Truth in Entertainment: Let the Buyer Be Told

By Timothy R. Hawthorne

Q:Congress is talking about regulating product placement on television. Should DRTV marketers care?

A:Lots of advertisers worry that remote-toting consumers skip all their expensive TV ads. As a result, many have turned to "advertising as content" tactics, including paid product placement. So viewers now can see characters drink Coke and Pepsi instead of "Yummy Cola," and eat bowls of real cereal, instead of "Tasty Flakes." Real world consumables lend an air of authenticity to fictionalized settings. Nothing awakens viewers to a sitcom's staged nature like working class breadwinners gulping cans of "Cold Beer."

Unfortunately, contemporary product placements sometimes do not slide seamlessly into the course of fictitious events--however carefully directors and advertisers strive to maintain the profitable illusion. The illusion, in fact, is what Congress wants to investigate. Reps. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Ed Markey, D-Mass., have asked the FCC to review its advertising disclosure rules. The congressmen contend that today's product placements are purposefully deceptive and blur the separation of commercials and content. Well, yes. That's the point.

According to PQ Media, worldwide placement deals for 2007 will reach nearly $4.4 billion. Television remains the top venue, with this year's take projected to surpass $3.2 billion. Ironically, the industry's clumsy execution of these initiatives is what attracts the unwelcome attention. Even lazy viewers see shots linger on computer logos and candy wrappers for split-seconds longer than the action dictates. And films get away with more.

Brandchannel.com runs a weekly feature that tracks the brands featured in popular films. When it analyzed the summer action flick "Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer," it counted a whopping 32, with the Dodge-branded "Fantasticar" taking center stage. In over five minutes of credits, Dodge wasn't listed once. Yet, the brand's presence was so blatant that Dodge aired a 30-second TV spot showing off the prop that it customized.

DRTV, conversely, is already subject to mandated disclosure, despite the fact that an infomercial's intention is completely transparent. Think about it. We create a half-hour program that doesn't break for a single commercial, features one product or service, then pointedly asks viewers to buy it. And we have to prominently display graphic text that this is a paid advertisement? How could viewers think anything else? Yet, on "The Closer," Deputy Chief Brenda Johnson can eat brand-name junk food every episode as often as she likes--and producers are not required to alert viewers that they are indeed being advertised to.

If DRTV marketers can thrive under truth-in-advertising guidelines, entertainment programmers can do so as well. Their protestations merit only shrugs. Most dramas already include content advisories, and the networks so clutter their screens with logos and program alerts that disclosure tags might barely crowd in. Ideally, forthright product placement statements might even alert viewers of what the advertisers want them to notice--or even better--to consider for purchase. And isn't that the point in the first place?

Timothy R. Hawthorne is founder, chairman and executive creative director of Hawthorne Direct Inc., a full-service DRTV, print, mail and digital ad agency. He can be reached at thawthorne@hawthornedirect.com.