Sir, I notice with dismay the appearance of advertorials in recent issues of the BDJ. For those not familiar with this concept, the advertorial is an advertisement disguised through typesetting and layout to look like the editorial content of the journal. This is at best an ethical grey area and at worst simple fraud, with magazine editorial staff responsible for plugs and advertising text from companies that they should keep at arm's length. The genre reaches its heights (perhaps depths?) in popular magazines where biased and misleading content is disguised within apparently independent articles. Advertorial has been described as information pollution.^1,2

The publication of advertorial material is, surprisingly, acceptable to the FDI Code of Ethics for Dental Publications provided it is clearly marked as such and I accept that these articles have been typeset differently from the journal articles. However, the whole concept of advertorial is to gain spurious credibility for advertising material and to make it look as though the publication and its expert advisers endorse the product. Advertorials are considered not to comply fully with the editorial standards of newspapers and there should be no place for them in the BDJ or in any professional journal that values its credibility and independence. Will we be seeing edutainment in the BDJ soon?

The Editor-in-Chief responds: I thank Dr Odell for his letter. Advertorials are not new to the BDJ and are common enough elsewhere that BDJ readers are hardly likely to be deceived into thinking them to be editorial copy of the credible and independent type on which this journal prides itself. In any event, as Dr Odell points out, advertorials are typeset differently to other content and marked clearly at their head 'Advertorial'. It might be argued that all content of all adverts may be classed as advertorial in that it is, presumably, the opinion of the advertiser but without the 'safeguard' of the label to which Dr Odell seems to object.

Dr Odell uses the words 'spurious credibility' and 'disguise' as if all advertisers are so unsure of their products and services that he feels they have to hide behind deceitful claims. In reality, I believe that we are in general 'old enough and ugly enough' (as my Grandmother used to put it) to know what's what in terms of unlikely or exaggerated claims.

Looked at from the opposing view, our surveys inform us that many readers are appreciative of the adverts to inform them of products and services currently available. Indeed, when we recently ran an advertorial in our sister publication BDA News, a similar letter of protest (sent, not for publication) was matched 10-fold by a delighted advertiser who reported great interest as a result - some readers it seems are not so concerned nor so easily duped.