FCC Commissioner assails Embedded Marketing

[Moses]

FCC COMMISSIONER DECRIES 'COMMERCIALIZATION OF MEDIA'
Rails Against 'Fake News' and 'Relentless Marketing'

May 25, 2005
QwikFIND ID: AAQ60W

By Ira Teinowitz [/size]

WASHINGTON (AdAge.com) -- A member of the Federal Communications Commission, Jonathan S. Adelstein, today warned about the “increasing commercialization of American media” and called on his agency to toughen its requirements and expand its investigations into the practice of product placement.

FCC commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein called for stricter product placement disclosure rules.

“People out there are frustrated by what they see as fake news and relentless marketing,” Mr. Adelstein told the Media Institute, a nonprofit agency specializing in communications policy and the First Amendment. “The use of covert commercial pitches is penetrating deeper and deeper into our media.”

Product-placement disclosure
Mr. Adelstein said he would like the FCC to mandate a clearer placement format that assures increased screen time at the end of TV shows to list product placements. He drew an analogy to political ads, which the FCC require carry sponsorship information on-screen for at least four seconds. He also said the FCC should step up its investigations into failures to disclose placements.

Normally, the FCC requirements covering product integration and placement are handled during a show's closing credits, for instance, when producers acknowledge that a host's clothing or a car has been furnished by a retailer or marketer. But those disclosures can flash by in fractions of a second, and local stations can cut into the credits, splitting the screen in half and rendering the type all but unreadable. Mr. Adelstein called for greater prominence of the disclosures and that the disclosures are being made.

Some advertising critics have called for even bolder measures, requiring some kind of on-screen alert whenever a product appears in programming, instead of a listing at the end of the show.

Paid 'experts'
Mr. Adelstein was especially critical of video news releases and so-called experts, from chefs to celebrities, who appear on news shows to endorse particular products without disclosing they are being paid by marketers for their efforts.

Mr. Adelstein referred to recent examples of government video news releases running without disclosure and to two April Wall Street Journal reports. In one, a former Child magazine technology editor, James Oppenheim, appeared on local stations to review educational toys and electronics without any disclosure he was being paid to tout a particular toy. In the second, the paper raised questions as to whether chefs on cooking shows adequately disclosed their sponsorships.

He called for the FCC to launch investigations into the practice of undisclosed paid endorsers.

Interactive marketing to children
He also called for a ban on “t-commerce,” or television-commerce, aimed at children. He said the term refers to interactive electronic links that allow children to jump from TV shows to purchasing products.

“Given that children do not always understand a division between advertising and programming -- let alone product placement that seamless weaves the two together -- I believe that now is the time to stop the development of t-commerce directed to children dead in its tracks. Digital TV ... should not provide wealth to advertisers at the expense of children and their parents.”

Adonis Hoffman, senior vice president and general counsel for the Association of American Advertising Agencies, said the group supports reasonable disclosure of product placement but only in instances where shows feature product claims and said there needs to be “a healthy discussion” about t-commerce and children. He said he believed older children understand the difference between advertising and programming.

 

[Moses]

www.orlandosentinel.com/business/la-fi-payola26may26,0,2138515.story?coll=orl-business-headlines

From the Los Angeles Times

Probe of Stealth TV Ads Sought

An FCC official urges his agency to crack down on lax disclosure of fees for product placement.

By Meg James
Times Staff Writer

May 26, 2005

Alarmed by "covert commercial pitches" sneaking into TV news and entertainment shows, Federal Communications Commission member Jonathan S. Adelstein on Wednesday called on the agency to investigate hidden advertising.

Although Adelstein took particular aim at on-air personalities who tout products without divulging that they are paid endorsers, he went an additional step by criticizing the lack of full disclosure in the pay-for-plugs proliferating in scripted and reality TV.

Adelstein lamented the practice, in which advertisers pay to get cars, cellphones, soft drinks and other products prominently featured or mentioned in shows.

"This is becoming so prevalent that people can't escape it by even taking a bathroom break," Adelstein said. "It's OK if the broadcasters do this, but they need to inform the public that it's being done."

Failing to disclose payments, he said, violates a 78-year-old FCC rule requiring broadcasters to clearly identify who provided "valuable consideration" to shows. Adelstein also took a swipe at his agency, which is charged with monitoring the public airwaves, for being lax in enforcing the regulations.

