Advertising in the New Media World: Product Placement

In her Chapter entitled Advertising after the Network Era, Lotz discusses the various methods and techniques advertisers used in television throughout history. She describes how at first the advertisers were still empowered during the transition from radio, as shows might have still only had one sponsor. “The dominant commercial model of radio utilized a single sponsorship system in which a corporation paid all of the production costs of a show and was the only product or corporate entity associated with it.” (Lotz 156) However, she is quick to point out that the relationship between advertisers and networks changed rapidly with new industry conventions such as upfronts. “Various norms of the ‘television season’ and the timing for selling advertising time developed once magazine-format advertising established its dominance. The annual September debut of programs led to the related annual process of securing advertising commitments in the spring in what came to be known as the ‘upfront’ market.” (Lotz 158) Yet she does not stop there, as she delves further into what became a new convention during the post network era. She outlines how product placement and integration became a major part of the television medium and came into its own in the early 2000’s. “By 2005, many examples of paid, unpaid, basic, and advanced placement appeared across the networks.” (Lotz 168)

One show that has stirred up quite a bit of conversation in our class with regards to a range of issues is the Netflix produced show House of Cards. Advertising is another interesting facet of the conversation, as House of Cards has no direct sponsors based on the fact that it is completely financed and put out by Netflix. However, it does have it’s fair share of product placement. Whether its Kevin Spacey’s incessant need to relieve stress by way of playing Killzone 3 on his Playstation 3, or the ridiculous amount of Apple products on display being used by everyone, product placement is definitely a prominent part of the show. This is interesting to me because, as Erin has pointed out in class, in the case of most of these products, they are not payed for by their respective company’s to be advertised.

Underwood: “Hey, when was I supposed to betray that one guy?” Stamper: “Let me check my iPhone.” Underwood: “Wait, I found it on my iPad.” Stamper: “I’m going to go back to listening to my iPod then.” Underwood: “Cool, Ill be on my Mac Book.”

So why do we have unpaid product placement? As Lotz points out, it is a relationship of convenience. “In the case of unpaid placement, or what Twitchell refers to as ‘product subventions’, companies donate products needed on the set for reasons of verisimilitude–if a scene takes place in the kitchen, that set needs to be dressed with products that make it recognizable as a kitchen.” (Lotz 166) So in the case of House of Cards, which takes place largely within the realm of Congress and the White House, the show utilizes Apple products based on their perceived technologically advanced nature. This plays on the audiences perceptions that Apple products are equivalent with technological sophistication. Obviously everyone in politics would utilize Apple products because they are the most cutting edge tech available on the market. Or so we are meant to understand.

While Apple product placement makes sense with regards to what has become one of the most widely used and highly sought after brands, Sony is a much harder, more cumbersome sell. These placements are what Lotz describes as awkward additions which are highly noticeable to the viewing audience. “By contrast, an ‘inorganic’ placement calls attention to itself and does so in a way that not only exposes the constructed nature of placement but also breaks the viewer’s submersion in the narrative.” (Lotz 168) Unfortunately, in the case of the multiple Playstation brand placements, this was definitely the case. Every time I saw Kevin Spacey fumbling around with a Playstation controller as footage of Killzone 3 flashed on screen I could only shake my head.  In one particular sequence Kevin Spacey happens upon a Playstation Vita (Sony’s new handheld gaming console) and is heard uttering in cringe worthy fashion “Is this a Playstation Vita?” These moments only served to alert me to the fact that I was watching a show with various commercial imperatives and capitalistic underpinnings, while completely jarring me out of the narrative cohesion the program does so well. When it comes to House of Cards, it has many utilization’s of product placement. Some that work. Some that don’t.

No Kevin Spacey, you clearly don’t understand what that controller or headset do. That’s just a video of Killzone 3 playing in front of you. You can go back to being ruthless again. I can believe that.

 

 

1. What experience as a viewer have you had with product placement?

2. Do you think this method of advertising has any affect on you?

3. Do you feel like any type of product placement can be “inorganic”, or do you think it generally meshes well with the given show?

