Generally, when people talk about product placement, it's referred to as a necessary evil. Something that shows HAVE to do if they want to survive. It's looked at as something that we have to live with, rather than something that should be embraced. Which is why it's so unusual to read that Apple apparently didn't pay a cent for all the free iPad love that Modern Family gave it yesterday.
Alan Sepinwall, a TV critic that I love and read perhaps more than any other writer on the internet, hated the tactic, and was even more turned off upon finding out that Modern Family included their product placement free of charge. I thought it was great, and here's why:
It's unlikely that the Modern Family writing team was just hoping that Apple would be so enamored by the episode that they'd feel compelled to give out free iPads to everyone. What's more likely is that the writers felt that this was a product which its characters(*) would have a strong reaction to. They weren't writing this storyline because they were obliged to work in an Apple product somehow, but because they genuinely felt that this was a realistic situation for their characters to encounter. And it absolutely was. Not once throughout the course of the episode did I feel like a scene was written clumsily, for the sake of promoting the iPad. Every scene felt like a believable portrayal of how the characters, which have been pretty well established over the course of 18 episodes, would react if they actually existed.
(*) Or rather, one character: Phil
Isn't this exactly the way that product integration should be used? Another instance that I loved was in the early seasons of the American version of The Office, when Michael would constantly insist that any business meeting or work event happened at Chili's. Blatant product placement? Sure, but it felt organic, because someone like Michael would absolutely love a restaurant like Chili's, and be convinced it was the perfect setting for any event.
I've never really understood the faction that hates any sort of product placement or integration in television shows. If we want fictional shows to feel REAL, isn't product integration a must? Considering how much material possessions dominate our daily activities and discussions, it seems more unnatural not to mention them at all.
Sure, some shows do it poorly. Watching an old episode of The Sopranos the other day, I winced at a piece of dialogue that went something like: "Do you need to wear a wire? Here, we'll just go into Office Depot," followed by a shot of the big Office Depot building. It was so unnatural and stilted that it felt like it belonged in 30 Rock, parodying the entire concept. Shows like the new 90210 are guilty of this as well(**). The most hilarious instance of advertising in that show came when a mother told her newly-licensed daughter, "Don't forget we're insured... we're with State Farm."
(**) Drinking game idea for season one of the new 90210: Take a shot whenever you see a Dr. Pepper logo.
Product integration shouldn't be a dreaded aspect of television though. When it's done right, like on Modern Family, Friday Night Lights, or The Office, it comes off as a logical part of these characters' lives. And when you can achieve that AND get paid by the companies to do it (unless you're Modern Family), where's the downside?
I think the biggest downside to product placement in TV is when it's extremely dated by the time the episode hits syndication. It'll happen with that ep of Modern Family, and in an even more ridiculous example, the episode of Bones that focused heavily on three of the characters waiting in line for a early screening of Avatar. I know that it was in large part due to one of the rotating assistants being IN AVATAR (I mean, the actor, not the squint), but a couple of years from now, it'll seem even more forced than when Avatar fever was legit.
ReplyDeleteThat's a fair point, but I dunno... there are plenty of things besides product placement that will make a show seem dated 10 years later. Fashion, hair style, vocabulary, etc. Plus, I'm watching these shows NOW. How they'll hold up to people watching them years later isn't really a primary concern for me.
ReplyDelete