Adelstein's comments mark the strongest words yet from an FCC commissioner about the lack of disclosure in product placement. The Democrat's remarks came in a speech to the Media Institute in Washington and in a subsequent Times interview. Whether other commissioners would support his call for a crackdown was unclear. Network representatives declined to comment.

Advertisers increasingly count on integrating products into shows to reach viewers using digital video recorders, or DVRs, to skip past their traditional commercial spots. The product placement market is expected to swell to $4.2 billion this year, according to Connecticut-based consulting group PQ Media, up from nearly $3.5 billion last year.

Networks are practically hanging "for sale" signs on their most lucrative programs, so much so that the topic was a running theme last week in New York during the kickoff of the TV industry's annual sales drive.

Fox Sports announcer Joe Buck joked to advertisers that he would happily hawk their products during Fox baseball broadcasts, just as he did during the 2003 World Series. During Game 1, Buck chatted with Robin Williams, who was in the stadium watching the game. Viewers were informed the comedian was using a cellphone from Sprint, one of the telecast sponsors.

"Think it up," Buck told advertisers last week. "I'll try it. I have absolutely no pride."

At the presentation for the WB — owned by Time Warner Inc. and Tribune Co., owner of The Times — actress Amanda Bynes said the characters on her comedy "What I Like About You" were becoming increasingly familiar with real-world products.

"This season we found out, like, they eat Pringles and use Herbal Essence shampoo," Bynes quipped. "Next season, we hope to find out what cellphones they're using and what cars they drive."

But Adelstein bemoaned the practice as part of the "bottomless pit of commercialism in today's media." He said that when viewers were left uninformed it amounted to illegal payola.

"Everything from Coke to soap is subliminally hawked in TV programs," Adelstein said. "In today's media environment, product placement has moved beyond Coke tumblers prominently displayed at the judges' table of 'American Idol.' Now, products have even seeped into plot lines."

These days advertisers pay as much as $2 million an episode to get their products featured on NBC's "The Apprentice."

Adelstein said networks needed to go further than inserting a fleeting mention of a paid sponsorship in a show's closing credits, which is how the practice is often handled. On Fox's "American Idol," for example, the closing credits quickly note that Coca-Cola, Ford and Cingular Wireless are paid sponsors.

"A disclosure that appears on screen for a split second during the credits in small type that no one could possibly read without pausing their DVR — and pulling out a magnifying glass — could not possibly qualify," he said.

Gary Ruskin, executive director of the nonprofit Commercial Alert, applauded Adelstein's remarks. His group filed a complaint in 2003 about product placement that the FCC has yet to rule on. Commercial Alert asked that payment disclosures come at the beginning of a show and on screen when an embedded image appears.

"The whole television industry has moved to stealth advertising," Ruskin said. "It's dishonest advertising that sneaks by our critical faculties and plants messages in our brains when we are paying less attention."

Copyright © 2005, The Los Angeles Times

[Moses]

Adelstein Pushes "Prominent' Disclosures
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 5/25/2005 4:36:00 PM

Democratic FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein wants the FCC to require "clear and prominent" disclosure of of paid content on TV, including product placements, paid endorsements, and video news releases.

Adelstein has begun stumping for a crackdown on covert commercialism, which he calls a pernicious symptom of consolidation. He said he had nothing against plugs or endorsements, per se, so long as they were clearly labeled as such.

He called for the tighter rules in a speech to The Media Institute in Washington Wednesday, saying:

"A disclosure that appears on screen for a split second during the credits in small type that no one could possibly read without pausing their DVR-- and pulling out a magnifying glass-could not possibly qualify."

He pointed out that though the FCC has rules requiring disclosure of paid content, the rules "do not clearly spell out the prominence of the disclosure required."

He suggested the FCC take a page from the Federal Trade Commission and require "clear and prominent" disclosures and clearly explain what that means.

Adelstein delivered a similar anti-commmercialism message to media reformers at a Free Press conference in St. Louis May 14, but said he wanted to deliver it to Washington directly as well.

