USA Today is running a story about a firm hoping to capitalize on the growth of product placement. It’s a somewhat pedestrian account, unitl you get to this part:
Hamet Watt, CEO of NextMedium says his firm will keep deals confidential. “To feel organic, it can’t be publicized that the brand paid for placement,” he says.
That’s exactly what worries critics of this trend.
“Undisclosed product placement is dishonest advertising,” says Gary Ruskin, executive director of activist group Commercial Alert. “We’re trying to get Congress to pass legislation prohibiting undisclosed product placement.”
If a brand wants to associate with a popular show, why hide the fact? I fail to see the point.
Discover more from Adpulp
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It’s definately bullshit. But false advertising? Only if they use the product in some way that misrepresents the product’s function and performance. Like if Trump had promoted Axe body spray on Apprentice and attributed his billions to wearing that product. Ok, bad example. But you know what I mean.
i don’t see why a product placement needs to publicized. if a company chooses to, that’s great, but if they are looking for a more organic integration, they should be able to keep it undisclosed. i don’t see it as dishonest at all, as long as the products use is consistent with its normal attributes.