St. Paul-Based Securian Is So Innovative Right Now

sourced

Categories

By Pioneer Press Editorial Board, Pioneer Press

“As St. Paul strives to create a niche for itself as a home for technology and innovation businesses, it’s worth recognizing that it’s a realm not limited to startups. In fact, a homegrown business — one of our city’s corporate points of pride and downtown St. Paul’s largest private employer — is in the midst of a “tech boom” of its own.

We learned more last week about efforts at Securian Financial Group that involve a digital revolution in how its does business, including creation of a collaborative workspace at its downtown St. Paul headquarters.”

Read More…

Tags

Comments

  • DISQUS-981741308

    EDITORIAL OR ADVERTORIAL?

    • http://twitter.com/casey__allen Casey Allen

      anon or credible?

      • http://tech.mn Jeff Pesek

        Both are fair questions – wonder if/how much Securian pays the Pioneer Press?

        • Frank Jaskulke

          Excluding subscriptions and advertisement the answer would be $0 as they do not take money in exchange for coverage. That is the main difference between trade press and regular news papers.

          If they did over the PiPress money for a story the likely result be a story about them trying to give them money to get coverage and calling them out…

          • http://tech.mn Jeff Pesek

            …so they do pay the Pioneer Press as an advertiser? I don’t see that financial relationship disclosed?

          • Frank Jaskulke

            Checked with some journo friends to see what standard would be – they confirmed that if the subject of the story is an advertiser it would be disclosed at the end of the article as a disclaimer. It would be possible that the company was an occasional advertiser (say they had done an advert years ago) and that would not be disclosed.

          • http://tech.mn Jeff Pesek

            I’ll believe what I hear from the source directly vs. your “journo friends” though your diligence around this issue is appreciated Frank…gotta wonder why they don’t just come out and say who pays them – unless I am missing something???

            In case anyone is wondering we have always disclosed 100% of our sponsors since inception because transparency when publishing is something we (and our audience) values: https://tech.mn/sponsors

          • Frank Jaskulke

            point was if the PiPress is not saying that Securian is an advertiser in the article than it is likely that they are not an advertiser. You don’t usually disclose that there is no conflict, you disclose when this is or could be a conflict.

            And for both of us it is all speculation anyway :)

          • http://tech.mn Jeff Pesek

            OK…so now you’re suggesting that Securian *is not* an advertiser of the Pioneer Press?

            Earlier Frank, you insinuated they were by saying: “Excluding subscriptions and advertisement the answer would be $0” – which means *including* advertisement, they are, in fact, paying the publisher in one form or another.

            That’s become the first fundamental unknown before even getting into the deeper stuff (is this an advertorial, who runs/owns the publisher, or who is on editorial board?)

            I just called and asked the publisher directly about Securian, but they wouldn’t say one way or the other. So you’re right, it definitely remains speculation all around, therefore bottom line sticks:

            Nobody reading this knows if Securian is or is not an advertiser of the publisher because the publisher deliberately decides not to reveal such financial relationships with their audience.

            Well, is it their right! But why is that the chosen way? Some very serious questions arise:

            Why is the publisher is unwilling to be upfront and transparent with their readers? (This is not about “how much $”, rather “if or if not $ exchanges hands” in the most basic sense).

            If they are publishing business information — which can and does carry serious financial ramifications — is it ethical to hide from an audience what businesses are financing the publishing or perpetuation of that information from behind the scenes, directly or indirectly?

            Who is on this editorial board and what are their financial ties to industry?

            Could this dynamic ever be abused? Has it before? Will it again?

            How would readers know if there even was a conflict of interest or advertorial happening if it remains totally unknown who’s paying them in the first place?

            Are you Frank, or is anyone else reading this advocating for something less than full transparency in media given what’s at stake and how little the public actually knows?

            Do you or does anyone oppose of these questions?

Sponsors