[Moses]

NEW XBOX RIGGED FOR EXTENSIVE PRODUCT INTEGRATION

Microsoft Creates Global Online Game Environment and Marketplace





LOS ANGELES -- Microsoft Corp.'s new Xbox 360 console has been engineered to accommodate product integration as never before, and its global audience of gamers will be sold aggressively to marketers when the system hits the stores this fall, according to the company.

[Moses]

NIELSEN PRODUCT PLACEMENT REPORT

Coke Classic Tops List for Week of May 9 - 15, 2005




NEW YORK -- Coca-Cola Classic scored highest in the latest round of Nielsen's TV program product placement survey

[Moses]

July 6, 2005

Product Placement for the Whole Family
By ROSS JOHNSON

LOS ANGELES, July 5 - At least some reviewers of Walt Disney Pictures' "Herbie: Fully Loaded" found themselves caught in a modern-day conundrum: Should they review the movie about a fledgling ESPN journalist turned Nascar driver who says she's willing to kill for Tropicana orange juice and seldom leaves home without her Goodyear cap? Or just skip the film and go straight to its ubiquitous promotions?

"This is a product-placement movie gone wild," Richard Roeper said on WBBM-TV, the CBS affiliate in Chicago. "There's a commercial contained within nearly every frame." "Fully loaded with what?" Ty Burr of The Boston Globe said, adding, "Product placement, as far as I can tell."

The fifth incarnation of Disney's 1963 film "The Love Bug" - which features 19-year-old Lindsay Lohan as the driver of an aging Volkswagen Beetle (and enjoyed favorable notice from some reviewers) - has taken in about $37 million at the domestic box office since it opened last month. But the film may ultimately be remembered less for its star or its box-office performance than for the boldness of its promotions.

Within three minutes of her on-screen introduction in "Herbie," for instance, Ms. Lohan's character, Maggie Peyton, is congratulated in two separate scenes by different characters for landing what promises to be a "great" and "cool" job as an assistant producer at ESPN - a cable sports network that happens to be owned by the studio's parent, the Walt Disney Company.

The only time Ms. Lohan/Peyton touches food or drink is when she pulls a prominently displayed bottle of Tropicana orange juice from a kitchen refrigerator. In a scene 20 minutes later, Maggie enters the kitchen growling at another character, "If you touched that orange juice, I'll kill you." Tropicana, a division of PepsiCo, is the official soft drink of the Nascar racing team headed by Jeff Gordon, who plays himself in the film.

And "Herbie" features a 15-minute stretch early in the film when Ms. Lohan's character wears a Goodyear baseball cap in every scene. The cap's bill was weathered by the film's wardrobe department - and tattered facsimiles, called the Herbie Derby, are currently available free to purchasers of a set of four Goodyear tires.

The deals behind those on-screen story beats were put together by David Leener, a marketing veteran whose headquarters are in the Santa Monica, Calif., offices of the producer Jerry Bruckheimer. (Mr. Bruckheimer is not among the producers of "Herbie: Fully Loaded," although he worked with Mr. Leener recently on another Disney film, "National Treasure.")

Mr. Leener says product proliferation occurred in the current picture largely because its Nascar theme brings with it an inescapable web of commercial connections. "The 'Herbie' deals were not about money," he said. "There was no way we could have gotten this film done without the cooperation of Nascar, and the deals were essentially a trade-out for services."

At one point, for instance, Mr. Leener had to secure cooperation from General Motors - and had to convince executives that audiences would accept the company's Pontiac GTO being whipped by a Volkswagen Beetle in the film's first race. These same executives, Mr. Leener said, were not open to a negotiation about a later match race in the film where Herbie went up against the company's venerated Chevrolet Corvette. (The Corvette won.)

To stay in tune with the Goodyear Tire Company - which sponsors three of the top Nascar racing series - Mr. Leener similarly had to make sure that a scene in the script involving a blowout would be changed to a relatively harmless "wall scraper," with no corporate signage in the background, that was clearly not caused by a failure of Goodyear tires.

Some of the film's writers said such considerations taxed their ingenuity to the hilt. "There's so much product placement in the film that it's really hard to sneak it by," said Thomas Lennon, who with his writing partner, Robert Ben Garant, came up with the idea of setting the long-delayed "Herbie" project in the Nascar milieu. (Alfred Gough and Miles Millar, who did later work on the script, declined to be interviewed.)

