Branded Entertainment - 1st Approach

The Tracker: Beware Big Numbers in Product Placement

2006-07-21

Last month PQ Media, a well-known media research firm in Stamford, Conn., published its new estimate of the total value of product placement in TV and film: $5.7 billion in 2006. That number is an increase over its estimate of the value of product placement in 2005, which was $4.48 billion. PQM�s 2005 number is itself a revision upward: in June 2005 the company estimated that year�s value would be just $4.24 billion. To give you an idea of how quickly these estimates are spiraling, they are fast approaching the $9.1 billion spent in the annual TV upfront. Can the appearance of all those brands on CBS�s Survivor and Fox�s American Idol really be approaching the value of all advertising bought on network TV in advance of the fall season? Other numbers tell a different story. Nielsen Product Placement recently released figures for 2006 that show the number of placements is actually decreasing on network TV, to 20,857 hits per quarter. At its peak, in the first quarter of 2005, network TV in prime time was blasting viewers with 27,548 brand views. (To see a chart of this breakdown, click HERE.) Which raises an obvious question: How can the value of product placement be going up by 21% when the amount of it (on TV�s most expensive real estate, at least) has dropped by 24%? At one level the question answers itself: if the most valuable inventory is decreasing then its price is likely to be increasing. That�s how supply and demand works. The Super Bowl has the same problem: It is the most valuable ad medium in the U.S. and yet, despite an historically declining audience, it continues to command increasing prices for 30-second spots, now north of $2 million. That, however, seems unlikely to be the case with product placement, because in-show placements are increasingly bought as package deals alongside regular 30-second ad units, and the amount spent on those ad units has remained relatively steady. This isn�t just an issue of confusing statistics. PQM�s numbers are widely quoted in the media. But some in the branded entertainment industry suspect PQM�s $5.7 billion figure may be wrong. �When I see a number like that it makes me angry,� said Tom Meyer, president of branded entertainment agency Davie Brown Entertainment in Los Angeles. �It portrays the product placement arena as being a $5 billion treasure chest that the networks just have to figure out how to monetize and then that money is absolutely real. It�s just not the case.� DBE represents Pepsi, Hewlett-Packard and AT&T among others in the product placement business. During a recent interview with Brandweek, Meyer used his clients� budgets as a guide to estimating what is actually being spent in the industry. �If you take the numbers we put up and multiply that by the number of brands playing in the space, I don�t have any idea how you get to a number that large,� he said. �You�re not even going to come close to that number. Michael Nyman of Bragman Nyman Cafarelli in Los Angeles, whose clients include T-Mobile and Kellogg, agrees. He believes the PQM estimate is �way out of line.� And Norm Marshall of NMA in Sun Valley, Calif., has previously gone on record with his doubts about the PQM estimates in 2005. PQM�s response is that some qualifications need to be borne in mind when reading their numbers. First, their total figure is an estimate of equivalent value, not an estimate of money actually spent, PQM said. As a large volume of deals occur for free or as add-ons to existing ad buys, brands can get product placement hits without actually spending extra money. However, PQM said, the proportion of paid deals is actually increasing. In 2004 it was about 29%, PQM estimated. It has no current estimate of the paid portion beyond that, the company said. Patrick Quinn, president of the firm added in a recent interview, �the increase comes from more-than-expected paid placements [and] the value has increased.� Secondly, the firm said, the $5.7 billion number includes TV, cable, film and certain Internet programming. Confusingly, it does not include Webisodes or advergaming. PQM concedes that placements are not increasing. �While the number of placements may be flat, the number of paid placements is certainly going up and in particular single-sponsor placements by major brands is going up and they�re paying a lot more dollars for those particular items,� Quinn said. PQM might well also point to cable, where brands show up at five times the rate of network TV. There were 105,588 hits in the second quarter of 2006 on cable TV, according to Nielsen Product Placement. The company has a more detailed report scheduled for publication on Aug. 1, it said. The problem that PQM will always face is that, unlike Nielsen Media Research, which tracks ads, or Information Resources Inc., which tracks sales, no one tracks product placement deal-by-deal. So every number is by definition an estimate. How to arrive at that estimate is in itself a matter of dispute. For instance, Jeff Greenfield, evp at 1st Approach/Hollywood Product Placement in Boston, feels that a placement is more valuable than a commercial because when an actor holds a prop in a show there�s an implied celebrity endorsement. Yet even Greenfield, whose clients include El Jimador Tequila and Black & Decker believes the PQM number is �way off.� In contrast, DBE�s Meyer reckons a placement is less valuable because, �It doesn�t speak to you. It can�t say anything about the value of the brand� even in a full-blown integration. There is one aspect of this debate that PQM and its critics all agree on. The TV networks have done a much better job in the last year or so of policing their programming. Less stuff is sneaking its way into scenes for free, and the nets are channeling more structured deals through their sales and compliance departments. That is a significant victory for the networks, who at one time were being written off by some as mere suppliers of undifferentiated media that streetwise brands need no longer deal with. For example, in June 2005, Joe Jaffe, a Westport, Conn., marketing consultant, told Brandweek, �The nets are becoming nothing more than a vessel to transport their content.� If, as the branded entertainment agencies claim, the networks have finally wrestled control of product placement from agencies and producers, then Jaffe�s prediction may have been premature. Increased network control would certainly explain why branded prop-shots are currently in decline despite the increased budgets that agencies and PQM claim are available for branded entertainment.

Hollywood parties inside a commercial

2006-07-21

From the beach, where the paparazzi were standing, it looked like any other gathering of beautiful people. But this was no ordinary multimillion-dollar mansion party. This was covert celebrity marketing in action. The Polaroid Beach House, on a stretch of Malibu coastline known as Billionaire's Beach, has been the site of some of the hottest celebrity parties of the summer. Lindsay Lohan celebrated her 20th birthday there, and she was back two days later for a huge Fourth of July bash that drew Hollywood scenesters Nick Cannon, Kelly Slater, Jesse Metcalfe and Jeremy Piven. Lohan returned a third time last Saturday for a soiree � a lobster feast with fresh crustaceans flown in from Maine � where she joined Paris and Nicky Hilton, Kevin Connolly and Garcelle Beauvais-Nilon. So where does the marketing come in? Hollywood's hottest lounged on furniture from Restoration Hardware, protected their skin with sunscreen from Dermalogica and, after a quick dip in the Pacific, showered and shampooed with Alterna products. (The company's top stylist was even on hand to give celebrity tresses a quick touchup.) They dried off with fluffy towels provided by Amazon.com and kicked back in comfy sweats from Victoria's Secret Pink. The party house is all about product placement. EXPERIENCING THE BRAND For the guests, Saturday was just a pampering day at the beach. There were no brand-touting signs in sight, no posed publicity photos, no giant bags of swag. If they liked what they saw, sat on or swam in, more info was provided. If not, no worries. Unlike the "gifting houses" that surround film festivals and awards shows � where stars pose for promotional pictures to collect their freebies � the Polaroid Beach House offers guests a low-key way to "experience" the brands, says Jay Marose of CityPublicity, one of two PR firms behind the party house. The idea is perfect for celebrities who have come to expect lots of freebies, says Jeff Greenfield, executive Vice President of 1st Approach, a Boston-based agency that specializes in getting brands into films and television. "It's part of the typical backstage experience," Greenfield says. "You could say the $100,000 Oscar bag has made its way to birthday parties." Marose and Valerie Michaels, founder of CityPublicity, came up with the idea after one of Michaels' friends made his about-to-be-sold beachfront estate available. A team of interior designers outfitted the five-bedroom house in magazine-worthy style, with high-end beachy furniture and high-tech electronic accessories. Then Michaels and Marose and partner Fingerprint Communications invited celebrities to use the space as a personal party locale. Stars don't pay a dime for the access � or anything. PERKS EQUAL BUSINESS Lohan was the first to sign on. Her birthday party resulted in a private shopping tour at Restoration Hardware and a personalized batch of Alterna hair care, Michaels says. Life & Style magazine is featuring a promotion to "win Lindsay's beach-house booty" � including, of course, products from house sponsors. Even the paparazzi are part of the equation. They lurk on the beach hoping to snap celebrity photos, so Marose provides them with a list of the house's guests and sponsors. If celebrities are photographed with a product, that can be worth millions to a brand, Greenfield says. But Mary-Lou Galician, a media critic and author of "Product Placement in the Mass Media," says consumers can spot a covert ad. "To me it sounds like yet another sad attempt to tell the consumer how stupid these brands think we are," she says. "I'd be terrified to think about Restoration Hardware and Paris Hilton, frankly. It's a little mind-boggling and a little scary." Future festivities at the beach house include Piven's 41st birthday party, a charity luncheon hosted by Elizabeth Hurley, a volleyball shindig with Molly Sims and a "celebrity moms' playdate" with Cameron Manheim, Mariska Hargitay, Brooke Shields and Joely Fisher, Michaels says. The party ends at Polaroid Beach House on August 6 after six weeks. But Michaels and Marose hope to repeat, and extend, the effort next summer. "As far as marketing goes, our world is evolving," Michaels says. "This is definitely part of the turn of the tide." asap contributor Sandy Cohen, who covers entertainment for AP in Los Angeles, is available to attend your Malibu beach party. Just don't tell the paparazzi.

