken to completely mixing advertising and "editorial" content to make the definitions completely meaningless.

On page 30 of the August issue, there is a dining review of The Clique...fair enough. But right next to it on the same page is what looks like a review of Corez...it is even written by OTT editor, Joanne N. Bailey-Boorsma, but beneath her byline it says (paid advertising).

I know things are tough in the media game, but wow! Is this OTT's way of just giving up? Seriously, is Joanne now the George Costanza of editors, walking around in sweatpants and writing fake "reviews" for money to anyone paying?

Attention Corez, why on earth would you PAY for that, when Clique got basically the same pablum-y praise for free?

No more "On the Take" mags for me. I'm full.

[201test]

It's still useful for the free calendar. And you don't have to pay to be in that.

[GRDadof3]

201, please don't use UrbanPlanet as your own personal vendetta machine. Topic closed.