Hoopla stays silent on reader donations and ad income despite promise of ‘transparency’
Six months after The Hoopla’s founder Wendy Harmer claimed she would perform the “industry first” of disclosing advertising revenue and reader donations, the website is yet to do so.
Harmer made the claim in November last year, as part of a fund-raising drive for the site, which targets middle aged women.
At the time she said in an announcement: “This may well be an industry first – there are not many companies that are prepared to discuss their finances but we think our supporters deserve transparency as they are directly contributing to our quality independent journalism.”
At the time, a spokesman for The Hoopla said this information would include advertising income, reader donations and what it pays its journalists and writers.
Hi Mumbrella,
if you had checked the Hoopla website before you had posted this story you would found that you were incorrect – we had indeed published our quarterly income from the Friends of The Hoopla on the Friends of the Hoopla page.
You quote me as saying “this is going up today, Sorry, just been mad in here,” and it seems more than a little unfair for you to go ahead and publish this negative piece without giving us a chance. As a small operator in a brutal industry we are under the gun on an hourly basis, struggling to stay afloat week after week with a miniscule staff working overtime to get fresh content up every day.
We never said we would make our ad revenue available, but we did promise to disclose our figures on Friends of The Hoopla, which we have done today. Please go back to the original release and check your facts. Thanks for your support.
Hi Jan,
Thanks for your comment.
(I’m actually posting this comment at 4pm on the 18th but manually changing the time of posting to thread the response immediately after your note.)
My apologies that your comment was moderated more slowly than usual – I wanted to dig out the original email exchange I had with The Hoopla last year. More on that below.
I did indeed check that page. The last time was moments before we posted, and the information was not there. Let’s put it down to an amazing coincidence that six months after going pubic with a promise to reveal details about your revenues, you finally posted some information just a few moments before we posted a story.
You say our story was posted was “without giving us a chance”. We first made contact with your PR in early April to ask why no numbers had been published. You told us it would be “in the next few weeks”. We allowed a few weeks, and when you still published nothing, we gave you a final chance to comment ahead of publishing our story pointing this out.
To respond to your next point: “We never said we would make our ad revenue available, but we did promise to disclose our figures on Friends of The Hoopla, which we have done today. Please go back to the original release and check your facts.”
When you issued your original press release, it was slightly unclear exactly what information you were proposing to share. You described it in the release, quoting Wendy Harmer, as this:
I note you say “we never said we would make our ad revenue available”. At the time I did ask your PR to clarify. This is what she said in an email on November 9:
I don’t think we have our facts wrong.
Best wishes,
Tim – Mumbrella
Your last sentence says it all….posing, another spelling mistake but unintentionally true. Posturing would have worked as well. Hoopla is quality journalism done well without posing.
Hi guys, I am afraid your facts are wrong here; the quarterly report was published about 12.30pm today, as Jane told you it would be. If you had bothered to click on the Friends of the Hoopla section of the website before you posted your story, you would have seen the Quarterly Report for January to March 2013 at the bottom of the page.
Regards, Deanne Weir, part owner and Friend of the Hoopla
Hi Deanne,
As I mention above, moments before I posted the story, the report was not there. I did look. I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that we happened to be writing the story at exactly the same time you finally decided to publish the quarterly report (albeit without most of the information you promised).
All the best,
Tim – Mumbrella
Hi Mumbrella, why so long moderating Jane Waterhouse’s comment pointing out the inaccuracies in your story? At The Hoopla, we moderate comments within five minutes of them appearing, usually within seconds of them appearing. I have left two phone messages for Nic Christensen to discuss the mistakes made in this story, perhaps he could call me back soon?
Best wishes,
Lucy Clark
Editor, The Hoopla.
Hi Lucy,
Thanks for your question, the delay in posting was while I dug out the email from six months ago in which The Hoopla committed to sharing details of its advertising revenues, which Jan said was not the case. it took me some time to find.
Best wishes,
Tim – Mumbrella
Fairfax’s Daily Life is killing it in that category.
Hi Tim, I believe that’s the pubic/public typo trifecta for you now…!
Lordy,
I fear there’ve been others too. LW. I’ve clearly got a problem…
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
1.54pm: “Another Chardonnay” lovey? “This Rosemount is absolutely deeeelightful”.
1:55pm ” That pest Tom..or Tim from mubrillo, whatever his name is has been on the phone again. looking for the ad revenue numbers”.
1:56pm “oh, shit….better put something up before it turns into a whole Singo/Tom/Gai/Obeid thing darl….
1:57pm “Lost me login……where’s that f&^%$*ing thumbdrive…….shit….I bet they don’t have this problem at mammamia….oh….bugger”. Yep…..yep got it”.
1:59pm ” shit….is that supposed to be “pubic”…..bugger, it’s too late now.
1:59:59pm “Ok, done. I need a f^&%$#ing martini . You reckon Vibe’s open yet? c’mon, if he calls tell him it’s been up there all the time and he wasn’t looking properly”.
2:00pm: oh shit….phone’s ringing again…..James ?…..James who? Mediaweek? ……tell him we’re in a meeting.
Seriously, Tim, can you please tell me the rationale for letting such a nasty, anti-female comment from an anonymous commenter like WIl go through? I’d really like to know what you think the above adds to this discussion.
And Wil, that’s so brave to write anonymously.
Hi Jacqueline, I didn’t post anonymously. i just didn’t put my surname in because that is just asking for trouble a la Catherine Deveny.
You can contact me any time. We share the same publisher – Random House (where i met my ex-girlfriend). We went to your launch. I actually gave your book four stars.
BTW how do you know that’s not two agency guys. we call each other Lovey all the time.
Actually Wendy Harmer has been cruel to many feminist websites (daily life, mamamia) in the last 12 months so its about time she copped it.
Well done Tim.
Dear “Dibby Dob” ( whoever you are)
Your accusation that I have been “cruel” to Mamamia and Daily Life is utterly without foundation. You cannot produce one shred of evidence to substantiate this ridiculous assertion- because there is none.
All we so-called “feminist” websites have cordial relations- we share writers and all have a common aim to produce a quality offering for female ( and male ) readers. What would be the point in trying to tear down other sites?The digital age represents a tremendous opportunity in new media. We are all in the same business – and all work damn hard at it in our own way.
BTW, Wil, we don’t have Chardy at The Hoopla. We usually tap a keg.
Ok, now this is getting good… *pulls up a chair and settles in*. Will Wendy answer Tim’s original question about why they didn’t reveal their net ad revenue? Was that really Wil Anderson posting or some other cheeky chappy using his name? Did Rosemount pay for that product mention? So many questions, can’t wait for some answers…
Re: Wendy Harmer’s comment. You are my hero!