Taking steps to lift ban on product placement

MEDIA AND MARKETING:Paid-for brand placing is a lucrative new area that can help offset post-boom cuts

TELEVISION PRODUCT placement is set to be on the agenda of many advertising and marketing discussions in the coming months following the release of an interim code from the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI). This is the first step in abolishing the current ban on paid-for placement of brands or services in Irish-made programmes.

The subject has proven to be controversial in every country where it has been legalised. Detractors question the ethics of blurring the lines between when commercials end and television programmes begin.

The BAI’s code governs product placement on television. This code will last until the end of the year, by which time they expect to develop a complete code of practice by which all Irish broadcasters must abide.

Declan McLoughlin, policy officer of the BAI, says it is expected the code will be altered to bring Ireland into line with other European countries.

“The prohibition of paid-for product placement is likely to change. However, no alteration will be carried out without public consultation, nor will any changes have negative implications on the viewing public,” McLoughlin said.

From last month, for any programme featuring products whose cumulative value exceeds €5,000, viewers’ sensibilities will be protected by a full-screen announcement at the beginning “The following broadcast contains product placement”. This will be accompanied by a logo containing the letters “PP”, which will also appear as the programme returns from a commercial break.

From next year, only the PP logo will be necessary. While this is a new dawn for the Irish marketing industry, how different will it appear to the average viewer?

At the moment on Fair City, while a newly launched brand of cereal can appear on the breakfast table, it cannot be paid for by the cereal company. From next year a company like Kellogg's would be charged a fee by RTÉ.

However, in neither instance can the cereal be overtly featured or endorsed in any way by the characters. Furthermore, news and current affairs in addition to children’s programming will be off limits.

TV stations recognise product placement is a lucrative new revenue stream that can make up for post-boom spending cuts. It could also help the beleaguered Irish television production industry to fund new programming.

Deirdre O’Brien, head of sponsorship at TV3, embraces changes to current regulations. “We welcome a transparent process to ensure viewers are aware of the various forms of commercial funding for programming without affecting editorial integrity. If the Irish television industry can fund more production, this will bring more jobs to this sector, which has to be good news in the current climate,” says O’Brien.

Any legislation, however well-intentioned, will do nothing to address what is happening in the US from where most of our drama is imported. Product placement in the US market is big business, with an estimated $3.61 billion spend in 2009, according to Los Angeles-based research company, PQ Media, who has been tracking this sector since 1975.

Consumers are finding ways to edit television advertising from their favourite programmes – whether fast-forwarding through ads on Sky Plus or downloading programmes from file sharing sites with the advertising breaks removed. The obvious answer is to insert the products into the programmes themselves.

So where’s the harm?

Wouldn’t it be normal for characters to wear branded clothing and show off their new cars, or shouldn’t the local shop, Phelans, more realistically be a Spar or a Centra?

But where is the line drawn? What about when the product goes beyond appearing in the background and actually becomes a plot point? This is the area of brand integration. Brands are weaved into the storyline and characters often rely on the product to advance the plot. Amid criticisms of an insidious step too far, we must remember that the viewer will always be the judge of what’s acceptable and what’s crass and off-putting.

We live in a time where two of the State's biggest venues are brand names. Every sports player is a walking advertisement. Blockbusters like Sex and the Cityand the James Bond films showcase the latest fashions and cars.

Audiences are accustomed to being pitched to whenever they are entertained. Irrespective of the BAI’s enforced health warning, the viewer will always recognise the difference between natural brand fit and a tacky, forced sales pitch.

Aidan Greene is managing director of Mediavest. Siobhán O’Connell is on holiday