Big Picture Advertising

Product Placement going legit?

With all the speculation around product placement triggered by Ben Bradshaws speech to the RTS I thought it worth digging up some of my old posts on the topic.

My main thought though is that it won't be ITV or the other broadcasters who gain the most benefit - it will be the programme producers. They make the programmes and are closest to the opportunities for brand integration - they also increasingly recognise the value of their IP.

I can't see the smart people at Endemol, RDF or Kudos meekly handing over either the control needed to make this work - or the revenue.

Product Placement - part of the solution or part of the problem?

As Ofcom hints that product placement may become more acceptable in the UK we're seeing some talk in the US of tighter regulations. Product placement is well established there - with shows like American Idol including over 400 commercial messages! - and a large proportion of advertisers using it as a marketing tactic.

In a recent speech by one of the heads of the Federal Communications Commission there is a call for more explicit disclosure of product placement

"There is nothing inherently wrong with product placement – so long as it is disclosed as required by law.
Disclosures should also be meaningful. A disclosure that appears on screen for a split second
during the credits in small type that no one could possibly read without pausing their DVR-- and
pulling out a magnifying glass—could not possibly qualify"

Remember the old saying - if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem? We think consumers have issues with gratuitous use of product placement and it contributes to the general disillusionment with advertising.

I ran a very early product placement for Kenco Coffee in the early 90s - as an example of what could be done we had the new packaging featured in Coronation Street - Alf Roberts held the jar clearly as he chatted in the corner shop for around 50 seconds. It was very impressive but we couldn't see any real commercial value. At around the same time we proposed the use to Nintendo in a pitch - we'd pay for placement of the latest console in the episodes of Neighbours that would be shown in the run up to Christmas here in the UK. (Product placement is legal in Australia). We didn't win the pitch, so it never happened.

Ten years on we think there is a place for product placement but there are now smarter ways to engage with customers on TV; smart use of iTV will do a lot more for a brand as would exploration of ad funded programming. A conference in the US this week talked about some of the opportunities but makes the point that branded entertainment must resonate with consumers to be effective.

Original post (from June 2005) with working links here

Product Placement - ready for prime time?

Product placement got lots of coverage in the press this weekend.The Sunday Times told their readers what we all knew - that spending with the right middleman can get your product just about anywhere on the BBC (and the rest of UK TV as well). Suitably outraged, the BBC have announced an enquiry!

Peter Bazalgette the head of Big Brother production company Endemol wrote just a few days ago that product placement is the only way to save TV - pointing out that PVRs will erode the traditional ad spend. And John Pluthero, the former boss of Freeserve stirred up the RTS conference this week;

TV is under threat like never before, as viewer behaviour changes, he said. 'Accept it, [remould] your business to suit, or die on your arse

Citing the impact of technology, Pluthoro suggests TV companies should embrace product placement and work with advertisers to create content.

As we've noted before product placement isn't new and it isn't that clever. But we have seen some interesting new evidence that shows just how well it can work - take a look at this chart looking at the Coke involvement in American Idol - from a presentation at MIP by Simon Spalding of Fremantle. Coke recognition was significantly higher within the show -  where Coke had extensive product placement - than in other shows.

Given this sort of evidence - and the threat of PVRs we expect product placement to continue to grow. But with guidance from OFCOM due - and with calls for clearer labeling growing - we expect it to work on a rather more strategic level than the examples the Sunday Times discovered.

Original post (from September 2005) with working links here

As Ofcom hints that product placement may become more acceptable in the UK we're seeing some talk in the US of tighter regulations. Product placement is well established there - with shows like American Idol including over 400 commercial messages! - and a large proportion of advertisers using it as a marketing tactic.

In a recent speech by one of the heads of the Federal Communications Commission there is a call for more explicit disclosure of product placement

"There is nothing inherently wrong with product placement – so long as it is disclosed as required by law.
Disclosures should also be meaningful. A disclosure that appears on screen for a split second
during the credits in small type that no one could possibly read without pausing their DVR-- and
pulling out a magnifying glass—could not possibly qualify"

Remember the old saying - if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem? We think consumers have issues with gratuitous use of product placement and it contributes to the general disillusionment with advertising.