Where Product Meets Program

2006-06-22

Last month, while the television networks were staging their upfront presentations for advertisers, the Writers Guild of America held a press conference to reiterate its objections to product placement�the practice of positioning name-brand items in a scene and weaving them into dialogue. This was the latest instance in a steady stream of disapproval by the artists' unions, whose leadership over the past year has pushed for a say in the process and, possibly, a financial stake. Though money is most often the bottom line, both the WGA and the Screen Actors Guild say they are most concerned about their members being contorted into�in their view�nakedly shilling for companies. Nevertheless, marketers still need to sell their products and studio executives still have to generate ad revenue, without which free television would not exist and many movies wouldn't get made. In an ever-shifting media landscape�with new technologies competing for viewers' attention, sometimes enabling them to avoid commercials altogether�this has become more challenging. Thus there is product placement, which has been on the rise in television and film for the past decade. Its net worth, according to the research firm PQ Media, was $3.46 billion in 2004, a 30% increase over 2003. The company also found that product placement grew at an annual rate of 16.3% from 1999 to 2004. Though there seems to be a great divide between management and labor over this issue, there is more common ground than some might realize. Like actors and writers, marketers and studio executives are wary of branded entertainment, because excessive commercialism can have a negative impact on the products being sold and the shows serving as a platform. Witness NBC's The Apprentice: According to advertising and entertainment industry experts, ratings for the reality show declined this season in part because of too much product placement. To avoid that situation, advertising and studio executives are developing ways to seamlessly meld products with shows. One occurs during postproduction, when editors can insert the image of a soup can or box of cereal onto a kitchen counter�a process known as digital product placement. Developed by Marathon Ventures in Burbank, Calif., the service is sold to ad buyers and studios. Not only does it allow for more-discreet advertising in a show, but the placement can be used in four different ways. For example, Coca-Cola can pay for a can of Coke on a table in the foreground of a scene, then change it to a carton of Minute Maid orange juice for the rerun, A&W root beer in the syndicated version�both of them Coca-Cola brands�then back to Coke for the DVD. This innovation would seem to answer the complaints of the WGA, the most vocal critic of product placement among the unions, because it doesn't involve writing at all. However, it's hard to know the writers' position: Gabriel Scott, spokesperson for the guild, said the union would not comment on the technology. The actors' unions seem to be sidestepping this issue, as well. When asked to comment, the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists released a statement outlining its general policy on product placement, saying it's studying the matter and working to ensure that the process does not "compromise members' employment or employment opportunities." Though SAG spokesperson Seth Oster also declined to comment on the issue, he pointed to the spring edition of Screen Actor, the union's magazine. It contains an article titled "Forced Endorsement," in which the union expresses its concern about digital product placement: "Technology now allows advertisers to digitally insert their products during postproduction, meaning actors may not even be aware of what is being advertised in their own shows." According to several news reports on Marathon Ventures from outlets such as The New York Times and CBS's The Early Show, an episode of Yes, Dear in April 2005 was the first scripted program to use digital product placement�in a scene in which a box of Club crackers sits on a coffee table. In an email to Back Stage, Jean Louisa Kelly, an actor in the scene, indicated she didn't have a problem with it: "I was okay with the product placement on Yes, Dear and didn't notice anything really inappropriate." Jeff Greenfield, executive vice president of 1st Approach, a branded-entertainment marketing firm based in Portsmouth, N.H., has long been a champion of product placement, but he also understands its limitations. "When it's done too much, it becomes exhausting to watch, viewers start to tune out, the bloggers pick up on it," Greenfield says. The resultant negative buzz can hurt show and brand alike. Instead, he says, the future of integrated marketing will involve brands producing their own programs. "Why try to get pigeonholed into a show?" Greenfield asks. "What I tell my clients is, if you create good content, the distribution will be there�. I see TV as an excuse to do marketing." Greenfield is working with two companies to develop two new programs, but they will be reality shows, not scripted. Enter Lovespring International, an improvised comedy on the Lifetime channel that catalogues the tribulations of a sputtering dating service in the digital age. The service's nemesis is the real-life website Perfectmatch.com, which paid for the tie-in that makes the show possible. It might seem that the talents behind a program in the tradition of Curb Your Enthusiasm and This Is Spinal Tap�which pillory the hypocrisy and self-seriousness of show business�would reject any kind of product integration. But the opposite is true, and not just because it provides work for actors and writers. "When I was told about the idea, I thought it was terrific," says Jack Plotnick, an actor on Lovespring and one of its developers, "because we needed that idea anyway"�another dating service to serve as a foil. "It's a fun tie-in. I don't see it as a slippery-slope kind of thing." Having a real-life competitor lends the show a legitimacy it wouldn't get with a fictitious company. In general, such verisimilitude can be a creative upside to product placement. Sam Pancake, another actor on the show, said he'd rather see a character eat Wheaties than a contrived, generic brand such as "Crunchy Flakes." "Seeing an actor hold a can that says 'Cola' takes me out of a show as much as excessive product placement," he says. Of the Perfectmatch.com tie-in, he adds, "It makes sense to me, and it doesn't bother me. I've never felt that it went against me creatively." The actors say, they are not even required to mention Perfectmatch.com in every episode. Guy Shalem, the show's creator, says he was pitched several ideas for product placement by Lifetime, including one for a computer company. "Not only did [the company] want to be mentioned, but also [wanted] some sort of story line," he says. "It was asking way too much of us. We wanted flawless integration, and in Lovespring, [Perfectmatch.com] was the only company." Achieving a flawless integration of programming and product would appear to satisfy all parties: marketers who need to work around DVRs and consumers' general dislike of ads; studio executives who are under pressure to boost revenue each year; writers, actors, and other artists who don't want to blatantly promote a company's wares within the context of a show. Yet the very idea of commercial legerdemain unsettles people outside and inside the entertainment industry. Product placement is "deceptive advertising," says Gary Ruskin, executive director of Commercial Alert, a consumer advocacy organization that agitates for a church-and-state-like separation between ads and shows. "It sneaks by people's cognitive capacities and plants messages in their brains when they're paying less attention," Ruskin explains. "We're already seeing the effects of subliminal advertising: obesity, addiction to gambling, Type II diabetes.� Americans are suffering." The WGA addressed the issue in a position paper about "stealth advertising" released in fall 2005: "That Guild members are now being forced to take part in stealth and often subliminal advertising concerns us a great deal." The tract also raises the specter of the Federal Communications Commission by mentioning an FCC regulation that states, "Listeners are entitled to know by whom they are being persuaded." The agency has worked diligently to raise its profile and influence during the Bush administration, most notably with the passage of a much tougher indecency bill. Jonathan Adelstein, one of the agency's commissioners, told the Los Angeles Times last year, "Everything from Coke to soap is subliminally hawked in TV programs. In today's media environment, product placement has moved beyond Coke tumblers prominently displayed at the judges' table of American Idol. Now products have even seeped into plot lines." Likewise, the WGA report states, "The Guilds do not want members put in the unacceptable position of facilitating violations of FCC regulations. We, therefore, think this issue ultimately requires discussion both at the bargaining table and before the FCC in Washington." The uncertainty caused by technology and the changing tastes of viewers forces studios and advertisers to seek alternatives to traditional models of marketing so that everyone can achieve the same goal: to get paid. Although the unions try to negotiate the margin between craft and commerce, ultimately their members work for the studios�and everyone wants to work, period. "I was in pilot hell for six or seven years," Shalem says. "I haven't gotten anything on the air" before the Perfectmatch.com deal. Creative talents can advocate for what they see as a better system, but, in the end, advertising pays the bills. There's no doubt marketers are going to have a big say in how the system works at any given moment. Consumer advocates such as Ruskin say that if the television industry struggles to survive, that's good. "For us, the television industry is doing great," he says. "They're making people want to watch less." People won't stop watching television, of course, and Ruskin knows that. But he believes that artists who work in the medium will eventually be affected by the integration of products and programming. "The infomercial medium allows for fewer opportunities for acting brilliance and screenwriting brilliance," he says. "As the constraints grow on television and it starts to look more like QVC, it's inevitable that the quality is going to decrease. Good actors and good screenwriters will flee opportunities [in TV] for those of higher quality." For some of those working in the television industry, the outlook is much more sanguine. Kelly, the actor on Yes, Dear, writes, "There will probably always be a tension between the advertisers' interests and the creators' interests." Says Shalem, "The bottom line is moderation. That's true for everything in life."

Interstate hopes Ferrell does wonders for bread

2006-06-13

Will Ferrell loves his all-American, squishy, white Wonder bread. That�s the word from Interstate Bakeries Corp. as to why the No. 1 selling bread in America ends up front and center in the upcoming Sony Pictures NASCAR-themed movie, �Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby,� set for release Aug. 4, and in which Ferrell�s character drives a Wonder car and wears a Wonder uniform. In a six-word pitch to producers: �Will Ferrell as a NASCAR driver,� the movie�s tagline is �The Story of a Man Who Could Only Count to No. 1.� America�s favorite bread and a NASCAR-themed movie seem a perfect fit. �NASCAR is as American as Wonder bread,� said Rich Seban, Interstate�s chief marketing officer. �His character only needs to count to No. 1, because that�s what the Wonder brand is.� Kansas City-based Interstate, which has a cross-promotion with Sony for the movie (the parties say no money exchanged hands), has been in bankruptcy since September 2004 and could use a boost of good news. And if Ferrell�s performance during the MTV Movie Awards Thursday night is any indication, the 85-year-old brand is going to get beaucoup exposure long before the movie hits theaters. During that broadcast, Ferrell, who makes millions playing goofy characters � think �Elf,� �Anchorman,� and �Old School� � showed up as his �Talladega Nights� character. The movie already has several built-in fan bases � untold number of Will Ferrell fans and the 75 million people who count themselves NASCAR fans. According to NASCAR, it is the fastest-growing spectator sport in America, second only to the NFL. Major League Baseball and the NBA dispute the second-place contention. In addition to starring in the movie, Ferrell also gets producing and writing credits. �I�ve not seen the movie nor seen a script, so I don�t know to what extent the brand gets mentioned in the movie, but we were assured that the brand would be treated with respect and professionally and would not be disparaged in any way,� Seban said. A spokeswoman for the NMA Entertainment & Marketing agency, which helped broker the deal between Sony and Interstate, said it has another �blue chip� client that wanted to be the race car �sponsor,� but Wonder won out. (NMA represents Dunkin� Donuts, Sears and General Motors Corp., among others.). Executives at NMA also said they�d not read the script. Jeff Greenfield, executive vice president at 1st Approach, a branded entertainment and strategic marketing firm in Portsmith, N.H., says not reading the script before agreeing to be involved is risky business. �It�s always more important to protect the brand than promote it,� Greenfield says. �I�m a little surprised, no actually very surprised that no one, not the company nor their agency has read the script. This is a family-friendly, all-American brand and the movie is a comedy, and based on some of his other movies, you could run the risk of alienating some of your customers.� Meanwhile, Nextel, the chief sponsor of NASCAR, also gets a small nod on Ricky Bobby�s right shoulder. In fact, with NASCAR being likely the most heavily product- and corporate-sponsored sport in America, �Talladega Nights� could end up being the product placement champ of all time.

NATPE Laces Up New Look Boot Camp

2006-05-10

The format of the US National Association of Television Program Executives' (Natpe) annual TV Producers' Boot Camp will be expanded this year to include The NextGen TV Festival and Competition. The Boot Camp, now in its fourth year, will be on July 26-28 at the Bel Age Hotel and other locations in West Hollywood. "User-generated content across all platforms will play a significant role in the future of our business and it makes perfect sense for Natpe to honour those who are creating this imaginative material as part of the popular Boot Camp series," said Rick Feldman, Natpe president and CEO. "It's extremely gratifying to provide the opportunity for the next generation of producers to present their ideas to executives from the top entertainment companies." The NextGen TV Festival and Competition will kick off the event with winning entries to be screened at an industry cocktail reception on July 26 on the eve of Boot Camp and for the next two days on site. Categories include one to six minutes of original content in animation, comedy, drama, mobile, factual and unscripted. Grand prize winners will receive a cash prize, a six-month mentorship, two pitch meetings, inclusion in the Natpe 2007 Video Wall and a complimentary Natpe 2007 registration. The Boot Camp event will offer more than 12 hours of workshops, seminars, clinics and networking activities featuring top executives exploring various production models for all types of programming including documentary, children's, scripted and unscripted. Topics will cover pitch structure and development, unique branding strategies, distribution trends and opportunities in emerging technologies. The event offers attendees access to a variety of panels, keynote speakers and hands-on clinics providing in-depth information on the development and production process, culminating with The Pitch Pit, an opportunity for face-to-face pitch meetings with development executives from leading broadcast and cable networks, talent agencies and production and distribution companies. This year's Boot Camp State of the Industry Keynote will be delivered by Michael Camacho, packaging agent and head of alternative television at CAA. Speaking at the closing Graduation Luncheon will be Anthony Zuiker, executive producer of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and CSI: Miami, and showrunner and executive producer of CSI: New York. Other confirmed speakers include Mad TV co-creator and executive producer David Salzman; producer Byron Allen; Gregg Spiridellis, co-founder of Jib Jab; Philip Gurin, president of The Gurin Company; Carolyn Finger, VP of TVtracker.com; Ray Solley, cable programme consultant at The Solley Group; Laurie Scheer, media consultant and pitching coach; Carole Kirschner, development executive and teacher at Next Door Entertainment; and Jeff Greenfield, executive VP and co-founder of Green Tentacle.

