The Birth of Product Placement; Avoiding the Million Dollar Minute

It's actually kind of funny. A few articles ago, I wrote about companies that pay lot's of money to introduce their products into a movie or a television soap.
Now I've read an article that companies actually pay less for this type of advertising than they do for commercials.
As advertising on television became more and more expensive, companies looked for a cost efficient strategy and that was the beginning of product placement.
A few years ago, brands were always covered or we we saw cans of soda labeled just with the name "Cola".
Nowadays, we aren't surprised anymore when we see clearly what car James Bond is driving or what sunglasses Tom Cruise is wearing.
It's less obvious than commercials but very efficient.
In my opinion, I would rather buy things I've seen in a soap than product of commercials. It's very strange but it's true. Commercials can be too direct. And in soaps, you don't even notice they trey to promote their products. And you're influenced without even knowing!

Product Placement; Avoiding the Million Dollar Minute essays

(Marie Lambrecht)

know your film product placement

Companies make use of product placement to promote their products to the public. But has product placement always be an advantage for the company?

This day advertisers need to be prepared that their promotion can always be linked to negative association, instead of grabbing the attention of people. “Up in the air” is a really good example of this negative promotion. When George Clooney, playing a corporate troubleshooter, walks with his luggage past, Hilton, Hertz and American Airlines, it all looks like traditional, normal product placement. But the person only stays in the Hilton, so it begins to feel like an attack on the brand instead of promoting it.

The director of Up in the air, thought that the movie wouldn’t work without any brands with a worldwide reputation. So Jason Reitman, just used the brands without any permission of Hilton and American Airlines, to give his movie more power.

So companies need to pay attention that their products or brand is not immediately associated with a negative aspect or a negative moment in a movie.

Stefanie Loggeh

Fictional brands

Where product placement isn’t possible, filmmakers are forced to create fake companies or brand names. Some of those products became a real product, others are just famous in different movies.

Since no real airline don't want to be associated with skyjackings or plane crashes, producers created Oceanic Airlines. It's a fictional airline that's often used in action movies and television shows and is now well-known from the TV show Lost.

As a matter of fact, some of the fictional movie products became such a phenomenon that it's now being sold in stores. Like in the TV show True blood where vampires drink bottled “True Blood” or in The Simpsons where the whole town drinks Duff Beer.

So if you are watching a movie, don't immediately think that all the products you see is some kind of product placement.

Shari Jonghmans

toptenz

 

Product placement on Flemish broadcasting companies

When I watched tv (especially vtm), I noticed something in the bottom right corner, namely the symbol “PP”.  Now, it took my attention, caused by our topic Product Placement. Is there really an association between the symbol on television and our subject? The best way to find out: GOOGLE, the magic search engine. And yes indeed, I found an answer. Isn’t it amazing?

Since 1 September 2009, all the Flemish broadcasting companies use the symbol until two seconds in the beginning and at the end of a program that consist product placement. The adjustments were a response to the European regulation from 2009.

http://www.vlaamseregulatormedia.be/nl/faq/productplaatsing.aspx#

Sophie Leyn

Why Apple deserves an oscar too

Based on other blogs, it seems that Apple really is a popular brand when it comes to product placement.

Going back to 2001, Ford and Pepsi were the most used brand. But like I already said in a comment, Apple has beaten Ford and Pepsi and can now be seen in at least 50% of top movies, which makes it the number one brand of product placement.

Even when the products aren't featured in movies, they still get involved in the design, for example Wall-E where the robot “Eve” is as shiny and white as any iPod or Macbook. Was it because Steven Jobs used to own Pixar or just because it was actually designed by a guy who also designed the iPod...? Who will tell?

Nobody likes to admit but I think Apple literally controls Hollywood! Is it because of his beautiful, expensive and not at all “representative of reality” look?

It's great for Apple that they don't always need to pay for this kind of advertisement but then they also get the effect where they camouflaging the logo with fruit or a pencil jar... Though we recognize easily when it's from Apple.

Shari Jonghmans

the awl

nytimes

Product Placement in National Television !

Yesterday evening, while I was watching "So you think you can dance", I've noticed that even Belgian television is overwhelmed by product placement.

Every time you saw the candidates texting with their phone, you saw a screen of T-Mobile. 

Not very subtle but still, a kind of product placement. 

I already knew that Mentos is a huge sponsor for that program, but I didn't know there were several...

-- the end of a Belgian update --

(The colors of the backgrounds are always in pink and orange, the colors of Mentos Aqua Kiss Double Layers)

(Marie Lambrecht)

Smoking in movies

In my first blog I described that food product placement can have a huge negative influence on children.  Now, I will explain another negative impact that product placement can have on adolescents.

Children and their parents watch an average of 3 movies in a week and in most of the films they see an actor smoking a cigarette. It’s probably really difficult for teenagers, when they see their favorite stars with several cigarettes on screen, not to copy their behavior. The more teens see the actors smoking, the more likely they will try it also one time. Especially when the children reached the age of 16, they are frequently faster influenced to smoke. The Tobacco companies know that the media can be so influential at teenagers.  That’s why these companies have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to promote their brand of cigarettes on the screen.

Stefanie Logghe

http://www.lung.ca/protect-protegez/tobacco-tabagisme/facts-faits/teens-ados_e.php