Whether product placement should be allowed in TV shows or not. Hmm, difficult question.
…ministers are consulting on whether to implement part of a European directive, which would allow product placement in the UK from as early as 2010.
Under the proposals advertisers would be able to pay to have products featured in most TV genres except news, current affairs, sport and children\’s programming.
However, the prospect of Coca-Cola or McDonald\’s advertising their products during prime-time entertainment programmes or dramas has divided opinion.
What would be the objection? That viewers would be mislead in some manner? That there would be a further orgy of consumerism? That cats will lie down with dogs and there will be rains of blood?
Hmm, wonder if there is any way of actually testing this?
Popular US imports, such as The X-Files and Desperate Housewives, regularly include products that companies have paid thousands of dollars to feature.
Sex and the City, the popular American sitcom starring Sarah Jessica Parker, featured Manolo Blahnik and Jimmy Choo shoes so frequently that it was credited with turning the brands into household names.
Research shows that in the last series of American Idol, the TV talent show, there were no fewer than 4,349 examples of product placement, and 3,291 in the first three months of this year alone.
Ah, so we already have product placement on UK TV screens.
OK; anybody willing to claim that US TV shows cause the cats and dogs thing, the sanguinary soakings, while UK TV shows do not?
No? Then there doesn\’t seem to be much of an argument against such product placement then, does there?