Product Placement Dealing: Try To Keep Your Hands In Your Pockets

2006-04-14

PAYING FOR PRODUCT PLACEMENT? SUCKER. Paying millions for product placement? Massive sucker. Don't take my word for it. Jeff Greenfield, executive vice president of entertainment marketing firm 1st Approach, The Hollywood Reporter that advertisers who pay $3 million to $5 million for product placement/integration deals are "massive suckers." Of course, Greenfield was referring to a couple of shows in particular--you know, the ones with "The Apprentice" title attached to them. Of course, those "Apprentice" product placement advertisers --Sony Pictures Entertainment, Burger King, Mattel, and others--might tell you differently. They might say that, in fact, those million dollar arrangements, which almost equate to hour-long infomercials, were effective in getting out name recognition or ringing up sales of product. Greenfield went on to say that "90 percent of the brands you see in shows are there for free... A lot of brands get in for free not because they're cool but because they happen to be there." Being there. Does "The West Wing" need some Johnny Walker scotch? You need to be a quick pourer. Could "King of Queens" use some Pop-Tarts on the kitchen set? Only if the cookie crumbles. The biggest success story for unpaid product placement is with Apple Computers. As has been known for a long time, Apple has been the quickest in overnight delivery of laptops to almost any and all entertainment projects for two decades. As a result, Apple appears to be dominating the PC market in the fictional lives of TV shows and movies. Other executives think just the brand names of Apple, iPod, and Aston Martin alone will get you in the door. Perhaps you don't even need that. Norm Marshall & Associates said it worked more than 10,000 product placements on TV shows and movies last year--all free. So where is the money in product placement? It's either in the hands of Mark Burnett or with long-time product placement agencies like Norm Marshall. It certainly isn't with the networks or movie companies. Market researcher PQ Media reported paid product placements were $1 billion in 2004, about a third of overall branded integration. That means 70 percent of all deals--for the moment--are sucker-free.

Brands take buzz to bank through free integration

2006-04-13

During the past four months, Apple iPods, Macs and other products have been featured 250 times on 38 different network primetime shows, including such hits as "CSI: NY" and "The O.C.," for a total of 26 minutes of exposure � and all of it was free for one of Hollywood's biggest brand stars. With its cultural cachet and storied history of giving away tens of thousands of Apple computers to the Hollywood creative community, Apple has had perhaps the greatest success of any brand in embedding its products into film and TV without paying for the integrations, even amid Hollywood's rush to cash in on branded entertainment deals over the past several years. But the Silicon Valley star is by no means alone, especially among companies that have that much-sought-after "cool" factor or that sell big-ticket luxury items, such as Aston Martin and Lamborghini. And, because of practical issues that arise on the set, even brands that lack such totemic status still frequently manage to win free placements. Many of the Apple placements, as tracked by Nielsen's Place Views, have handed the computer company key roles in story lines: Stewie did his own rendition of the iPod black silhouette commercial in "Family Guy"; Pamela Anderson and her co-stars tried to figure out who left an iPod behind in the "Stacked" bookstore; and co-workers on "The Office" attempted to trade in their office holiday party gifts for an iPod in a yankee swap. Apple also is featured regularly on "Las Vegas," with an iLounge populated by iPods and iMacs as a permanent part of the set. "IPod has never paid for placement because Apple is cool," said Ruben Igielko-Herrlich, founding partner and CEO of Propaganda Global Entertainment Marketing. "If you're a cool brand or an affluent, prestigious brand, it's not going to cost you what it's going to cost fast-moving consumer products like soft drinks or detergents. When you have that kind of image and aura, you don't pay for it." But even less hip brands that lack the all-powerful "buzz" factor still are succeeding at getting prominent visual and verbal integrations without forking over extra cash for integration fees, promotional support or media buys, albeit to a lesser extent than they were before branded entertainment took off several years ago. "As big as branded entertainment is, I will still venture to say that 90% of the brands you see in shows are there for free," said Jeff Greenfield, executive vp entertainment marketing firm 1st Approach. "A lot of brands get in for free not because they're cool but because they happen to be there." Five of the leading product placement agencies estimate that 70%-95% of their placements are still barter deals only. Norm Marshall & Associates said it orchestrated more than 10,000 free product placements last year. Market research firm PQ Media last year reported that while paid product placements soared 44% to $1 billion in 2004, they still only constituted 29% of the overall brand integration market. It estimated that the paid portion of the placement market would increase to 31.9% in 2005, 34.1% this year and 35.6% in 2007 � still only a fraction of total brand integrations. Entertainment marketers say that despite efforts by the networks and studios to crack down on free placements, they are still happening for a variety of reasons: Many integration decisions are still being driven creatively rather than financially; production companies still want to save money by getting free product on the set; branded entertainment deals do not come close to covering the amount of product that is needed to dress a set; many changes in props or sets are made during filming, long after product integration deals are sealed; and producers don't always want to spend the time and money required to satisfy the demands of brands willing to pay for integration. "Decisions are still driven creatively, and if a brand really does add value to the message, the story and the content, it's going to get away with its prominence in shows without paying," said Keith Ferrazzi, CEO of marketing consulting firm Ferrazzi Greenlight. Added Erik Stroman, partner at Entertainment Marketing Partners, "There are always going to be examples of great placements for free because the only thing with television that you can't control is what's happening at the set." But some brands that sell high-priced products caution that even when they don't pay for product integration, they still are not getting it absolutely free. By supplying several vehicles for use in a production, for example, luxury car manufacturers are providing hundreds of thousands of dollars of value. For its part, Apple has reportedly spent millions of dollars providing free Macs for the Hollywood community over the past 15-20 years. The investment clearly has paid off. Despite a tiny share of the worldwide PC market, Apple is by far the most widely used PC by fictional characters in film and television. "Apple has 90% of the exposure but only 2% of the business," Igielko-Herrlich said. Among the luxury brands that recently scored unpaid high-profile placements is Lamborghini, which had a starring role in September on NBC's "The Apprentice," on which contestants were asked to create both a TV commercial and a print campaign for the luxury automaker. Sources close to Lamborghini said the company was approached by Mark Burnett Prods. to appear on the show and paid nothing for the integration. Such other brands as Pontiac, Burger King, Crest and Home Depot reportedly have paid Burnett record fees ranging from $1 million-$4 million to appear on the show. Lamborghini also paid no integration or promotional fees to be featured in Paramount Pictures' "Mission: Impossible 3," due in theaters May 5, and had a prime placement in last summer's "Batman Begins," with a passerby calling Bruce Wayne's Murcielago Roadster a "great car." In an unusual twist to the brand-studio relationship, the Volkswagen-owned automaker sometimes charges productions up to $3,500 a day to use their cars, the sources said. On ABC's hit series "Desperate Housewives," material girl Gabrielle Solis, played by Eva Longoria, drives an Aston Martin. Besides supplying the $125,000 vehicle to the production, Ford-owned Aston Martin has not paid any additional fees for the frequent visual placements, nor did it pay for a key episode last year in which a new, bright red Aston Martin purchased by Gabrielle was part of the story line. Ford also pays no fees for a Mustang GT convertible, Volvo V70 and Mercury Mountaineer driven by "Housewives" characters Karl Mayer, Lynette Scalvo and Betty Applewhite. Aston Martin also is featured regularly on NBC's "Las Vegas," and HBO's "Entourage" without paying any placement fees. Starbucks, another brand possessing sought-after buzz, not only has won key roles in "Shrek 2," "Miss Congeniality" and "Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me" but also recently was cast in a starring role for a new film in development at Universal Pictures titled "How Starbucks Saved My Life." Starbucks said that while cash does not change hands for its integrations, the company does give away free coffee and products for set dressing and also frequently constructs Starbucks outlets for productions. Other luxury and iconic brands known to get placed for free include Tag Heuer and Rolex watches, Rolls Royce, Ralph Lauren, Jack Daniel's and the American Express Centurion Black Credit Card. "Those brands will never need to pay," Igielko-Herrlich said. Less prominent brands, or those with a bit less cachet, that recently have appeared in film and TV for free are Stoli in "Rent," Equifax in "Firewall," Black & Decker AutoTape on Fox's "Stacked" and Kodak digital cameras on Bravo's "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy." Numerous brands whose logos are not visible to audiences also frequently are placed for free, such as Martin guitars in "Walk the Line" and "Ring of Fire," Rimowa attache cases on all the "CSI" shows, and Humanscale office chairs on a number of shows, including "24," "Boston Legal," "Medium" and "CSI." Many product placement agencies are getting brands directly into the hands of writers, hoping they'll make it into their scripts and onto the air even if the advertisers are not paying. But while brands clearly are managing to get cast in high-profile TV and film roles without cutting any deals, paying for brand integration gives them much more say over the way their products are portrayed and virtually assures them that they won't end up on the cutting-room floor, some entertainment marketers say. "Whether money is spent or not determines how secure your integration is," said Mark Workman, president and CEO of First FireWorks Group. But according to 1st Approach's Greenfield, with so many high-profile integrations being given away for free, brands that spend $3 million-$5 million on a single-episode integration are "massive suckers."

Advertisers can bid for space on mom's belly

2006-04-06

A pregnant woman's belly is prime advertising space, says former radio disc jockey and full-time mother Heather Williams. "It tends to draw people's eyes," Williams said. Under that assumption, the Berkshire mother of two is using eBay to auction off space on her pregnant mid-section. "Everyone looks at pregnant bellies," her online advertisement reads. "Why not let them see something you want them to see?" Williams said she will wear T-shirts with the winning bidder's company logo displayed across her belly. The higher the bid, the longer she will wear the T-shirts. Williams said she would like to hear from some local bidders. A part-time deejay with her business, Some Beach Entertainment, she describes herself as a "fun, outgoing 25-weeks-pregnant momma." Williams' mother, Bonnie Winans of Deposit, wasn't surprised to hear about her daughter's stunt. "She's very creative," Winans said. "She thinks up a lot of stuff. There's never a dull moment with Heather." Williams thought up the advertising auction, she said, after GoldenPalace.com, an online casino, paid her friend thousands of dollars to airbrush their logo across her pregnant belly. Williams said she shied away from the idea of walking around with her mid-drift exposed and instead opted for T-shirts. Jeff Greenfield, an executive vice president with 1st Approach, a Boston advertising agency, specializes in product placement in movies, television and the Internet. With media growing more diverse, Greenfield said, the advertising industry is rapidly shifting to adapt. "Non-traditional is the way to go these days," Greenfield. "If you go back to the days when there were only a couple of channels, it was very easy to reach the majority of the country. Now, with hundreds of channels, the Internet and video games, it's very difficult to reach everyone." With the media world evolving every day, companies are forced to think creatively to get their brand in the public's eye, he said. Greenfield described Williams' strategy as more of a novelty, or lighthearted entertainment, than an actual trend in advertising. Still, he said, creativity is key. "What the heck," Williams said, "it's fun, and I get some free shirts."