But, Mr. Garant said, "people who have problems with the 'Herbie' promotions don't understand Nascar."

"Fans can't see the drivers during the races, so they are sort of just cheering for the car and the sponsor's logos on the car," he continued. "When these fans see a Nascar driver out of his car, they just expect to see a lot of logos around him."

Audiences can be forgiving when it comes to product placement tastefully done. Many filmgoers, for instance, were intrigued when a new Aston Martin was introduced in the James Bond series. But they can also rebel when they feel a filmmaker crosses the line. Thus, antismoking advocates expressed outrage when it was revealed in 1994 that Sylvester Stallone agreed to accept $500,000 from the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation to use its products in five planned movies.

Martin Kaplan, an associate dean of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Southern California, cautions that things may be going too far, not just with "Herbie" but with the growth of product placement even on Broadway, where the producers of the current revival of the 1966 musical "Sweet Charity" - with the permission of Neil Simon, who wrote the original script - changed a line to mention Gran Centenario tequila.

"Do we really want our entertainment to make us think about brand equity strategy instead of whether the boy gets the girl?" Mr. Kaplan asked.

A Disney spokesman said he was not concerned about the way product placement had leaked into the "Herbie" reviews, since the film wasn't "review dependent." At ESPN, Rosa Gatti, a senior vice president for corporate communications, said that clearance of the ESPN name was granted to Disney only for reasons of "script authenticity," and not to promote the network.

One company that will not be explaining its "Herbie" plugs is Volkswagen, maker of the Beetle. Neither the company name nor the abbreviation VW is once mentioned in the film.

Volkswagen, which recently signed an overall deal for product placement with NBC Universal Pictures, agreed only to provide a Volkswagen Touareg sport utility vehicle and a new Beetle for a handful of "Herbie" scenes.

"There was no deal with Volkswagen," Mr. Leener, the marketing executive, said, "because their executives said, 'Why would we want to promote an old car?' "

---

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

[tombldr]

When in Mexico last Fall I went and saw the movie "Cellular". Dumb as gum but that's not the point. It was a 90 minute ad for Nokia. I couldn't have counted how many times they played Nokia's trademark ring tone. Bunch of other products in there but none as prominent as Nokia, from start to finish, where a Nokia phone really saved the day. Whew!

[Moses]

I guess it is yet another frightening aspect of globalized commercial media concentration

[Moses]

....In today’s climate of multi-national corporate conglomerates, cross-promotion between two companies who fall under the same corporate banner, such as Sprite product placements on MTV (both of which are owned by Viacom) have also become common. And whereas once a pair of Nikes was merely a costume or a Grey Goose Vodka martini a prop, now producers are aware that they can earn money through these once-innocuous products. In fact, product placement has become such a common and significant part of marketing, it’s now considered an independent entity within the advertising industry, with whole firms specializing in product placement strategy and execution.

Product placement advertising has become such a staple on television that the Nielsen rating system has even re-tooled its process to count viewers who watch product placements. In just the first quarter of ’05, the Top 10 prime time television programs included a whopping 12,867 product placement ads. That’s up 27 percent from last year, and it just continues to grow.

“I think you’re going to see a quantum leap in the number of products integrated into your television shows this year,’’ said CBS Chief Les Moonves at a recent media conference.

MUST SEE TIVO
Why the increasing landslide toward this new form of advertainment? For one, media-savvy consumers are now acutely aware of when they’re being advertised to in more “traditional” methods (TV commercials, radio and print ads, etc.), which thereby reduces the effect of those messages. And with the advent of TiVo and other digital video recording devices, consumers have the power to bypass commercials altogether, a prospect that initially had many advertisers and studios shaking in their loafers.

“Imagine if your readers had a machine with which they could insert your magazine and moments later it came back out except without the ads,” a local CBS executive told us. “That’s a pretty scary tool.”

But one should never underestimate the advertising industry’s resolve to saturate the public landscape with their clients’ products. Forced to become more sophisticated and subtle about the manner in which they deliver their messages, advertisers have concocted creative new ways of showcasing their brands, without having to fear the impatience of an attention-impaired consumer with an itchy finger on the remote control. In some ways, TiVo is directly changing television by forcing advertisers to merge the advertisements into the entertainment – if you can’t get people to pay attention to the commercials, you’ll have to put the commercials into the shows.

