third-party ink

[sonyet]

Dear all,
I can't catch the meaning of *third-party ink* in the following sentence:
Prior to the web, organizations had only two significant choices to attract attention: Buy expensive advertising or get third-party ink from the media.

Is there anyone who can kindly help me? What does exactly mean? Why *third-party*? Thanks a lot in advance.
s

 

[Rover_KE]

They had to rely on the media to give them free publicity.

The first party is the organisation, the second is the public and the third party is the newspaper or magazine writing about it.

Rover

 

[BobK]

:up: Specifically, 'ink' meant printed coverage (in, as you say, newspapers and magazines) - in those pre-web days. Coverage in, say, a TV news report wouldn't be 'third-party* ink'.

b

*PS The reason for specifying 'third-party' is that if they bought 'expensive publicity' the 'ink' would be theirs (although someone else paid the ink supplier - ultimately, the advertising fee would cover it).

 

[sonyet]

*PS The reason for specifying 'third-party' is that if they bought 'expensive publicity' the 'ink' would be theirs (although someone else paid the ink supplier - ultimately, the advertising fee would cover it).

Therefore can the third party be a subject different from the newspaper or the company? I mean... A company makes the advertising on a newspaper but its marketing department finds someone else who pays for it...
That seems the meaning of the sentence if I literally translate it in Italian (third party = conto terzi)...

 

[SoothingDave]

Not a teacher.

They mean by "third-party" someone else. In this case, a newspaper.

The point is that promotion was accomplished by either buying advertizing, or getting someone in the media to cover you.

It's basically saying you either paid for it yourself or convinced someone else to cover you for free.