Indy.com
Today:
Product Placement
Posted: Jul 25, 2008 in Movies, TV and Celebrities
Tags:
I recently read an article about the problems with product placement and how commercials have infiltrated the shows themselves, even to the point that they are being written into the plot line. Yeah, so what? Back in the day, only one product was underwriting the show and that was the only product that was shown or mentioned. Remember I Love Lucy? Their show was sponsored by Philip Morris, so guess what brand they smoked? You got it! I would rather avoid cheesy lines in shows like "Mom, you bought me a G6 with a iPod docking station!!" but I got a little tired of seeing people pull out a red, white and blue can from a refrigerator with a giant piece of duct tape on it...yeah because we are NEVER going to figure that one out people! Yikers! I think there is a way to be sensible about product placement and then there is the overboard method. After all, what would Carrie Bradshaw be without her Mac and where would ET be without his Reeces Pieces?
The problem is that at some point the corporations (i.e. the owners of the product that is being placed) then has some control over the creative process. The danger there is that if, say, Pepsi has some sway over the show they're sponsoring, there will be some hesitation on having a show that might offend someone who is good friends with that corporation.
It creates conflict of interest and degrades the quality of the story, as well as potentially creating a situation where a corporation could affect undue control or influence over the populace.
That's specifically why in our country the press is separated from the government, and why so many people decry corporate-owned news agencies. When the people in charge of reporting the news have other interests, it can make a big difference in what is reported. Certain things can be swept under the rug that might be damaging to a friend of the corporation, while other things could unfairly be played up.