Advertisers get piece of local news shows

2006-03-16

By Gail Schiller While just about every television genre has jumped on the lucrative branded entertainment bandwagon, news programs generally have been considered off-limits to product integration to preserve editorial integrity. But with TV stations facing increased competition and pressure on advertising revenue, the barriers that shielded news programming from production integration and placement deals are falling. Product placement, media and branded entertainment agencies say they are increasingly being pitched opportunities from local stations to integrate their clients' products into news programming in exchange for media buys or integration fees. "There are more local news stations that are incorporating brands into news in innovative, cutting-edge ways," said Aaron Gordon, president of entertainment marketing firm Set Resources Inc. "The line, which has always been black and white in terms of what's news and what's commercials, is now being blurred." Media agency Initiative said it has been working on integrating advertising content into local news on behalf of several of its clients. A number of local stations, including Young Broadcasting's indie KRON-TV San Francisco and Univision O&O KMEX-TV Los Angeles, confirmed that they have integrated advertisers into their newscasts and are actively seeking out product-integration deals. Meredith Broadcasting's Fox affiliate KPTV-TV Portland, Ore., launched a new lifestyle show in January called "More Good Day Oregon" as an extension of its morning news program "Good Day Oregon" that airs weekly segments designed to serve as vehicles for brand integration. Such other stations as CBS Corp.'s indie KCAL-TV Los Angeles and Gannett's NBC affiliates in Denver, Minneapolis, Atlanta and Cleveland are experimenting with integration into newsmagazine-type shows that they describe as entertainment rather than news. "We're all trying to find ways of integrating commercial messages into content that satisfy the audience and advertisers without hurting our product," KRON president and general manager Mark Antonitis said. "When you're an independent, you've got to do what you can to survive. You bank on your credibility as a news organization every day, but you also have to be successful as a business. You have to be creative for your advertisers without compromising the credibility of your news organization." Most stations are focusing their efforts on morning news shows, where lifestyle segments allow for more integration opportunities without sounding as many alarm bells with viewers as it might if product integration popped up in the hard-news portions of their newscasts. At present, full-fledged brand integration into news programming appears to be limited to local news, but some marketing experts suspect that the network morning news shows won't be far behind. "We are already seeing an erosion of the 'editorial wall' in network newsrooms, particularly for morning news and newsmagazines," said Jim Johnston, partner at the law firm Davis & Gilbert, which represents both media agencies and entertainment clients. "I think you'll find that this type of activity will continue to take place, and other forms of product integration will find their way into news divisions as well," he said. "The news organizations will continue to seek a balance between editorial independence and advertiser interests, but you will likely see a lot more boundary-pushing in the future." Representatives for ABC's "Good Morning America," NBC's "Today" and CBS' "The Early Show," all produced through their respective networks' news divisions, say they allow no product integration of any kind. But they do feature the brand names and logos of the sponsors of their concert series on the stages where their musical acts perform. They also run billboards announcing the sponsors of their various news segments. Just last month, "Good Morning America" broadcast segments of the show live from a Norwegian Cruise Line ship as part of a weeklong series called "Girls' Week Out." According to "GMA" spokeswoman Bridgette Maney, Norwegian Cruise Lines did not pay integration fees for the segments, hosted by correspondent Mike Barz and co-anchor Diane Sawyer, but did foot the bill for airfare, room and board to send nearly 300 women -- contest winners and their girlfriends -- on a cruise to Honduras, Jamaica and the Grand Cayman Islands. Most of the segments broadcast from the ship focused on the women who won the cruise by writing in to say why they deserved time away with their girlfriends, she said. Radio-Television News Directors Assn. president Barbara Cochran warned that integrating advertisers into news programming could backfire, costing local stations viewers instead of having the intended effect of increasing ad sales. "You're selling the credibility of the news, and if viewers start thinking your news is for sale, then the credibility of your news is lost and your audience is lost," she said. According to RTNDA's ethics guidelines, "news reporting and decision-making should be free of inappropriate commercial influences" and "should not show favoritism to advertisers," and "news organizations should protect the integrity of coverage against any potential conflict of interest." Univision's KMEX has an ongoing integration partnership with health-care provider Kaiser Permanente Southern California as part of what the station calls its "Lead a healthy life, get the facts" public-service campaign. Kaiser physicians are interviewed on myriad health topics on Univision's various news programs, news footage is shot at Kaiser facilities, and Kaiser patients and support groups are featured in news segments. As part of the arrangement, Kaiser pays additional fees for the integrations, which are not disclosed as such during the news programs. "Bringing Kaiser on board was a win-win for both of us because they get the exposure of their physicians on television and we have their experts giving us the medical view on a particular health issue and providing vital information to our audience," a Univision spokeswoman said. "Typically news isn't for sale because you need to maintain your integrity. However, you also need to be creative to find ways to include your advertisers without damaging your credibility." She said KMEX also has involved some of its news personalities in on-air integration/promotion deals with other advertisers, including a major automaker. Last month, KRON aired an 11-day "Spa Spectacular" series in which 11 local spas were featured in the last half-hour of its five-hour morning news programs and viewers were offered the opportunity to purchase half-price gift certificates for spa services. According to Antonitis, one of the station's news anchors announced that the spas were paying to be featured on the program during the segments. "I want it to be absolutely clear that that's what's going on here," Antonitis said. "If it's in the newscast, it has to be clearly identified either by an anchor, an announcement or even both that these people paid to be part of this segment or are providing products in exchange for the segment." In another KRON integration that aired this month, Tourism Australia -- the government body responsible for international and domestic tourism marketing for Australia -- paid KRON to run a weeklong series featuring stories about the country in its morning news program. In addition to an integration fee, Tourism Australia bought traditional spots in the KRON newscasts, paid all expenses for a five-member news crew to travel to Australia and sponsored trips to Australia for two winners of an e-mail contest promoted on-air. "They certainly had input into our stories, but anytime we do anything with an advertiser that involves news, we have ultimate editorial control," Antonitis said. In this case, Tourism Australia's pay-for-play role was disclosed in the end credits. "We bring on people all the time to talk about books, products and interesting new ideas anyway," Antonitis said of KRON's decision to integrate advertisers into its news programming. "So if we can have the added benefit of a new revenue source and give something to our viewers that they wouldn't be able to get otherwise and advertisers get their products advertised, it's a win-win-win." In Portland, KPTV maintains that its new "More Good Day Oregon" program allows for product integration because it is a lifestyle magazine show rather than a traditional newscast. "It's a high-energy, fast-paced, newscast-style program that has lifestyle content, not news content," KPTV news director Patrick McCreery said. "I think it's an important distinction that our news segments are not for sale, which is why we're endeavoring to create a new product where integration is possible." Since premiering Jan. 9, "More Good Day Oregon" already has integrated a major local shopping center for a segment on last-minute gifts for Valentine's Day and a local spa for a two-part series featuring the spa's services and a makeover giveaway won by a viewer. In both cases, the advertisers' involvement was disclosed in the end credits. "It's proving to be a fairly popular way to work with advertisers here in Portland," McCreery said. "I think it's going to catch on. Gone are the days of just selling spots in local shows. You have to move beyond that if you want to take it to the next level." Indie KCAL in Los Angeles said that its "9 on the Town" nightly program, covering hot spots and entertainment in Los Angeles and produced by Icon Entertainment, accepted payments from advertisers to be featured in the program, which is expected to go off the air this month after a year-and-a-half run. A KCAL spokesman said the financial relationship is disclosed in the end credits just as it would be in "The Apprentice" or any other show doing integration deals with advertisers. Lisa Joyner, KCBS-TV and KCAL's lifestyles and entertainment features reporter, was one of the hosts of "9 on the Town." Despite their willingness to strike integration deals with advertisers, the local stations all insisted that the exchange of airtime in their news broadcasts for additional ad revenue would not jeopardize their editorial integrity. "What you can't do for any advertiser is put into question the integrity of your news product, and the best way to do that is to be absolutely clear about what you're doing," KRON's Antonitis said. "As someone with a journalism background, I don't have any concern about integrating products as long as it's done properly, appropriately and consistently. That's why we have very hard-and-fast rules about identifying advertisers who pay to play." Advertisers also have found more subtle ways to integrate themselves into local news content, like getting their brand logos displayed in crawls at the bottom of the screen during newscasts. Sue Johenning, executive vp and director of local broadcast for Initiative, said the media agency has worked out such deals for Carl's Jr. with Fox O&O KTTV-TV Los Angeles and KNBC-TV Los Angeles. "It's a nonintrusive way for stations to be able to integrate clients' logos in a way that seems to appeal to the news departments," she said. Advertisers also pay to have their logos displayed on news and weather helicopters featured during newscasts. For those advertisers who want to forgo the expense and restrictions of dealing directly with station ad sales and news departments, there are also a number of back doors into local news shows. According to product-placement agencies, there are news production companies that strike their own integration deals with advertisers without informing the dozens of local news stations around the country that pick up their segments. "These production companies have called me and pitched me on the idea of how they do product placement within news stories," said Jeff Greenfield, executive vp at entertainment marketing firm 1st Approach. There also are industry experts paid by advertisers to talk about their brands on both local and national news programs. Despite news reports last year about experts who had failed to disclose financial relationships with the brands they pitched on network morning news shows and assurances from the networks that they were either tightening or reviewing their policies to prevent any recurrences, marketing experts say they are certain the practice is continuing. "This type of thing is happening to a greater extent than people realize," attorney Johnston said.

