In North Carolina, WRAL-5 is running one of their “5 on Your Side” television news features.  The station reminds its viewers of how important it is to have a plan to pay off debt and it outlines a few simple steps everyone can take to reduce their debt burden.

Within a few minutes of that story hitting the air, the CBS affiliate will share another message to its viewing audience–this time in the form of paid advertising.  Barely removed from dire warnings about reducing debt and comments from experts who recommend a “cash diet”, WRAL will turn into a platform for selling everything from unneeded $20 novelty products to automobiles that cost in excess of $35,000 (financed over 60 months, of course).

It’s a mixed message, to say the least.  While the news crews are smart enough to assemble warnings against debt extension and overspending in a tight ec0nomy, the station can’t raise the money necessary to make the pronouncements unless someone is willing to pony up for advertising.

And advertisers aren’t going to do that if the “5 on Your Side” message of personal responsibility sinks in with the audience.  If people really do go on a cash diet, WRAL-5 will be suffer the consequences.

The station isn’t alone, of course.  The same story, or variations of it, is repeated in every media market.

KLTV-7 in Tyler, Texas, is offering advice on managing credit card bills, encouraging more responsible spending.  Meanwhile, the homepage of the television station’s website is running an ad from JB Byrider, a sub-prime used car chain with a very questionable financing reputation.

Baltimore, Maryland’s, ABC-2 wants you to pay off debt and to take control of your credit cards.  They put together a week’s worth of tip segments to kick off the new year.  I’m willing to bet that at least a handful of slickly-produced ads encouraging irresponsible or unnecessary spending are going to find their way into tonight’s broadcasts of Wife Swap and SuperNanny.

It’s the same story on every commercial station, of course.  Advertising pays the bills and it only cuts checks because it convinces people to spend money.  Those news pieces reminding people to pay off debt?  The stations couldn’t afford it if they worked too well.

The fact that news departments are willing to act in direct contradiction (at least in one segment per evening) with the commercial viability of the station could be a good sign.  It’s an indicator that cash doesn’t yet completely buy and sell the news.  We should be thankful for that.

But the underlying lesson of this split personality is somewhat troubling.  Is it possible that, from news director to ad buyer, everyone knows a 2-minute “pay off debt” segment simply can’t overpower twenty-three hours and fifty-eight minutes of hyper-consumerism and tempting advertising?

The “Kill Your Television” crowd may be a little over the top, but they might be onto something.  Comments like those made by John Heckman Wright do have resonance:

Marketing, particularly in the form of television commercials, has so desensitized the viewing public to these connections, through constant repetition, that the rest of the story is no longer necessary in order to sale a product. The general viewing public needs only the symbols, the punch lines, whereas we need a marketer to draw logical, thoughtful connections before hear the persuasion. In essence, by giving up television, the husband and I have become bad consumers. The easy jargon of the marketer fails on us because we do not make such simple connections. Our minds are focused on our lives, and we do not “turn off” several hours each night for a marketer to sale us the latest “must have” product.

On the other hand, maybe the do-gooders at Delaware’s WOBC-TV will make a difference as they continue their Wednesday and Friday partnership with Consumer Reports.  They’re willing to preach the gospel of responsible money management as a sliver of their newscast twice a week, after all.