In what is perhaps a coincidental stroke of luck for the advertisers, “reality-based” programming dominates the television ratings. Viewers identify with the “real people” characters in these shows, allowing advertisers to conspicuously place products without ruining the audience’s would-be suspension of disbelief. For example, one could argue that NBC’s top-rated show The Apprentice is essentially just an hour-long infomercial, with its egregious sponsorship tie-ins (notice how the contestants are always working to promote a very specific product?), some of which the producers are integrating into the plot, some of which they are not. However, millions of viewers tune in every week, apparently unconcerned by the advertising messages that saturate the show.

While reality shows make product placement easy, they certainly aren’t the only programs on TV with brand integration. Scripted entertainment is just as likely to showcase a product, though these placements are usually handled a bit more creatively. As fashion was a major aspect of Carrie’s life in Sex and the City, the show practically became a filmed runway for the latest designer clothing and accessories. The entire caper plot of the recent action-heist film The Italian Job revolved around the new Mini Cooper, re-introduced to the market right around the time the film was released. There’s a reason why the only coffee that seems to exist in the fictional world of entertainment comes from Starbucks.

When thinking of ways to combat TV viewers skipping through their commercials, advertisers began asking the question “What if we could not only place products in the shows, but actually make it possible for consumers to click on and purchase them, via remote control?” As this is a logical marriage of eCommerce and home entertainment, this scenario is not as far-fetched as you might think. In many ways, TiVo-like technology might become the greatest thing ever to happen to the advertising industry.

GET [YOUR AD] IN THE GAME!
Product placement tactics have recently begun to reach beyond reality and fictional TV programs and into the coveted realm of talk shows, where celebrity guests are paid handsomely to plug products as if they use them in their regular lives. On a recent visit to NBC’s Today show, Lauren Bacall told a story about how one of her good friends had been helped by Visudyne for age-related macular degeneration. On Good Morning America, Kathleen Turner not only stated that Enbrel was “extraordinarily effective” in helping her cope with arthritis, she even gave out the drug’s web address.

“These types of testimonials circumvent people’s defenses by appearing to be spontaneous and genuine endorsements, rather than paid promotions,” says Christian Wheeler, a professor of marketing at the Stanford Graduate School of Business. “Many of the celebrities who do this claim to do so out of a genuine desire to help people, but to the extent that these testimonials are driven purely by goodwill, neither payment nor secrecy regarding links to the company should be necessary.”

Movies and television aren’t the only places to find product placements. Internet blogs, videogames, podcasts and all the other latest media trends come with paid advertising built right in. It was recently reported that the makers of the popular role-playing game Everquest II struck a cross-promotional deal with Pizza Hut that allows players to place a pizza delivery order from within the game. So not only is the Pizza Hut brand being reinforced, they are actually selling their product as part of the “entertainment.”

So, will mainstream media consumers eventually grow weary of this constant advertising bombardment? “I do think we could reach a point where the average consumer feels a bit encroached by corporations,” adds Professor Coakley. “But it’s also interesting how willing people are to advertise for companies for free. Look at the average person riding down the street on a bicycle – they’re covered in labels from head to toe, and you know what? They probably wouldn’t have it any other way.” [? huh?]

[Moses]

Fri / 08 Jul 2005

Paid product placement on Today? Not anymore...ish


If you're like any good j-school cadet, you know all about adjacencies: when magazines put editorial content right next to an ad about the same topic (the best are when the advertiser is also mentioned in the editorial), like an article on how to stock your bar next to one of Ketel One's signature "Dear Ketel One Drinker" ads. And you'll also know it's v. v. bad.

Also taboo is bringing paid advertisers on the air with you, which (now former) tech editor James Oppenheim of now-owned-by-Meredith Child magazine did on the Today show and other news channels, offering up supposed no-string-attached product recommendations. Turned out companies like Kodak paid him more than 12 Gs for the privilege.

So what's an ethics "king" like NBC supposed to do with its credibility on the line? Institute a zero tolerance policy against such product placement, even when there's a good chance an editor's recommendation actually comes from the heart — and not the wallet. (And who thinks programming like this isn't completely paid for?)