Virtual Product Placement Infiltrates TV, Film, Games

2006-02-23

What's fueling the virtual product placement fire? In a word, TiVo. American mass-media consumers are tired of boring, irrelevant, intrusive ads sandwiched between gripping stories with plot lines that can better be digested without reminders of what to do when your toilet bowl clogs or your mufflers go south, and they now have the technology to do something about it. Ready to take your business to the next level? Capital Source Partners helps businesses just like yours. Our expert team of advisors will guide you through the processes of preparing for a M&A, an IPO, and obtaining investment capital to expand your business . Contact us today for a free consultation. U.S. advertisers have turned the practice of "product placement" into a lucrative market. This advertising phenomenon makes possible the insertion of an advertiser's product into a film, television program or video game. The estimated value of the total product-placement industry in 2005 -- when you include other creative arrangements such as barter (where the use of the product becomes the actual payment) or gratis (where the placement happens to enrich the plot or boost the character's profile) -- was US$4.24 billion, according to Stamford, Conn., media and entertainment research and consulting firm PQ Media. "Trends in the two major media -- television and film -- that account for more than 90 percent of the value of product placement seem to hold true to our predictions," said PQ Media Vice President Leo Kivijarv. Further predictions are for the value of product placement to grow at double-digit rates in 2006, he noted. Fueling the Fire With advancements in technology, a hot outgrowth of traditional product placement has become "virtual" product placement, which employs software tools that allow products to be inserted, deleted and substituted without making any demands on scripts, cast members or production schedules. With the right computer engineering, products roll on and off story boards and footage, offering promoters and content owners an alternative form of advertising. What's fueling the virtual product placement fire? In a word, TiVo (Nasdaq: TIVO) . American mass-media consumers are tired of boring, irrelevant, intrusive ads sandwiched between gripping stories with plot lines that can better be digested without reminders of what to do when your toilet bowl clogs or your mufflers go south -- and they now have the technology to do something about it. They can configure their entertainment systems so there are no commercial breaks. Vendors, all the same, need to get their brands known and loved, and virtual product placement is an increasingly viable alternative. When it comes to computer-manipulated placements, the execution needs to look a lot better than just a cut-and-paste job. The viewer sees the product and may engage with it as part of the larger scene if it is placed successfully. Negative Attention? "If the quality is not there, the virtual placement will attract negative attention from the viewer, which is likely to result in a negative response," cautioned Allan Jaenicke, co-founder and managing director of Imagineer Systems, a UK-based provider of film and video post-production software tools. The company's "monet" placement station can perform virtual product placement for use in a broadcast, film or post-production setting. "Both [cost-effectiveness and quality] are important when you consider the need for virtual product placements to be produced in higher volume and lower cost per placement compared to traditional 30-second spots," Jaenicke told the E-Commerce Times. Imagineer's technology makes it possible to customize product-placement relevancy in a film or program to different geographic regions at the same time, he noted. "We see larger broadcasters and content owners coming together this year to work out revenue models for exploring one of the significant benefits of virtual product placements, namely that they can be changed and adapted geographically as well as demographically. This provides additional revenue opportunities when programs are sold internationally," said Jaenicke. Hot Spots While films and television have been the hot spots for virtual product placement, marketers see lucrative dollar signs in bringing virtual product placement to other kinds of media too. "Marketers continue to seek the most efficient methods to reach their target audiences, especially 18-to-34 years olds. They are looking at programs, films and other media," said Kivijarv of PQ Media. Among those "other media" are video games. Interest in product placement integrated in video games is increasing, with proponents insisting gamers think ads in video games punch up the realism of the gaming experience. These positive reactions may in turn lead to positive brand awareness. However, this reasoning may not always hold true. Such product placements risk overkill that can turn players away. The Internet and video games "are media that have high consumer consumption among the coveted 18-to-34 market. That said, the success of these placements has yet to be determined," Kivijarv said. In a recent survey on the issue, "half of the respondents said the placements gave the game a more realistic feel, but the other half complained that they were a distraction," he stated. To be sure, marketers are becoming increasingly concerned that too much of a good thing can negate the good. The words "clutter" and "irrelevancy" are now frequently mentioned as risks that can yield negative results. All the same, if 2006 becomes the year that product-placement gurus do something to avert errors and clutter, it could lead to greater profitability for those who can execute. To be effective will require thoughtful product placement -- "not just throw it in there and we are all set," said Jeff Greenfield, editor of Product Placement News and executive vice president of 1st Approach, a marketing firm. In 2006, marketers will also be focused on another media hot spot: mobile video. Looking Ahead "Obviously, more and more content is being made available via mobile devices," said Jaenicke. "Once we start watching movies on a phone, where is revenue going to come from? Not traditional 30-second spots, as it would be unacceptable for a consumer to have to pay bandwidth charges to watch a commercial." An offering that can combine free or low-cost advertising based television with mobile devices would be attractive and a good use of virtual product placement, Jaenicke believes. "You can target the viewer demographically; for example, you can have three different versions of the same film or program to download and stream the most appropriate one to the viewer, based on knowledge obtained when they purchased their telephone," he said. Still, it may be too early to nail with certainty the strength and speed in which virtual product placement will travel in the mobile-device marketplace. "Mobile entertainment is only in its infancy stage," said PQ Media's Kivijarv, "and advertisers have to be convinced that it is a viable alternative to other media. The small screen makes the seamless integration of a product into a scene extremely difficult."

Chrysler shares spotlight with (Harrison) Ford in 'Firewall'

2006-02-13

A Ford and a Chrysler hunt the bad guys in the new movie thriller Firewall. The Ford is actor Harrison Ford. The Chrysler is a 300C. Thanks to a product-placement deal between the Chrysler group and the film's producers, the Hemi-powered sedan appears prominently in Firewall. Ads for the 300C include content from the Warner Bros. movie, which opened last week. A new 30-second TV spot has a high-speed chase involving the 300C. Actor Ford's grim visage glowers from print ads that promote both the car and the movie. Internet ads also link the movie with the car company. Ford plays a computer security specialist for a bank. He drives a 300C. His onscreen wife drives a Chrysler Pacifica, which also appears in the film. The movie's villains kidnap his family to force him to take part in their scheme to rob the bank electronically. Working together Jeff Bell, the Chrysler group's vice president of product strategy, says his company saw the script for Firewall in its early stages. Chrysler officials and the movie's producers worked together on integrating the 300C and Pacifica in both the film and related ads. "We suggested where we thought there would be opportunities to naturally and appropriately" include the vehicles, Bell told Automotive News. "They already had (the) vehicles in the film. We said we can use this footage for promotional purposes. They made sure that when they were shooting it, they would do it in such a way that the vehicle looked great and the stars were present." Actor Ford requested the inclusion of Chrysler vehicles in the movie, Bell says. Bell would not discuss financial terms of the product-placement deal. The Firewall-related commercials are running for six weeks on broadcast and cable TV, Bell says. The spots appear during prime-time programs and sports telecasts. They feature logos for both Chrysler and the movie. 'Cost pressure' Movie studios are under a "tremendous amount of cost pressure," says Jeff Greenfield, executive vice president of 1st Approach, a marketing firm in Portsmouth, N.H. So they are increasingly interested in product-placement opportunities with automakers, he says. Such deals often specify how a car company will promote the movie along with its vehicles, Greenfield notes. In recent years, Bell says, Jeep division made similar product-placement agreements to promote the films Sahara and Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life. Using film footage in TV commercials, he adds, reduces the spots' production costs.

Trading product for air time

2006-02-06

In every episode of the Showtime series �Weeds,� a character drinks It�s A Grind coffee. �To be on a television show like Weeds means a lot to our brand, especially while we�re in a stage of growth,� said Rick Kowalski, the vice president of operations. The Long Beach-based chain currently has 70 locations across the United States and plans to open 150 by year�s end. As It�s A Grind executives work to negotiate new franchise agreements, �the exposure on �Weeds� helps elevate brand awareness and reaches our target audience,� Kowalski said. �Weeds�" storyline centers on the life of Nancy Botwin (Mary-Louise Parker), whose husband died of a heart attack. The widow is left almost penniless and struggles to raise her two sons in the fictional town of Agrestic, Calif. She sells marijuana to make ends meet. For Parker�s performance, she won a Golden Globe for best TV comic actress Jan. 16. Critics compare the show to other award-winning series such as �Sex and the City� and �Desperate Housewives.� The notoriety behind the show warrants a six-figure product placement contract, but the opportunity just sort of fell in It�s A Grind�s lap when representatives from Showtime and Lions Gate films contacted company officials. �The people from the show drink our coffee and asked if they could have it on the program,� Kowalski said. The only catch was Showtime requested fresh-brewed coffee, an expense of maybe $30 a day. This type of trade is quite common, according to Jeff Greenfield, executive vice president for 1st Approach, a firm that charges an annual fee of $150,000 to $180,000 for placing brands in entertainment properties. Greenfield helped negotiate a similar deal for Baja Fresh, which provided food for the �I am Stamos� set. �With restaurants, we use branded items where people are eating. We make the items and labels visible where you recognize the specific chain,� he said. Value added Product placement began in 1938, but really made its mark in the 1970s when tobacco companies ensured actors used their brands on camera. The concept became commonplace when Reese�s Pieces sales increased 80 percent after its placement in the movie "E.T.� According to iTVX, a company that measures the quality of product placement, television viewers recall strategic product placements four times more than they do in paid commercial messages. But just because a viewer recognizes product placements over commercials does not necessarily net a positive return on investment. Greenfield said companies must establish strategic goals. �When we get a new client, we ask, �What is the goal?� Do they want to put more people in seats? Do they want to increase franchises? Are they looking to increase business in certain demographics or areas?� he said. �And whatever the goal is, it�s important that the company�s Web site communicates that goal. Because what we�re finding is consumers get online to research products they viewed on film or television.� No franchise does a better job of using entertainment properties strategically than Starbucks, Greenfield said. On Feb. 14, Starbucks will release a children's music DVD collection "We Are ... The Laurie Berkner Band." The project includes a five-song CD and is a co-release from indie label Razor & Tie Entertainment, Two Tomatoes Records and Starbucks Hear Music. It will be available at Starbucks stores in the United States. Starbucks also is prominently featured in the new film �Something New,� which hit the box office Feb. 3. �Starbucks is very attractive to filmmakers,� Greenfield said. �They (filmmakers) want those chains that have strong brand recognition and will bring in an audience. Right now, the major filmmakers are very interested in working with large chains.� He said moviemakers begin selecting brands months before filming. �At first, they will ask for $100,000, and as the film date becomes closer, they will lower the fee,� Greenfield said. �The day or so before filming, if they don�t have a brand, they will ask �can you get us free soda� or whatever brand they need. From a product standpoint, you take a chance of a competitor purchasing the placement. Those free deals don�t come around very often.� It�s A Grind lucked out with the �Weeds� opportunity, said Kowalski, with having producers approach them. But most of the time a middleman like Greenfield works for a company to negotiate deals with filmmakers. �The real value of being on a show like �Weeds� is in DVD sales,� Greenfield said. Kowalski said for �Weeds�� second season, there�s been discussion to film at the company-owned Long Beach store. �It�s really hard to say how valuable that is for us, but obviously, it�s in the million-dollar range.� By Fred Minnick Managing Editor

Paid To Place

2006-01-27

Jeff Greenfield product placement consultant, executive Vice President of 1st Approach, supports product placement in films and television shows and Patric M. Verrone president of the Writers Guild of America, West, talks about protesting product placement in TV and film scripts.

