Comments on: Some Thoughts on Product Placement

By: Jennifer

Jennifer — Fri, 28 Jan 2011 21:11:51 +0000

I found that movie annoying overall, and the product placement especially annoying. I hate when movie scripts are altered, or the shooting of a movie is changed to highlight a product. It’s one thing if someone is just drinking a pepsi but it’s another if the logo is perfectly placed to make sure it’s right-side-up & the person’s hand isn’t obscuring the logo while they’re drinking it. If I see a car in a movie that looks cool I would think to myself, wow, that’s a cool car, I wonder what kind of car it is. But in this movie all car scenes are shot with the decals front and center. Lame acting, lame product placement, lame story, lame movie.

By: Janis

Janis — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 04:31:12 +0000

I just saw a quote of Marshall McLuhan’s from 1967 that reminded me of this post and I had to share it:

“If an ad has become so environmental as to be unperceived, that’s when it’s really doing its work.”

Trent, this reinforces your point: to help protect ourselves from this kind of advertising, we need to be aware of it.

Ah, that McLuhan; he was so ahead of his time!

By: Jason

Jason — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 00:19:11 +0000

Apple is pretty famous for never paying for product placement. In fact they have very specific rules about who and how can show their products. I don’t know if burger king paid for their spot but with the apple spots it’s safe to say that it’s more of a reflection of our times (as some other readers have said) than product placement.

By: Steve

Steve — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:29:23 +0000

Tranformers (both of them) were the epitome of commercially-driven movies. Most product placement (and most movies) are far more subtle.

By: Carmen

Carmen — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 19:56:18 +0000

As entertainment changes, I would expect a great deal more of this since we don’t have the patience to watch commercials and we don’t want to pay more for our entertainment. I agree that it is important to be aware of that product placement and identify it. Especially important in children’s programming!

By: Vickie

Vickie — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 18:05:50 +0000

I’ve seen the transformer movies and never even noticed the product placements. Thanks for the information. ☺

By: Golfing Girl

Golfing Girl — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:18:44 +0000

Even my 7-year old daughter catches this. We were watching the Tooth Fairy (with The Rock) this weekend. She kept seeing and shouting out the advertisers in the ice rink. “Mommy! Nationwide!” I was waiting for her to sing the jingle next…

By: Megan

Megan — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:17:32 +0000

Some TV shows are taking this even further now. I’ve noticed at least two different TV shows including character dialogue about the features and benefits of a particular car brand. For me, it makes me lose some respect for a show I otherwise enjoy.

By: Pete

Pete — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 08:16:15 +0000

Sometimes product placement will lend verisimilitude to a movie (except when it goes over the top – not all cars on the road are made by GM), but this sort of thing has been going on for decades. I noticed it quite a lot last time I watched the Back to the Future movies a month or so ago – see http://backtothefuture.wikia.com/wiki/Product_placement for more detail.

By: Kai

Kai — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 02:03:23 +0000

I always remembered being annoyed when reading a book and hearing about the characters going to ‘funland! or drinking spry-cola or something. Or watching a move and seeing such things.
I think brands are part of life, and when a movie takes place in our world, hiding the brands just seems unrealistic. But then, some really do turn everything into a commercial (transformers, as mentioned, being conceived that way in the first place).
I think there is room between the two to allow a character to grab a coke without turning it into an extended shot that lingers on the logo. Gratuitous product placement is annoying. Hiding all logos looks like another world.
Of course, when your movie is set in another world, it makes no sense at all to have earth products, and we can happily go without.

By: jak

jak — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 21:46:07 +0000

Can you imagine how odd it would seem to have a movie with out a single “recognizable” item? There’s something to be said for the attempt of the movie producer to bring items into the movie that are “comfortable” to the viewer.

If as a consumer one is easily swayed by product placements, then as a savvy shopper we FAIL. Product placement means nothing to me and it’s nothing more than a interesting tidbit in a movie…

By: Kate

Kate — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 21:07:22 +0000

I think your argument in principle is completely right on. I would like to throw something out there, though. Occasionally I do choose where I bring my business by what my friends like, depending upon what that business is. Their preference of Jiffy over Great Value brand doesn’t mean much to me, but, as an example, a little while ago I had some serious problems with my car. I am new in town and don’t know many of the mechanics, so I asked a friend which she preferred, and she gave me her answer based reasonableness and reliability. Really, I didn’t have any reason other than my friend’s preference to choose that mechanic, but I’m glad I did, looking back.

I realize that you’re mostly thinking about the Peter Pan vs. Great Value thing, but I thought this merited mentioning.

By: Pat S.

Pat S. — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 19:26:30 +0000

Product placement is huge business. Its subliminal messaging, as you said in your article. The emotions, the circumstances, and situations that the products are associated with, are burned into our subconscious. Its exactly the same way that cigarettes were glamorized for years by the media, by having characters constantly smoking on screen.
Pat
http://compoundingreturns.blogspot.com

By: Mari

Mari — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 19:14:17 +0000

I have found your articles on this topic to be good reminders. I’ve been consciously cutting back on my mindless use of technology for the past year or so. It really is rewarding to be less connected and less (mentally) surrounded by stuff. My enjoyment at the movies has really diminished over the last few years and a large part of that is related to continuous product placement that has nothing to do with story.

By: Kathy M

Kathy M — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 18:39:54 +0000

@Chuck…
It’s not free. Companies pay a high premium for those spots. A friend of mine in advertising worked many years exclusively with product placement.

By: Joel

Joel — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 18:20:25 +0000

Trent, you’re one of the few pf bloggers that consistently points out the psychological aspects of consumerism; keep it up!

A book a HIGHLY recommend everyone read before any sort of major purchase (actually, it applies to purchases of all cost) is “Influence: The Art of Persuasion” by Dr. Robert Cialdini. He covers the psychological tactics used by marketers and those attempting to part you with your money and teaches you how to disarm those tactics; fantastic stuff that’s stuck with me. The book was written by one of my professors I had while attending ASU; it’s incredibly well written and based on personal experience of his (he actually took several years off to do the research for it) and scientific studies. It’s a solid read.

- Joel

By: chuck

chuck — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 18:19:11 +0000

i think ET movie originally wanted to use M&Ms but whoever owns M&Ms declined. hard to believe a company declining free advertising via product placement nowadays.

given that, weather we like it or not, our lives are dominated by products and labels so avoiding all brand names in a movie wouldn’t be very realistic.

By: Jill

Jill — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 17:42:27 +0000

I don’t think obvious product placement like those examples are going to make most people I know rush out and buy stuff.

It’s when the product placement is done so subtly, and is pivotal to the plot of the movie…ie) in ET, when Elliott uses Reeses Pieces to lure ET out of the forest.

Another candy company (I unfortunately forget the name right now) had the opportunity to have their product used, and they said no. Reeses Pieces said yes, their sales went through the roof, and the rest is history.

I think it’s because of the way the product was used in the movie, not just the fact that it’s there that makes the difference.

By: Interested Reader

Interested Reader — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 17:28:43 +0000

I get your argument but what do you expect in a movie that is, itself, nothing but a product placement?

The toy transformers came first, then the comic, then the cartoon and then the movie – and all of those were made to get parents and kids to buy Transformers?

By: Steven@hundredgoals.com

Steven@hundredgoals.com — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 17:11:18 +0000

I don’t think Burger King is the reason Megan Fox is so good looking…so, I find that scene ironic.