Reading this week's Entertainment Weekly, I found a pretty interesting article (unfortunately it's not online) about the proposal before the FCC to make product placement on television shows more transparent. I've written a lot on Ypulse about the traditional "Chinese wall" between advertising and editorial continuing to crumble under the massive media shifts we're experiencing (internet, Tivo, DVR, etc.). EW has it right when it says, "As television bleeds viewers and the Internet siphons ad dollars away from the tube, networks are growing ever more desperate to make sure advertisers -- their main revenue source -- are getting as many attentive eyeballs as possible." This desperation has lead to massive amounts of product placement on network shows at a level not seen in television's history. It's the most blatant on reality shows, but as the article points out, it's also rampant on scripted shows popular with teens like "One Tree Hill," "Kyle XY," "Smallville," and "Heroes."

Here's how the article describes the proposal:

Consumer groups -- with support from actors' and writers' unions -- are asking the agency to require more prominent warnings on product placement: Instead of the quick scroll listing sponsors in tiny print at the end of an episode, you could soon see disclaimers at the beginning and end, or even in a crawl or pop-up while the show is in progress.

At Ypulse, I think we walk a very fine line in our goal of covering youth culture for media and marketing professionals. There are some who want to banish all marketing to youth and reject the increasingly branded, consumer culture we live in. For me personally, marketing to children under the age of 9 turns my stomach, but for tweens and teens the reality is that unless they grow up on a commune without television or the internet, they're going to be exposed to advertising (in whatever form it ultimately takes). And of course, many of the products and services being marketed are actually entertaining and/or useful!

This is why I think we should be teaching marketing literacy, not just media literacy, to youth, especially as the wall continues to crumble. I have always been an advocate of transparency when it comes to advertising, and I believe that young people will actually respect broadcasters, publishers or technology companies that are up front about the need for advertising in order to be free, and especially those who attempt to work with users or viewers to make advertising relevant, contextual and useful.

I love the idea of this proposal -- though I'm not a fan of a crawl or pop-ups that actually take away from the experience of watching a show. But some sort of disclaimer at the beginning pointing out the sponsors who have paid to place product would be fine for traditional broadcast television. With TV heading online more and more, and online ultimately heading to "interactive" TV, there will be ways not only to label product that has been paid for but to click on it or roll over it for more information. In the EW piece the concern is raised that if everything were labeled, it would get out of hand, but maybe it will push programs to offer way less placements for a lot more money (i.e. a new advertising model). If young people are taught to be conscious that this is happening and to be on the look out for product placement, they become less passive viewers unconsciously absorbing commercial messages and more critical consumers of media -- instead of just being brand savvy, they will truly become marketing savvy.

Posted by anastasia