Jeff Greenfield on CNBC Business News

2006-01-27

In-game ads link to the real world

2006-01-26

Even a virtual soldier gets hungry sometimes. That's why one new firm is helping Subway, the sandwich chain, embed advertisements for its $2.49 daily specials in the video game Counter Strike. The real ads - still in test mode - appear on signs an alert gamer encounters while patrolling a virtual city. And they appear to deliver. The company, Engage In-Game Advertising, surveyed online players recently after they had encountered the ads and recorded 94 percent recall. That's a "phenomenal" result compared with other media, says David Smith, vice president of business development for Engage in San Francisco. Subway's sales numbers also spiked in the test market. Product placement meant to foster brand affinity has been commonplace in video games for several years. The practice is widely embraced by gamers, who prize realism - a FedEx delivery truck as opposed to a generic one, for example, in a street-racing game. But "this is more," says Mr. Smith. "This is actually immersing traditional advertising, like billboards, into the games." The ads are local-market specific, and can be updated by means of an Internet "patch." The move is the latest step in marketers' ongoing bid to capitalize on the rising number of PC- and console-based games that include, if not require, an online component. It has some watchdogs worried that more ads will pitch to younger-than-intended gamers. Though many games are targeted to older teens, members of the age 12-to-17 set are most likely to play, according to one 2004 study. "In-game advertising is here to stay, and will increase as more games and platforms hook up to the Internet," says Jeff Greenfield, executive vice president of 1st Approach, a marketing firm in Dover, N.H. "Gamers love the reality, and brands are excited about reaching their core demographic." It's a willing audience. "This new generation of consumers does not consider its experiences 'authentic' unless advertising is involved," says Mario Almonte, a vice president at Herman Associates, a public relations firm in New York. Soon, new gamers might not recognize ad-free games. In fall 2004, two companies, inGamePartners and Massive, began experimenting with enhanced versions of product placement, including multiplayer online games that could be played free if a gamer agreed to view ads. Then, early last year, Sony Online Entertainment formed an alliance with Pizza Hut centered on the fantasy role-playing game Everquest. A player can type "pizza" to open a browser window and order home delivery. Today, one in-game advertising insider speaks excitedly about games in which a 3-D city might resemble New York's Times Square, ablaze with ads. Already in the works: in-game ads that replicate broadcast advertising formats. For example, a car in a video game can have a radio that streams live-audio ad messages, says Justin Townsend, chief executive officer of IGA Partners Europe, a leading global player in in-game advertising. As for in-game television ads: "That's very close on the horizon," says Mr. Townsend. "Our next software release will actually allow us to place TV spots inside games." Some observers, including Mr. Greenfield, do not yet see clear evidence that in-game ads will cause youths to buy more. Greenfield also maintains that too much ad clutter could actually annoy gamers and even trigger retaliatory hacking. "This is a rebellious group," he says. Already the Pizza Hut order option has been derided on some websites, says Steve Mounsey, a 20-something gamer who manages a GameStop store in Beverly, Mass. "A lot of people make fun of that." Still, few marketers are likely to resist the potential gold mine. Big recent studies - including one in November by Mediaedge:cia and another, just last month, by Nielsen Entertainment and gamemaker Activision - show relevant, well-integrated in-game ads to be remarkably persuasive among 18- to 34-year-old males, a group marketers have found to be elusive of late. "The consumer is no longer sitting in front of the TV set, and brands have to be more innovative in terms of engaging that consumer," says Claire Rosenzweig, executive director of the Promotion Marketing Association (PMA), a nonprofit research and educational organization. "What you see is an incredible rise in experiential marketing, and 'advergaming' can be included in that branded experience." (Advergames typically promote a single product or brand.) The PMA's stand on this avenue for ads: The industry should educate, rather than regulate. "Give people information about what it is they'd be engaging with," says Ms. Rosenzweig, "and let them make informed decisions." But all of that access to eyeballs, in the hands of a still largely self-policed marketing channel, has more independent watchdogs concerned. In some cases, in-game ads might thrill marketers by providing useful feedback on gamers' personal preferences - vehicle colors, for instance - raising privacy concerns. And parents rattled by the likes of Grand Theft Auto may now wonder what kinds of ads might eventually flow through such games, many of which are played by younger teens, despite a ratings system. "It's virtually impossible to know what kids are doing," especially as gaming goes mobile on hand-held devices, many with wireless Internet connections, says Susan Linn, cofounder of the coalition Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood. She suggests that parents lobby Congress to get the Federal Trade Commission involved. "We need to have some laws about marketing to children," says Ms. Linn, as what she calls "interactive advertising" broadens its reach. IGA's Townsend counters that it is in advertisers' interests to protect their brands from image problems. Clients already can schedule ad campaigns that preclude games that feature alcohol or violence. He adds that opt-out rules apply to in-game ads, and he says firms like his are not seeking to mine for private consumer data. "If you were to remove any regulations regarding privacy, it would be an advertiser's dream," he allows. "[But] there are regulations in place already that prevent people from working with that data."

Coke Forces TV Placement Clutter Debate Into The Open

2006-01-16

OVER the past couple of years, the branded entertainment business has been in denial about product placement clutter on television. That denial tends to look something like this: An exec grudgingly admits that branded TV airtime is increasing, but it's OK because their specific placements are so "organic," "subtle," "natural," and "seamless" that viewers either don't notice or are charmed by them. In other words: "My placements aren't clutter, but everyone else's are." The traditional advertising industry has lived with this denial for years. Each advertiser attempts to "break through the clutter," but the mere act of clutter breakthrough only creates more clutter�an irony that even Alanis Morissette could define accurately. Until recently, the industry's rationalization was that the field is still an evolving one, that everyone was on the same side in terms of finding ways of making it work because everyone loses if the audience gets bored. But that happy compromise of marketers, producers and TV executives looked like it was coming apart at the seams last week in light of two events. First, Coca-Cola said it was reorganizing its branded entertainment efforts and putting its entertainment marketing firm, Creative Artists Agency, on a tight leash. The news is seismic because Coke and its main vehicle, Fox's American Idol, were both consistently the busiest show and brand for placements. Second, Nielsen Product Placement released its full-year numbers for 2005, and (no surprise) they revealed a 31% increase in placements on prime time network TV. Last year, there were 110,322 shout-outs for brands. In 2004, it was only 84,119. The Gloves Are Off Brandweek has harped on the clutter issue since last May, when we reported that in the first four months of 2005, placements had doubled over the same period in 2004. This month, some execs finally stopped being diplomatic about the issue. One producer said it was the networks' fault for cutting too many integration deals. "On some of our shows we have had to go out of our way to integrate network-generated product placement deals that we have not necessarily been happy about," said Joey Carson, CEO of Bunim/Murray Productions, in Van Nuys, Calif. Of course, BMP's The Real World on MTV virtually invented the reality TV genre that has become so useful for brand placement. "For instance, Starting Over on NBC [which BMP produces]. I would say that would fall on a percentage increase year-over-year higher than your 30%. That's gone up 50% at least, if not 60%, all due to network-mandated value-added integrations. To the point where I would say we have a level of clutter on that show that, if we were controlling it, we probably would not have that much. That's the inherent problem I have," Carson said. Carson argued that he was not trying to bash the networks, but that when producers control the brands on the screen, the integrations are likely to be less forced. NBC reps declined to comment. In The Real World, he said, there might be 30 to 40 brands on screen in the form of furniture, phones, computers and cars. (Interestingly, in the The Real World's early days, logos were often pixilated.) Carson is not alone. Three other execs in different companies backed his position. A "perfect example is The Apprentice [NBC]," said Jeff Greenfield, evp of 1st Approach, a placement agency in Portsmouth, N.H. "Their ratings decline is in direct proportion to the amount of branded entertainment," he said. 1st Approach reps Black & Decker. Christopher Raphael, president of The Really Spectacular Company in Warwick, N.Y., also cited The Apprentice as a prime example of "when a network and a producer jam as much brand integration and product placement in a show as humanly possible." RSC lists Allied Domecq Wines & Spirits and American Airlines as clients, among others. "Although the brand gets an extreme value for money and the producer is compensated with huge dollars�does the viewer get confused and irritated? This would probably be the time when the marketer worries about clutter because his client's exposure is potentially diluted," Raphael said. Even the clients piled on: "We've done research on possible networks where product placement is available (Queer Eye for the Straight Guy; Extreme Makeover Home Edition and Desperate Housewives), but found these shows to be highly saturated and expensive," said Katie Dunsworth, a rep for 1-800-Got Junk? "We have instead negotiated product placement deals on HGTV, Style and Discovery Home, which have given us a great ROI." Might Less Be Better? Coming to the defense of the networks was Sabrina Ironside, vp-integrated marketing at Fox Home Entertainment (who also has a foot in the opposing camp as chairman of the board of the Promotional Marketing Association in New York). She argued that the clutter increase appeared artificially large because it was coming off a low base. "It's not like you turn on your TV and watch your shows and you're saturated," she said. "It's not offending the consumer." Ironside also defended The Apprentice. "At least the episodes I've seen, they were all very well integrated into the tests [on the show]. That Star Wars episode ... I really enjoyed that. It was top of mind, and everyone loves Star Wars."She did note, however, that the competition for ad dollars with cable�which tends to be more flexible with brand integrations�puts pressure on the nets to accept more placements. That inherent contradiction�the need for more money versus the need for credible show content�was not lost on Fred Dubin, New York-based Mediaedge:cia's director of entertainment marketing and promotion. "My sense is that we have gone through a year of the Wild West, where people did as much as they could do and there were very few restrictions," he said. In 2006, "We're going to see a reining in, and we're going to see less. Hopefully, we'll see less and we'll see better. Having said that, we're trying to do more."

NATPE Features 1st Approach EVP Jeff Greenfield

2006-01-10

Jeff Greenfield, Executive Vice President for Branded Entertainment Firm 1st Approach will be a featured speaker at NATPE 2006 in Las Vegas. "Buzz Marketing: How to Become the Next Big Thing in Hollywood" is the topic of Greenfield's hour long presentation to be held on Thursday, January 26th from 12:30 to 1:30 PM in Ballroom J. Here is an overview of the presentation: Network and Cable television are having a tough time reaching consumers and have turned to 'buzz' and other non-traditional 'word of mouth' marketing campaigns to market new and existing programming. Just like the marketing for 'The Blair Witch Project', 'buzz' campaigns always reach more people and cost less than a traditional advertising campaign. Savvy producers are currently using these techniques to help get their projects sold. During this program Jeff Greenfield will show you why word of mouth is working so well right now. Word of mouth has become the most profound influence of consumer behavior and this program will show you how to use it to get Network execs 'buzzing' about your project! Takeaway: Come away with action steps for creating your own �buzz� campaign on a near-zero budget! The program is being sponsored by Green Tentacle.com

BBC News Interview on Product Placement

2005-12-17

Product placement may sound dull and not even very relevant ... but it's going to be big in the European Union ... it describes the practice, popular in the US, where television and film makers boost their earnings by charging companies to show their brands on the screen. In some cases, product placement is moving towards becoming its own master ... large branded companies making complete shows around their branded products. Product placement has been banned in most European countries ... until now. The European Commission has decided it's time to catch up with America ... with some limitations. Is it necessary ... or is it simply inevitable? Joining Rodney Smith to discuss this are Jeff Greenfield of 1st Approach marketing in the United States, Lora Kolodny, business reporter on the industry newspaper, Hollywood Reporter, and in London, Steve Read of 1st Place media marketing.

