This has repercussions for the squashing of credits of programmes. If this is to be done correctly then there will have to be detailed accounts of the products 'placed' at the beginning and end of the programme as is done in other mature television markets where this practice occurs.
The fear is producers effecting the integrity of the programme in the chase for the product placement money
The example that keeps being quoted is characters in Corrie asking for specific drinks in the Rovers, but then you wouldn't want drinks being ordered that was out of character, just because that brand is offering money. i.e Rita, Emily & Norris ordering 3 pints of Stella.
You'd like to think there's going to be some sensible logic behind every product placement decision, I can't see ITV going off to every drinks manufacturer to get a few quid to allow loads of brands to be mentioned when someone orders a round in the Rovers but maybe one will be given a quota of mentions over x months worth of episodes or something? For other things like X Factor, it won't make any difference to me to see judges with Coke glasses in front of them.
There's a balance between unsubtle and too subtle and I guess that'll work itself out over time - and if it doesn't, I'll complain to the ITC
The new rules are likely to allow paid-for product placement in TV dramas, as well as sports and light entertainment shows. But ministers could face a backlash if TV role models are seen to be promoting alcohol.
They already do on programmes like Friday Night With Jonathan Ross and The Graham Norton Show It's just as bad as when famous people used to smoke on chat shows, now they've either got a glass of wine or a bottle of beer in their hand instead.
Oooh...tragic. A few ADULTS drinking a GLASS of WINE on ADULT chat shows. Shocking. I'm sure that makes the coked-up-celebrities and trashed stars on the cover of Heat magazine look like absolute angels. Twit.
Having said that, I think it may lead to people asking for "a pint of John Smith's" on Emmerdale as opposed to just "bitter" or "mild."
I do remember years ago on Corrie when Alf and Audrey Roberts were in the kitchen chatting away and Alf picked up some washing powder and held it up to the camera so that you could get the brand name in and then put the washing powder back down again. Bit dubious that one.
Theres also the time when Sooty got into the trouble when they had their videos in the background in one of their scenes. The wee scamp!
It just means Soap living rooms will no longer have generic tvs and equipment, and you will see empty boxes for Sony equipment etc...
Speaking of Sony, I've always noticed BBC using Sony TVs and sony laptops in their productions, and they always (even though it's obviously different people doing it each time) cover up the Sony logo with a badly stuck down piece of gaffer tape.
This has repercussions for the squashing of credits of programmes. If this is to be done correctly then there will have to be detailed accounts of the products 'placed' at the beginning and end of the programme as is done in other mature television markets where this practice occurs.
I think that would be even worse if it's prompted at the beginning. If it's going to be enforced upon us, it should only be highlighted at most with something in the credits themselves. Would much rather see the individual sponsor stings remain (which don't seem to be as common in other countries which carry product placement) rather than the generic "This programme is sponsored by..." nonsense.
It's just as bad as when famous people used to smoke on chat shows, now they've either got a glass of wine or a bottle of beer in their hand instead.