I ran a very early product placement for Kenco Coffee in the early 90s - as an example of what could be done we had the new packaging featured in Coronation Street - Alf Roberts held the jar clearly as he chatted in the corner shop for around 50 seconds. It was very impressive but we couldn't see any real commercial value. At around the same time we proposed the use to Nintendo in a pitch - we'd pay for placement of the latest console in the episodes of Neighbours that would be shown in the run up to Christmas here in the UK. (Product placement is legal in Australia). We didn't win the pitch, so it never happened.

Ten years on we think there is a place for product placement but there are now smarter ways to engage with customers on TV; smart use of iTV will do a lot more for a brand as would exploration of ad funded programming. A conference in the US this week talked about some of the opportunities but makes the point that branded entertainment must resonate with consumers to be effective.

Product placement got lots of coverage in the press this weekend.The Sunday Times told their readers what we all knew - that spending with the right middleman can get your product just about anywhere on the BBC (and the rest of UK TV as well). Suitably outraged, the BBC have announced an enquiry!

Peter Bazalgette the head of Big Brother production company Endemol wrote just a few days ago that product placement is the only way to save TV - pointing out that PVRs will erode the traditional ad spend. And John Pluthero, the former boss of Freeserve stirred up the RTS conference this week;

TV is under threat like never before, as viewer behaviour changes, he said. 'Accept it, [remould] your business to suit, or die on your arse

Citing the impact of technology, Pluthoro suggests TV companies should embrace product placement and work with advertisers to create content.

As we've noted before product placement isn't new and it isn't that clever. But we have seen some interesting new evidence that shows just how well it can work - take a look at this chart looking at the Coke involvement in American Idol - from a presentation at MIP by Simon Spalding of Fremantle. Coke recognition was significantly higher within the show -  where Coke had extensive product placement - than in other shows.

Given this sort of evidence - and the threat of PVRs we expect product placement to continue to grow. But with guidance from OFCOM due - and with calls for clearer labeling growing - we expect it to work on a rather more strategic level than the examples the Sunday Times discovered.

The mobile disconnect between consumers and business

 In yesterdays Sunday Times the Vodafone CEO talked about tourists he had watched in Rome;

Technology, he noted, was changing their habits. “Some of them were with the guide who was holding the little umbrella but following a map on their phone as well,” he said. The smartphones that Vodafone had been selling for five years or more to business customers had finally permeated into the mainstream.

The facts are now pretty clear - consumers are using smartphones as the remote control for their life - accessing mobile services and content as they need to solve problems - which way is the Museum?, what's the football score?, i need to order some groceries, i have 5 minutes to kill etc.

Yet there is a real disconnect here - business seems a little slow to get with this programme. Research suggests few Fortune 1000 companies have a mobile strategy - and we believe that even amongst those that have, mobile is being viewed as an acquisition channel. Classic Big M Marketing - focused on promotion.

But what about the opportunities for what we call small m marketing - reducing the cost of servicing customers through enhanced self service, lowering transaction costs, increasing barriers to churn, facilitating advocacy etc. This type of service issue is perfectly suited to mobile yet few mobile marketers seem to focus here.

Why? Well the panel I ran at the Mobile Marketing Forum in Berlin suggested that clients think Agencies don't get mobile. Speakers from Coke, P&G, BMW and Lufthansa talked about their success stories and it was clear that the client is taking the lead.

Resolving this disconnect between consumers and business is a huge opportunity. We believe that the answer is addictive services and content that solve consumers problems - branded utility made real by mobile.

There are few brands that can't benefit from this approach - we note that Vodafone have a churn problem too

Some 18% of its better value contract customers quit in the past year. They cost £350 each to recruit.

They need some addictive services and content too.

web 2.0 continues to innovate

I've always been a fan of small victories - whilst its great to find
something that's twice as good/ effective/ cost effective etc its much
more likely that you find something that's just slightly better.
But with regular iteration, these small victories - these 1% of 2%
improvements - soon add up to something significant.
And the new service by posterous fits in well with this thinking - its
a service that allows you to post by email - so this blog post was
knocked out in gmail in 2 minutes and posterous post it one the site
Not a huge step forward but combined with twitter and their iphone app
sharing my thoughts seems a little easier.
With twitter I've become quite lazy about blogging - maybe this bring
the blog back into usage a little more.
-
Simon Andrews

 http://www.bigpictureadvertising.co.uk
+44 (0) 7973 640556
@simonbigpicture

Posted via email from bigpicturemobile's posterous