Product placement in games sizzles

2005-12-01

When video gamers lube their cars in Electronic Arts' "Need For Speed Most Wanted," they don't use just any oil. They use Castrol Syntec. And along the 337 miles of "drivable" roads in Midway's "L.A. Rush," billboards hawk everything from MTV to Piloti driving shoes. The signs that litter our real-life highways are increasingly finding their way into games, and the publishers who act as urban planners for these virtual thoroughfares are very aware of the dangers even as they ratchet up their product placement efforts. Inappropriate, or too many, product placements in a game, they say, and gamers quickly let their anger be known. Yet, at Electronic Arts, plans are to sell space in 13 games next year compared with 11 in 2005 and just two in 2002. At Midway, the company hired its first director of in-game advertising just a few weeks ago to intensify sales efforts. And the goal of at least one small, independent developer is to profit from product placement in addition to the funding developers traditionally receive from publishers. "A properly designed game that provides lots of game play hours and high replay value can provide more bang for the buck than a favorite DVD, which might get played 3 to 5 times in a year, max," says Jeff Greenfield, publisher of "Branded Entertainment Monthly" and executive VP at Portsmouth, N.H.-based 1st Approach, a product placement marketing firm. "And if the brand becomes a critical part of the game's mission objective, then you've got a product placement home run." While Midway's product placement program began about 18 months ago, the Chicago-based publisher has named a new director of in-game advertising and set in place a new, more aggressive sales program. Steve Allison, Midway's corporate marketing officer, attributes the energized initiative to both rising video game production costs and a maturing industry. "Making games is getting more expensive, and we hope to offset some of that. But, more importantly, we're just maturing as an entertainment business, and we're finding that we have the same opportunities as, say, the movie industry. If you look at the blockbuster movies, you see that their promotional partners do very well when the movie is hot. If we follow that model, we know we can make a lot of partners happy -- and generate a lot of revenue from it." Allison refers to the endless product placement opportunities as a sort of "Wild Wild West" -- "a pizza box on a table can function the same way as a billboard in a racing game," he says. "There are also storefronts. And, with next-gen technology, we're at the point where we can recreate real clothing brands, dress the game's characters in them, and sell that to the clothing manufacturers. We're looking to do that. For companies that want to be incorporated into a game, there are many, many opportunities." For example, in "L.A. Rush," the driving game released last month for PlayStation 2, Xbox, and PC, Midway signed on 40 partners, "although, with 337 miles of drivable roads, we could have done 400," says Allison. He wouldn't reveal what the deals netted Midway, but disclosed that, in general, "we take as little as $20,000 for a limited placement on up to close to $1 million. It just depends on how much exposure the company wants. There's a lot of negotiating going on." Armor All ad in Midway's "L.A. Rush" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- But Allison recognizes that too many advertisers in a game could do more harm than it's worth. "When gamers pay $50 or $60 for a title and then feel that they're being barraged with ad content, especially if it feels like advertising to them, you get some very harsh reactions -- e-mails, calls to your PR or investor relations department, blogs," Allison notes. "It's the same thing as when moviegoers pay $10 to see a movie and then have to sit through 15 minutes of commercials before the movie starts. They don't react positively to that stuff. So you and your ad partners have to be crafty; you have to present it in a way that's going to appear cool." Julie Shumaker, too, is more than a little concerned about what she predicts will be a "consumer backlash" against publishers who "are rushing so fast that they may likely go too far." As national director of sales/videogame advertising at Electronic Arts, Shumaker says she doesn't want to see a repeat of the Internet boom-and-bust era of the mid-to-late-'90s. "Marketers had a very bad experience and got burned," she recalls. "While I believe we are doing things the right way here at EA, we are concerned that if consumers have a bad experience [with too much or too blatant advertising in games], you can bet that the advertisers will have a bad experience. And if their first entree into video games is a negative one, it will take years to get them back and try again. So my hope is that the buzz in the marketplace about product placement doesn't transfer into publishers going too far." She had praise for publishers Activision and Ubisoft who she described as "doing a heck of a good job" and having "similar concerns." Shumaker says that EA has firm guidelines in place to prevent overenthusiastic product placement. "I can say to a marketer that I know your tendency is to be interruptive but, at the end of the day, it's our job to have you be seamless," she notes. "Some marketers are going to run to a publisher and say 'Slap my logo everywhere and make sure it's seen and that it's really in your face.' My concern is that other publishers won't be as firm in their pushback as we would be." The question, of course, is how much is too much advertising? In order to determine the line of over-commercialism, EA does extensive focus-group testing, combines that with consumer feedback on current games, and then, according to Shumaker, "we pull waaaay back from that line. Also, some games lend themselves to product placement more than others. For example, in 'Need For Speed Most Wanted,' we sold 15 placements; in "NCAA March Madness 06" there are only two." And other games go ad-less -- in 2005, EA published 33 games, only 11 of which contained advertisements. Fantasy games and those set in historical times tend to be inappropriate for product placement, and advertisers tend to avoid "M"-rated games (for ages 17 and older) which limit the size of the audience and may include content with which they'd rather not be associated. The product placement process starts with the game's executive producer, explains Shumaker, who determines how many spots are available for real-world brands. He may feel that the game requires a mobile device, and so Shumaker will ask her team to go out and talk to wireless companies to determine their interest. Castrol ad in Electronic Arts' "Need For Speed Most Wanted" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Or a company like synthetic oil manufacturer Castrol Syntec will approach Shumaker and ask which game is available for product placement. In fact, they signed a multi-component deal for the just-released "Need For Speed Most Wanted" -- the game includes a Castrol-branded garage, plenty of Castrol oil cans, Castrol signs, and an "unlockable." Shumaker explains: "There is a high-performance vehicle -- a hot, souped-up Ford GT -- in the game that players have to go through many, many levels to access. We did a promotion with Castrol in which they delivered the code to unlock access to the car. It was a win-win situation -- in effect, Castrol was gifting the gamer with added content, and was itself excited to be associated with a high-performance vehicle in the game." While Shumaker wouldn't disclose what Castrol paid, she says there was a different fee for each of the four components of the deal. EA's rates are based on per-unit sell-through. "I guarantee that a certain number of units will be sold and then, typically, we over-deliver," she says. "I will admit that our per-unit rate is consistently a little higher than the rest of the market." An alternative to product placement is what is known as "dynamic advertising," a new technology in online games that lets different ads rotate in the same game "space" or location. While Midway has dabbled with companies like Massive and Double Fusion, which stream ads into some of Midway's online games, EA is taking a wait-and-see attitude on dynamic advertising technology. "We are on record as investigating various technologies and business solutions in the dynamic ad-serving space," Shumaker says. "But, right now, we're not using it and won't until we have gained full confidence in it." She describes what EA does now as seeking out sponsorships rather than advertisers. "When Coca-Cola pays for a 30-second ad on TV, it's usually because it wants to talk about, say, its new flavor," she explains. "That's time-based and it's focused on product features. Sponsorship is really about brand affiliation. Our research has consistently shown that gamers have higher favorability for a brand that's been in our games after they play the games than before." While it's impossible to determine how much revenue video game publishers generate by selling product placements, there is at least one small game developer who is hungrily attempting to slice off a piece of that pie. After all, as production costs rise, it is the independent developer who is being hardest hit. Devin Cambridge is managing the creation of a new video game called "Sirius Sepheroth" which features the talents of comic book veteran Mike Carey of DC Comics. According to Cambridge, who is the CEO of Newnan, GA-based Cambridge & Smith, the plan is to incorporate real-world brands into the game, which would "not only add to the immersion of the cyberpunk fantasy adventure, but bring in revenue over and above what the game might receive from a publisher." The biggest challenge has been to create a game that incorporates advertising, without having closed any deals yet. The would-be advertisers, it seems, want to see the game before signing on the dotted line. Cambridge's goal is to sign on as many advertisers as possible at the rate of $100,000 on the low end up to $1 million, depending on their participation. Midway's Allison wishes independent developers the best of luck. "The truth is that the third-party development climate is really tough," she says. "Their costs are rising, and so I understand why they may want to do this. But I'd be shocked if any small developer will be able to pull it off. "What we're looking at is that, in the next two years, more and more games will take place in big city environments, where there'll be lots more opportunities to sell stuff. The publishers who are savvy will be able to take advantage of that. In the meantime, this is all still in its infancy and a lot of advertisers still don't get it. Educating them will be the biggest challenge." Paul "The Game Master" Hyman was the editor-in-chief of CMP Media's GamePower. He's covered the games industry for over a dozen years. His columns for The Reporter run exclusively on the Web site.

A Slippery Snowy Slope for Marketing

2005-12-05

In "First Descent," a new snowboarding documentary that opens in limited release this week, mountains are everywhere. You'll have to look a little harder to spot the Mountain Dew. But not too hard. Mountain Dew, after all, didn't just pay to have the soft drink in the movie. It financed the entire project, which follows five snowboarding icons. (A rep won't comment on the budget.) Experts call it "branded entertainment." How better to control screen time for a product? But John Galloway, VP of sports and media for Pepsi-Cola, says that less is more in this film. Pepsi-Cola, which owns Mountain Dew, wants to build buzz by association. "Our goal is for this to be the seminal movie of snowboarding�we didn't want to go overboard with the product,'' he says. Product shots are subtle�a snowboarder's helmet, for example, shows the logo. Marketers say Mountain Dew made a smart move, because audiences are turned off by blatant product placement. Jeff Greenfield, a product-placement expert, says there's a "backlash that's happened with brands; it's not supposed to be in your face.'' Still, media experts aren't so keen on the idea of a company's bankrolling a documentary, with say over the final cut. "It's like going back to the 17th century, where you had to please the patron," says Mary-Lou Galician, head of media analysis at Arizona State University. "This is dangerous." But John Kaplan, a co-producer of the film, says that if the filmmakers "felt in any way they had to compromise, the whole thing would have been a wash,'' and there would have been no film. It seems the real danger was on the slopes.

Actors spar over video-game voices

2005-06-22

Video games generate large profits, and Hollywood movie actors are pushing to reap a bigger share of those rewards. The Screen Actors Guild announced this week it has rejected a deal with the video-game industry that would have boosted its members' pay for doing the voices of video-game characters by nearly 40 percent over the next three years. The guild is seeking greater compensation for its members. "We will now explore other options," said Greg Hessinger, SAG's chief executive, in a statement. Guild members currently are paid a minimum of $556 for a four-hour recording session. Had SAG agreed with what had been put on the table, that price would have risen to $759 by 2008. The union representatives argued, however, that movie actors featured in top-selling games should receive additional compensation -- a proposal rejected by industry executives. There is some concern that SAG's rally to obtain more for its members may backfire, particularly because the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists -- SAG's counterpart -- already has accepted what game companies have offered, and their agreement will take effect July 1. Earlier this month both SAG and AFTRA stated publicly they were prepared to accept the new contracts, but SAG decided to back out of the agreement in the end. "It is unfortunate that our brothers and sisters at the Screen Actors Guild have chosen another path," said John Connolly, AFTRA's president, in a statement. Because AFTRA has accepted the agreement, there will be no shortage of voice actors willing to take on contracts with video-game producers. Some industry analysts argue that the SAG decision will hurt voice actors far more in the near term than the game companies, which collectively generated $25 billion in revenue within the United States last year alone -- if they are adversely affected at all. "The gaming industry is relatively new ... and there's always a clash (between companies and trade unions) whenever there's a new division of entertainment," said Lee Crowe, chair of media arts and animation at the Art Institute of Atlanta. Crowe said video-game companies were seen to be taking advantage of the lesser-known voice actors who needed the union to defend their rights. "Exploiting them is rampant throughout the gaming industry right now," Crowe told United Press International. She said the latest contract dispute involved those who needed the voice-over jobs the most, rather than the major Hollywood celebrities. Crowe noted that keeping out talented voice actors from the market could hurt the gaming industry in the long run. She said trained voice actors make animation come alive, and their contributions to the animated product, be it film or video game, is invaluable and should be treated accordingly. Jeff Greenfield, executive vice president at 1st Approach, a product-placement company in Dover, N.H., said voice acting is a "craft ... and if you believe in those characters on the screen, it helps" improve the game experience. Greenfield told UPI the voices of Hollywood celebrities featured in games may make them "totally cool" to players, but whether or not the original actor in a movie takes part in the game version makes no difference in actual sales of the product. The original cast of a blockbuster, such as "The Matrix," might play a role in the video game as well, but whether or not the game becomes a hit ultimately depends on its action quality, rather than on any secondary factor such as the voice behind a character, Greenfield said.

