Product Placement: who cares?

In my week #11 text response blog, I will examine the issue of product placement advertising in movies and television. In Chapter 14 of our text, they show a screencap from the TV show 30 Rock in which the characters are seen in a McDonalds. The producers claim that they were not paid for this appearance, but it looks as though it could be deliberate. It does beg the question: can the American TV viewer discern the difference between paid and unintentional product placement? And do they care?

We live in a branded world. Brands are everywhere. Some we are proud to display, some not so much. If someone had a camera on me right now, they would see that I am drinking a Coke Zero while clicking on my Toshiba laptop, and wearing a Reebok hoodie. Unfortunately, I am not being paid by any of these companies. However, in recent years product placement has begun to really invade movies and television, especially movies. Some are subtle, but some are obvious. For example, in the movie Castaway, Tom Hanks’ character works for Fed Ex, which has its image in many scenes of the movie. It seems to be a bit ironic product placement considering that a Fed Ex plane crashes in the movie.

My personal opinion is that subtle product placement is tolerable. It seems too contrived when every mention of a product is a fictional one. Sometimes, the brands will have to be shown. It is impossible to shoot a scene in Times Square without many brands shown in lights. So, the characters should be able to eat in a McDonalds without a high level of scrutiny. The Golden Arches are nearly impossible to avoid, and TV characters should be able to eat there if they want to seem believable.