Appropriate or not, the Today Show seems to be tightening its belt on indirect product placement. Hornblower says she asked retailer Crate & Barrel for products to take with her on a recent Today Show appearance and had agreed to credit them on the air, but the show’s producers would not allow her. Crate & Barrel, Hornblower says, is a frequent Brides advertiser, but that the magazine has “relationships with a lot of companies all over the country—advertiser or not—and we never promise an advertiser anything.”

Man, it sucks when the best products are also those of your advertisers. And that's why even if Ketel One decided to start running a campaign here on Jossip, we'd still throw it around it like a Russell Crowe telephone. But what pains us is to learn Katie Couric and Matt Lauer are more than glorified QVCs hosts.

[tombldr]

www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07/13/foxsports_ruse_web/

Fox deceives millions during national pastime

By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Published Wednesday 13th July 2005 20:20 GMT

Fox Sports and Chevy teamed yesterday to deceive millions of people during the Major League Baseball All-Star game. They did such a good job of it that many of you viewing probably didn't even notice.

As Fox came back from a commercial break in the bottom half of the third inning, many viewers caught sight of a very long, flashy banner draped over an equally ostentatious advertisement picturing a yellow Corvette. The banner read HHRYA.com with the letters done in pseudo Asian design - clearly the work of professionals. However, the Fox Sports broadcasters Joe Buck and Tim McCarver played off the ad like it was the work of a goofy sports fan, dangling his banner in the hopes of securing a moment of TV glory.
Click Here

Here's the chatter as Fox panned across the outfield and then held on the supposed fan's sign for between 10 and 20 seconds.

"Welcome back to Detroit," Buck said. "A lot of banners and signs around the ballpark. No surprise there. Somebody just unfurled a big banner behind left field."

You'll love the next bit, as Buck devolves into a second grader.

"H-H-R-Y-A. Tim, you'll have to tell me what that means. I am not sure, but someone went to a lot of trouble, obviously, to put it up out in left center field."

You'd think that would be the end of the stunt, but no. Fox returned to the action to see baseball's best pitcher Roy Oswalt face off against Johnny Damon. After one pitch, McCarver brought all the weight of his formidable intellect to bear on the puzzle:

"I don't know what that sign means, but 'hooray' is the first thing that comes to my mind."

Funny you should mention that, Tim. Hooray is exactly the sound Fox executives made as they cashed their checks from the largest advertiser of the day. Chevy, the sponsor, must have been disappointed as it failed to prepare its HHRYA.com website for the traffic it expected to receive. Visitors to the site were unable to reach the page for about thirty minutes after the "I don't know what that is" ad appeared.

Today, you could see the website runs one of those cheesy take a photo with your cell phone campaigns. Chevy wants people to place themselves in shots with the letters HHR - the name of an upcoming vehicle. Now the site is rolling over here.

Is this a huge deal? Well, in the big scheme of things, maybe not.

It is, however, one of the most blatant examples of companies trying to pass off an advertisement as reality. Anyone watching the game would have sworn that Buck and McCarver really seemed not to know what was going on. But their ruse was easily discovered once you realized that Fox would never hold its camera on an unknown website and read the URL on air.

"Buck might have been saying that tongue in cheek," Fox Sports spokesman Dan Bell told The Register. "For sure, it was planned. It's not like we didn't know about it. Both parties knew about it."

Chevy's PR staff is on forced vacation this week and hadn't found anyone who could answer questions about the incident at the time of writing.

Buck certainly did not sound "tongue in cheek" to us at all. Both he and McCarver sat there debating the sign like marketing automatons, wondering if it was real and how much time some true fan of baseball spent hammering it out. They most certainly wanted all the saps watching to believe in the sign's authenticity and go hunting for this mysterious website. "Yet another Chevy ad" probably would not have worked as well.

It's sad that Buck and McCarver were willing to sacrifice whatever credibility they had as journalists in this way. Beware of what they point out next during a game. It may be a real fan out in the stands ... or just some cardboard figure dressed up as a Coke can.

[Moses]

Let's hope that the print media points out the deceptive embedded advertising and the woefully shabby whoring that big media has become.

And let's hope the Democrats can pass a law forcing them to come clean and have popups or scrolls when they embed advertising into their crappy content.