The Mobile Media Massacre

In the early to mid 2000s, a common belief among the TV Elite was that television was quickly losing its long held crown of media king. Lotz disagrees with this notion, stating that:
“Rather than these technological assassins causing the death of television, as many writing about television in the mid-2000s claimed,the unprecedented shift of programming onto tiny mobile phone screens, office computers, and portable devices ultimately reasserted the medium’s significance.” (pg.50) She goes on to argue that while we ultimately have more control over how we view programs, when we view them, and on what device, we are actually more tethered to the medium of television than ever before, thanks to the technological advances that have allowed for television on mobile devices. Because only one device -the actual TV set- was available to the public viewership, the viewing experience itself was essentially the same across the board. The advent of mobile devices capable of acting as TV’s created an entire array of possibilities in viewing. Say a person living in Washing DC is watching Netflix on a standard television set. Half way through an episode of House of Cards, that person has to go to work and use the metro to get there. While riding the metro that person could pull out his or her smart phone and resume watching House of Cards from the exact point they left off. The advent of this media synchronization (media devices working in was not quite developed when Lotz wrote The Television Will Be Revolutionize, but she clearly foresees its eventual happening. Lotz also sees the trend that while we may have more control over the media we consume, we also end up paying more in return. For example, I myself pay around $80.00 a month for my mobile device, with data charges (used for things like Netflix) making up about 25% of the bill. Add-on the monthly subscription fee of Netflix, as of this writing $7.99 monthly for Unlimited streaming plan, without the DVD delivery service.
So while the early fears that the historically super-controlled medium of television was potentially becoming a lawless anything goes affair, I would say that Distributors and media corporations have successfully monetized a once feared venue.
I have met people who were ardent TV watchers, and once they had the option to watch a TV program anytime they wished, their TV consumption dropped off considerably. And on the complete other end, I know people who will maratheon entire seasons of a show once they become avaible on Netflix. In the end, the “it all evens out” argument might sound like a cop out, but I believe that is by and large the current state of the television medium. Streaming or otherwise.

1. Do you think that bringing mobility to TV (or vice versa) has helped or hindered television?

2. Now/if you have regular access to streaming-capable devices and watch-any-time options, do you find yourself watching more or less TV than you did back in the pre-mobility days?

3. How much do you estimate your various mobile devices end up costing you on a monthly basis?

A New Era in Media

The Introduction chapter to “The Television Will Be Revolutionized” sets the stage for an instance in industrial foresight, first by explaining the history of television and second by making note of changes we are presently experiencing due to innovations in hardware and technology. This was an exciting chapter to read because most things Lotz claimed seemed to be true to me. The history element of this set-up was mostly repeated information from Mittell’s “Exchanging Programming”. It went over the Network Era, the Multi-Channel Era, and the Post-Network Era.

The Network Era was the first stage of television that lasted until the mid-1980’s and was characterized by the control held by networks in the times in which programs could be viewed (linear). The networks also held power because there were only three competitors (ABS, CBS, NBC) and each competitor had affiliates all over the nation who would broadcast their programming.

If only we could watch Andy Griffith right now. I guess we’ll watch this I Love Lucy rerun first.

The Multi-Channel Era was the second era that lasted from the mid 1980’s until the mid 2000’s. This era was characterized by the technological innovation of cable and satellite transmitters that allowed for new channels to emerge and succeed due to the distributors reaching a national audience. This took power away from networks and made television programming less “safe” and more aimed at niche audiences.

Watch out, TV isn’t just for you crusty straight white families anymore!

The era we currently exist in is somewhere in-between the Multi-Channel Era and an era defined by the dominance of user-determined time frames of media consumption. The technologies that Lotz makes note of are not adopted by the majority however, so this era is considered transitory from the Multi-Channel Era into something else characterized by the majority use of user-determined media consumption time frames. I liked how Lotz made sure to state that this era, the Post-Network Era, is transitory because I absolutely agree. Due to generational differences, distributors must accommodate both the tech-savvy youth and the old dogs who aren’t going to learn any new tricks. As new technology is being adopted (smart phones, tablets, Netflix, Hulu, etc.), the future of media consumption is apparent; television will see an end in popularity of prime-time in lieu of user-determined viewing schedules.

 Screw off, TV execs! I’m the boss now.

Questions:

1: With the options of fast-forwards, rewinds, and pauses, what kid of advertising can we expect to dominate the future era? I expect to see more snipes (YouTube seems to have adopted it).

2: I wonder how remote controls will change as technology changes. If the cable/satellite become obsolete, maybe we will see something more similar to an XBox controller. I anticipate the number pad on remotes to disappear. Maybe the WiiU will lead the remote control change to include its own screen where a user may live tweet from their remote control and thus build stronger TV audience community and promote “viewsing”.

