While screenwriters, TV writers and other "ethical artists" have been balking at the notion of incorporating subliminal and not-so subliminal product placement ads and messages into scripts, Gail Collins from the New York Times opines today on whether that war is worth waging at all.
Especially when wages (and ad revenue) is so hard to come by in this new period of economic reflection. I was actually intrigued by Gail's take on on the topic (click the link to read her column), but...
My opinion? Am I insulted when I see a Starbucks coffee cup sitting in front of a news anchorperson? Or does it bother me that the producers of Boston Legal are getting paid for William Shatner to pitch Viagra?
Nah! Its all fair and fun, and it doesn't lead me to say "How could they do something as unethical as pitch a product on the news or within the script of a favorite TV show??"
Next question: Does it influence me to buy the product that's subliminally promoted? Nah. Not yet anyway. But, I'm a lousy shopper, especially these days.
Last question: Will these types of product placements have a negative impact on the brand?
I'll leave that to the rocket scientists that analyze consumer behavior. My guess is the answer is "no". I'm actually waiting for some pharmaceutical company to invent a pill that triggers visuals of certain products when the brain sends a mood change message.
No comments:
Post a Comment