Has hidden advertising gone too far?

2005-11-17

HOLLYWOOD - TV editor Scott Miller says he has twisted himself into a pretzel trying to bend plotlines to suit sponsors. In Game Show Network's "American Dream Derby," he had contestants swill Diet Dr Pepper during the show's weekly "fallout moments," when the teams quietly discussed strategy. On MTV's "Tough Enough 3," pro-wrestling contestants were taken to a local mall to visit Foot Locker, Coffee Bean, and Jamba Juice. "I remember asking the producers, 'Do we really have to show this? There is other more interesting stuff that is important to the story line,' " recalls Mr. Miller, a 31-year-old who has been working in Hollywood for five years. "Just do it," they said. "We have to." Miller and his fellow members of the Writers Guild of America as well as the Screen Actors Guild say such pressures to place commercial products in TV shows and films have skyrocketed in recent years. They are calling for a code of conduct to govern the practice and say they will appeal to the Federal Communications Commission if production studios and networks don't seriously consider their proposal. The two unions also want a percentage of the additional revenue that this advertising generates as well as healthcare and pension benefits. "Viewers don't want to be sold something when they've tuned in to be entertained and informed, and writers don't want to have to become shills to an advertisement-driven media," says WGA West President Patric M. Verrone. Saying the increased weaving of paid-for product advertisements into TV and film "raises serious ethical questions" Mr. Verrone adds, "The public has a right to be informed that they are viewing de facto subliminal advertising, and creative artists have a right to exercise their creative voices when required to participate in such advertising." This week the WGA and the SGA released a report showing revenues from advertising within TV shows and movies exceeded $1 billion in the past year. The report described that product use had increased in films by 44 percent and in television programming by 84 percent in that period. It singled out the NBC primetime hit show, "The Apprentice" for its use of advertising. In the program's third season, Burger King, Dove Body Wash, Sony PlayStation, Verizon Wireless, and Visa paid more than $2 million per episode to have their products incorporated into plotlines. "High-tech tools have pushed out the commercials, and the commercials are pushing back," says Matthew Felling, media director at the Center for Media and Public Affairs based in Washington. He notes that several high-tech devices - DVDs, TiVo, VCRs, and webcasts - now allow viewers to bypass or delete the string of ads on TV. "TV is having to create alternative revenue models. That's the price we pay for paying no price," he says. To better handle how the entertainment industry engages in advertising, WGA and SAG have proposed a code of conduct with four main guidelines. It would require: a full, clear disclosure when viewers see commercial products or hear them mentioned in the program; a strict limit on integrating products into children's programming; a voice for storytellers, actors and directors "arrived at through collective bargaining" about how a product or brand is incorporated into the content; and an adherence to these regulations by cable TV, where "some of the most egregious abuse" of this integration happens, they say. Those in the advertising industry respond citing their own pressure to regain audiences they have lost as fewer people watch commercials. They say that it is the networks that have suggested the broader product integrations because of their fears of declining advertising revenue. These complaints are economically driven on both sides, says Jeff Greenfield, publisher of Branded Entertainment Monthly. In the SAG report, Mr. Greenfield notes that SAG President Alan Rosenberg objected that the growing product-placement practice "too often takes place without any compensation to the very performers that are expected to push those products." Adds Greenfield, "This is a shakedown by the writers who want a piece of the pie." But media analysts say the report and ensuing debate are more evidence of a high-stakes, changing media environment, as cable and satellite TV have eroded the conventional free-TV model. In recent weeks, new partnerships have formed, making network content without commercials available for purchase via the Internet and satellite. "This is another step in the breakdown of the free-TV model," says Mr. Felling, who says the industry is at a critical juncture as the rules change for the writers, the networks and the public. "Is it worth putting up with this advertising creep to keep your TV free," he says, "or do you want to switch over to something that costs you money?" By Daniel B. Wood Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Product placement - the plot sickens

2005-11-04

The gang in the WB television comedy "What I Like About You" has been lunching at Chili's now and then this season. One of the characters, Vince (Nick Zano), recently got a job there. And fans who watch the Nov. 18 episode will hear an appeal for St. Jude's Children's Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn., a charity favored by Chili's. Vince's job and the gatherings at Chili's resulted after the TV network and the restaurant chain made a promotional deal, and are an example of "product integration," an escalation of the age-old tradition of product placement. Product placement, in its most basic form, is the art of setting a box or bottle so that its label is within range of a movie or TV camera. But with product integration, the product becomes part of the story, not merely a set decoration. Both are increasingly becoming advertisers' method of choice for reaching consumers in movies, TV shows, even novels and plays. With digital video recorders and VCRs making it easier for viewers to zap past commercials, and with DVDs offering more chances to see shows without the ads, advertisers want their products smack in the middle of the programs � where they can't be avoided. Apple's recent introduction of the video iPod, which allows TV shows to be viewed commercial-free, has only increased the perceived need for injecting products into the programs themselves. The practice has its critics. Gary Ruskin, president of the nonprofit group Commercial Alert, calls product placement "dishonest advertising ... stealth advertising. It sneaks by our critical faculties and plants images in our brains when we're paying less attention." Hollywood writers also have sounded an alarm. The Writers Guild of America, west, recently issued a statement declaring that "product integration is blurring the line between advertising and content." Guild President Patric Verrone called it "a disservice to the American audience." They're fighting a century of history. Placement began with the earliest commercially released movies in the late 19th century, and it's not about to stop now. A 'Wild West' How much advertisers shell out for product placement, and the return they get on their investment, are difficult to estimate. "It's still kind of the Wild West out there," said Patrick Quinn, president of PQ Media, a Stamford, Conn.-based consulting firm that conducted a six-month study of the subject. "There is no uniform system." Nevertheless, his firm estimated product-placement spending in all media last year at $3.46 billion, a 30.5 percent increase over 2003's total. TV's share jumped 46.4 percent, to $1.87 billion. Most of that is in the form of "barter." The advertiser buys commercials in a show, then pays a premium to get a mention in the script. Placement can be as simple and discreet as a can of Budweiser in an actor's hand or a close-up of a Dell computer in the CBS drama "Without a Trace," or as blatant as an entire episode of NBC's "The Apprentice" plugging the new Sony movie "Zathura." In an episode of CBS' "The King of Queens" last spring, a store clerk forgot to charge the character Carrie (Leah Remini) for an iPod, and much of the plot revolved around her guilt over getting the "free" player. When she told a priest, he agreed that an iPod was a really cool gadget, all right. Contestants in UPN's "America's Next Top Model" recently took turns delivering sales pitches for Secret Platinum Clear Gel, and every episode of NBC's "The Biggest Loser" is an hour-long advertisement for 24-Hour Fitness gyms. The practice stretches to the silent-screen era. Jay Newell, an assistant journalism professor at Iowa State University who studies the ad industry, has found product placements as early as 1896, when Lever Bros. (now called Unilever) wangled bars of Sunlight soap into the first silent films. In one of the oldest forms of placement, the product is the title of the show. That practice goes back to radio � "The Lux Radio Theater," "The Kraft Music Hall" � and early television: "G.E. Theater," "The Dinah Shore Chevy Show," "The U.S. Steel Hour." And it's still around today in "The Hallmark Hall of Fame" and "The Victoria's Secret Fashion Show." Even literature isn't immune. Jewelry maker Bulgari paid British author Fay Weldon to write a novel � "The Bulgari Connection" � with its products featured in the plot. Playwright Neil Simon approved a script change in the revival of "Sweet Charity." Now, instead of ordering "a double scotch on the rocks," a character in the play asks for Gran Centenario Tequila. Last spring, fans of the teen drama "The O.C." were treated to an example of human product placement. Movie producer George Lucas appeared as himself, written into the script, chatting with a regular character. He never mentioned that "Star Wars: Episode III � Revenge of the Sith" was about to be released, but his mere presence was reminder enough. Holy grail Lucas' appearance wasn't quite the holy grail of product placement � that's still the trail of Reese's Pieces in "E.T." � but it was close enough. Getting all those products on the set isn't exactly a mysterious process. Jeff Greenfield, vice president of product-placement agency 1st Approach, said: "You're a set designer, and you get your script for the week, and you've got a limited budget. You've got a choice. Either you get products provided for you by a brand, or you've gotta go out and rent it or buy it. "Ninety-nine percent of all brands in television are there for free. People don't pay for them." Last summer, Greenfield sent nearly 1,000 Black & Decker Autotapes, a tape measure that extends automatically, to Hollywood script writers. "Black & Decker didn't pay anyone to get on these shows," he said. "They provided the product and paid us for our time. We provided a service. We knew it was cool and cutesy enough that the writers would have fun with it." As a result, the Autotape was seen in episodes of "The King of Queens" and "Still Standing," and a character in UPN's comedy "Cuts" actually used one. As often happens, the public doesn't agree with the critics. "I'm fascinated why people don't seem to be upset at all with product placement," Newell said. "They seem to like it. My students say they expect to find recognizable products in their television shows and movies." Those Reese's Pieces in "E.T." in 1982 remain one of the best-remembered examples of product placement. Hershey placed its candy in "E.T." for free, then the company bought $1 million in commercials that pitched both the candy and the movie, Newell said. Reese's Pieces had been on the market for just two years, but the "E.T." appearance helped establish the brand's place in the market � to the chagrin of the maker of M&Ms, which turned down an offer to be in the film. Placement is in part "a defensive strategy," a response to DVRs, VCRs, DVDs, video games and the like, said Quinn of PQ Media. But "in another respect, it's capitalizing on trends. Seventy percent of Americans are more apt to try or buy a product they saw in a placement on television than if they saw it in a 30-second spot." The word "defensive" can also be used in another sense. "You might see Coca-Cola in a movie because they don't want Pepsi there," Newell said. Results are hard to measure, but sometimes they're obvious. When "The Apprentice" devoted an episode to plugging the sporty new Pontiac Solstice, 1,000 coupons giving holders first shot at driving and buying the first cars off the assembly line were gone 44 minutes after the show aired, Quinn said. "That's a great return on investment as far as they're concerned," he said. Not everybody is crazy about the practice. Ruskin's 2,000-member group wants Congress to pass a "Product Placement Disclosure Act" that would require disclosure of product placement all across media, whether it's TV, movies, video games, books, videos, songs, whatever. "When the Coke can comes up on 'American Idol,' there would be a small, superimposed graphic that would say 'Advertisement,' " Ruskin said. "In Europe, most product placement is either illegal or severely restricted." Quinn doesn't believe viewers are being fooled. "I think American consumers are very savvy, and they know what's product placement and what isn't," he said. "People are savvy, and if it's done well, it's going to work. "If it's not done well, as in 'The Restaurant,' where the guy was reading off cue cards in a trendy Italian restaurant and selling Coors beer, which no one bought, it's not going to work and the show is going off the air." By Robert P. Laurence UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER