Dean's World

The Evil of Product Placement

Dean

John Hood says concern about product placement in entertainment is silly.

I quite agree.

Posted by Dean | Permalink | Technorati Trackbacks

Steven Malcolm Anderson (www):

People, in real life or in fiction, use products and those products have brand names. Archie Bunker once ate some Cocoa Puffs. Ayn Rand once mentioned Fruit Loops. She also had a character smoke Camels. Leonard Peikoff once referred to Safeway on his radio show and he used Safeway as an example in his book on the philosophy of Objectivism.

There's nothing wrong with eating food or wearing clothes or using any other product of capitalism. There is nothing wrong with brand names. There is nothing wrong with buying and selling things. There is nothing wrong with advertizing things. There is, in fact, everything right with those things. What is wrong is socialism and government controls and busybody "do-gooders" who want to regulate every aspect of our lives.

11.22.2005 5:26pm

(link)

Dean Esmay:

What I object with the "product placement is dangerous" ninnies is the assumption that people are brainless sheep easily brainwashed. As if somehow I'll mindlessly drink Coke not because I like it but because I was hypnotized....

11.22.2005 6:41pm

(link)

S.C. Ripley (mail) (www):

I actually like (most) product placement. It was always jolting to see a character drinking a made-up soda brand or eating generic cereal. It always seemed like a jarring reminder that these people weren't real, living in a made-up world. Of course, you already know this, but when you're trying to enjoy the story, you don't want to think about that.

What I find annoying about some product placement is that they'll slip it in where it doesn't fit so that, like the made-up products, they end up distracting from the story. When I saw The Island this summer, the product placement was utterly baltant. They live on an isolated island where they are told they are the last survivors of doomsday, and they drink Aquafina? Really? It kind of broke the futuristic feel that the first part of the movie otherwise had.

But I agree that it should be left to the markets to determine when companies are taking product placement too far. After all, The Island did bomb....

11.22.2005 6:56pm

(link)

Michael Demmons (mail) (www):

I'd rather see a Coke in a movie than have the movie interrupted by a Coke commercial!! And really, it kinda makes the movie more real when you see a Coke in it. Dontcha think?

11.22.2005 7:21pm

(link)

Dean Esmay:

I do.

11.22.2005 8:04pm

(link)

triticale (mail) (www):

My all time favorite product placement was the Voodoo for Dummies book in "Bride of Chuckie".

11.22.2005 10:15pm

(link)

Steven Malcolm Anderson (www):

Michael Demmons wrote:
"I'd rather see a Coke in a movie than have the movie interrupted by a Coke commercial!!"

Absolutely.

"And really, it kinda makes the movie more real when you see a Coke in it. Dontcha think?"

Yes, it does.

Dean wrote:
"What I object with the "product placement is dangerous" ninnies is the assumption that people are brainless sheep easily brainwashed. As if somehow I'll mindlessly drink Coke not because I like it but because I was hypnotized...."

Absolutely. They may speak for themselves, but not for me. I've never bought something because a character in a movie used it or because I saw it advertized on TV or because a character in a novel used it. Rand's heroes in Atlas Shrugged smoked cigarettes all the time, but I've never smoked a cigarette in my life nor been tempted to. No matter how many characters in movies drink a certain brand of pop, I'll always prefer a good smoothie or a glass of milk.

I think for myself and like what I like and don't like what I don't like. I'm no brainwashed sheep.

And then there are the people who complain that we have "too many" choices and that this bewilders our little minds. There can never be "too many" choices. I'll take as many choices as I can get and I won't let anybody else make my choices for me.

Back in the old days (circa 1909) when it was still possible to be a socialist and still be an honest man, the complaint against capitalism was long work hours and low wages. Now, the complaint is that people have too much leisure, too much money, and that they are wasting it on buying things they like instead of what somebody else thinks is good for them.

11.23.2005 12:55am

(link)

JRogge:

I thought the only reason you didn't see more products placement in movies and entertainment awhile ago was due to the fact that companies were refusing to pay to advertise so the movies took the products out of the films refusing to offer free advertisement. In any case it dosen't mean people are going to be swayed by this type of thing anyhow. No I am going to have a lamb chop, followed by a nice Camel cigarette. Then I'll wash it all down with a effervescent, refreshing, ice-cold coke. For some reason after reading all of this it just sounds good.

11.23.2005 10:51am

(link)

Inv A. DeSoda (mail) (www):

Further proof of the irrelevance of the FCC. The viewer obviously sees the product placement, no need to warn them about it. If I am watching the movie, should I be thinking about the dramatic tension in the story or should I be thinking "Hey, there's that Coca-Cola(TM) the FCC warned me about?"

And won't the disclaimer have the opposite effect from what is intended, effectively giving free advertising to the companies?

"WARNING: This movie is sponsored by Coca-Cola(TM)"

It's kind of like, "Don't think of a purple elephant in a polka-dot tutu!" You immediately start thinking of a purple elephant in a polka-dot tutu.

11.23.2005 11:56am

(link)

JRogge:

While we're at it why don't we put product sponserhip warnings on everything!

"Warning: This Wal-Mart commercial was sponsered by Wal-Mart"

"Warning: This stripper's breasts were sposered by Trump's Adult Entertainment."

"Warning: This candidate's campaign contributions come from moveon.org, The Walt Disney Corperation, and Halliburton."

or

"Warning: This show requires obligatory warnings that serve no purpose."

Let's have fun with this!

11.23.2005 12:22pm

(link)

Steven Malcolm Anderson (www):

"WARNING: The No. 2 pencil used by the hero of this story to jot down his notes was made by Eberhard-Faber!"

"WARNING: The publisher of the novel on which this movie is based is New American Library!"

"WARNING: The computer on which this comment is being written is an e-machine running under Microsoft Windows NT! He is using Firefox!"

"WARNING: The author of this comment reads books published by Arlington House and by Western Islands!"

"WARNING: The breakfast cereal the heroine in this story is eating was NOT made by the Democratic People's Collective but by a PRIVATE enterprise motivated by the profit motive!"

11.23.2005 12:48pm

(link)

Martin L. Shoemaker (www):

I wish I could side with you and John, Dean, because I think it's none of Nader's or the government's damn business.

But I do have to say that product placement is an insidious form of brainwashing. Or at least, it was for me. But only once.

Back in the 70s, Marvel introduced a new comic book hero: Luke Cage, Hero for Hire. Luke was a man falsely convicted of murder; and to win credit toward an early release, he participated in an experimental biomedical program. But a vindictive prison guard turned up the settings on the experiment, and it overloaded, leaving Luke with incredible strength and a super-strong hide. He injured the guard in escaping from the experiment; and rather than face the wrath of the guards, he broke jail, and went out to prove his innocence. And to pay his bills, he advertised himself as a superhero for hire.

Now I happened to luck onto Luke's first issues; and I thought he was just the coolest character out there. I was too young to understand that he was black, and so he wasn't supposed to be a role model for little white kids like me. He was aimed at the black youth market, not me. I didn't know, and I didn't care. For a long time, Superman, Batman, and Captain Marvel couldn't hold a candle to Luke Cage in my eyes. I wanted to be just like Luke.

And Luke lived right down the street from and often got food from the Orange Julius. Imagine my surprise when, later in life, I learned that that's an actual restaurant chain!

To this day, I can't pass by an Orange Julius without getting at least a drink. And every time I do, some little boy in the back of my head is envisioning himself as a big, mean-spirited black superhero with a heart of gold.

So sometimes, product placement really can tie a character and a product together in your head. Does that make it a matter for the government to intervene? Not a chance. But it explains why the companies do it.

11.23.2005 10:53pm

(link)

JRogge:

Funny you mention that Martin. I always wanted Hostess brand treats because Spider Man said they were awesome :) I think the children are usually the best age to market to because they have so many role-models that can make a product appealing to them. Still, even if there's a fond memory of Luke Cage or Spider Man involved, we know that it was just an ad. To be convinced that the Orange Julius is the end all be all of drinks and no substitute will suffice might boarder on brainwashing. I used to like the rumors of subliminal ads, those were my favorite. If there were subliminal ads, I certainly don't remember any. :D

11.24.2005 2:51am

(link)

Trudy W. Schuett (mail) (www):

Back in the early 1970s, there was a new bath soap being introduced called Phase III. They had a massive ad campaign, but since I'm so often allergic, I didn't even consider buying this product.

One day I was grocery shopping with my sister-in-law, and I remember we were talking about something else, and the name of the soap, "Phase III" came into my head, almost as if somebody was whispering it in my ear. Next thing I knew, Betty was tapping me on the shoulder, wanting to know if I was OK. Guess I just went off somewhere for a minute.

When we stopped at her house to unload groceries, there was that damn soap right in the top of one of my bags. Never did figure out how it got there, especially since soap was not on my list that day, and I didn't have any recollection of going down that aisle.

Spooked me then, and and now!

11.24.2005 7:46am