★★★★★ 0/5

It’s Content Integration, stoopid…

In the old days they used to call it Product Placement, but now shows like Big Brother just lurve 'Content Integration.'

7
Leave a comment

2014-07-04_1432Nine’s latest Insights newsletter to clients, gives us some deeper insight into ‘content integration.’

Y’know, that thing we used to call ‘product placement.’

As these photos indicate, shows like Big Brother are rife with the stuff as part of their storytelling (and let’s not even start on The Block).

It’s not new to BB, nor the genre, nor even the network. But it helps explain why some kooky challenges are the way they are. It’s just an excuse to embed the client’s product.

As Nine explains it:

Content integration offers something money can’t buy – the opportunity to weave your brand into the fabric of the program. With Big Brother reaching 73.8% of Australians in 2013, it is the perfect vehicle for your brand to reach a large, youthful and engaged audience.

It’s why it’s called commercial TV, right?

2014-07-04_1432a.

 

2014-07-04_1432b

2014-07-04_1433 c.jpg

Networks of course must comply with the Code of Practice:

Where a licensee receives payment for material that is presented in a program or segment of a program, that material must be distinguishable from other program material…

Broadly speaking they distinguish this in the tiny credits that run at show’s end, despite the whole notion that product placement works most effectively when you don’t notice it as separate from the storytelling.

But remember… starving housemates on staple foods then ‘rewarding’ them with fast food equals elated TV faces gorging themselves on client product. Who’s a happy Sales and Marketing Director?

7 Responses

  1. David may class this comment as off topic or to political, but this ‘content’ B/S is as serious as the attacks on our public broadcasters.

    Product placement does not worry me as such, but I’m more concerned that since the commercial networks veiled/blatant complicity in ensuring a landslide election victory for Mr Abbott and Co, these networks have almost become a law unto themselves,

    The most serious implications of ‘product placement’ or ‘content integration’ is the interpretation of ‘advertisement’ ( and nearly as much an insult to the most australians as is between ‘broken promises’ or ‘mandate’), what next does ‘subliminal’ become ‘semi-subliminal’ or ‘flash content’

    My ‘pipe dream’ answer is simple, ‘ blatant content integration’ should be ‘timed’ and included in advertising totals.

  5. There is a difference between product placement and what shows on commercial TV like Chuck do. As for The Checkout its a consumer awareness program, pretty hard to warn people of consumer rights without mentioning products involved.

    @Pertinax – I’d have to disagree with you about Gilmore Girls, it wasn’t created by advertises.

  6. If you fast forward through the ad breaks where do you think they are going to place the ads?

    In the US entire shows like Chuck and The Gilmore Girls were created and funded by advertisers as giant ads.

    Though I am getting sick of the scene where the characters get into a Prius talking about how wonderful it is while they fire up Pandora on the sound system and set their destination in the GPS. They seem to just insert the same page into the script of whatever show they are paying for promotional consideration in.

  7. So correct me if I’m wrong but is this Channel 9 trying to sell content integration for BB 2014? Just askong because where 9 explains it sounds like a sales pitch.

Leave a Reply