3: Websites have been broadcasters for awhile now (Homestar Runner- gotta reference it again). What can we expect in the media industry as far as independent productions? I think the shift in eras will be great for independent producers who are willing to entertain niche audiences. This might make the entertainment industry more appealing to entrepreneurs instead of the make-it-or-break-it structure that is in place.

4: Random question: What is fin-syn? I saw it referenced in Table 1

“Every Friday at 5:00pm! Only Toonami”

In the introduction to The Television Will Be Revolutionized, author Amanda Lotz highlights the wealth of new ways in which people view Television, effectively changing the entire concept of television itself. But it isn’t just television that has changed, so too has its viewers. Having been born in the early 1990s, I was somewhat on the balancing beam between the dawn of Digital media, and the old traditions of the past, network-driven programs, that dominated the field from the 1950s until the recent early 2000s, have become increasingly displaced. Growing up, I was a huge TV junkie, regarding it as a precious commodity that I had to constantly keep up with, lest I fall behind on my watching. I vividly remember turning twelve and my parents were throwing me a birthday party. I liked it of course, but it was nearing five o’clock a.k.a., When the Toonami Cartoon Block came on. I remember sneaking away from my own dang birthday party and watching the latest episode of Justice League. This serves as a good example of the differences between the Broadcast/Network era Lotz speaks about, and the Digital Age that followed it:
With Broadcast-based TV I was a bit of a slave to television, at the mercy of program scheduling.
When the Digital Age struck, the restraints of pre-designated television watching were lifted.
What this meant for me, personally, was that I could watch Television whenever I chose, and I subsequently began to actually watch less, because I didn’t feel the pressure of always having to “pencil in” a given show for the week. Lotz is right in more ways than one when she states that the transition from the old era to the current digital one is less of a “mass audience; instead, it is more accurately understood as a collection of niche audiences.” (pg.5)

1. Do you have an example of how broadcasting/the digital age has affected you?
2. Do you think that we have reached a tipping point, and all of this media upheaval will begin to settle down?
3. Is it good/bad/unknown that outlets like Netflix have largely replaced the old Broadcast system?

Technology Boom and Its Effects on Television

While reading the first few pages of the intro to Amanda Lotz’s The Television Will Be Revolutionized, I was flooded with not only with memories of my childhood and adolescence, but of some of the opinions I’ve formed of TV and technology over the years. Not only that, but I could hear the voices of my parents and grandparents in my head, as well as the views of my younger brothers and cousins.

The first thing I found related to the Jason Mittell reading we had last week, a sense of awe at what television has become nowadays, and how hard the word “television” is to define with recent developments (pg. 1).

The words from my elders came to me when I read that some people in the television industry were worried that with the Post-Network era of television, that television would be forever ruined (pg. 1). It reminds me of almost every time I’d show something new to my parents or grandparents. They’d scratch their heads and wonder what life was coming to. I’m here to say that just because something is new, doesn’t mean it’s bad.

In reading that kids consider a DVR to be a channel, it reminded me of my younger brothers and my cousins, in the sense that they take today’s technology for granted (pg. 2). For example, with the touch-screen interface Apple’s iDevices: they see it as a normal piece of technology, whereas I see it as a great feat in the field of computer science.

One of the big problems of TV moving to different screens, such as an iPod, is that episodes are available in single packages instead of coming as a part of one whole season. This made me think of how iTunes and music sharing websites have really hurt the music industry. Now, because songs can be individually downloaded, every song an artist makes HAS to be a hit, otherwise, they lose money. They can no longer sell music via an album. It’s the same with television shows, each episode has to be really good (unless the show has a story-arc that requires all the episodes) (pg. 3).

The introduction also gave a good insight to the three eras of television: the Network era, the Multi-Channel Transition era, and the Post-Network era. It showed how not only viewing television was changed through the advancement of technology, but how TV had to be produced, distributed, and transmitted (pg. 7-19).

 

1. Do you think the television set will eventually become obsolete with the rise of technological advancements?

2. Will producers end up like music artists? Struggling to find the next big idea for an episode?

3. Will the next generation treat Netflix as we do with the DVR now? Thinking that this is the only thing that TV is?

When Kids Know More About a TV Than a Media Student

The introduction to The Television Will Be Revolutionized gives a broad overview of the rest of the book by the inclusion of detailed history, arguments, and definitions. It also brought up memories of mine regarding television.

~

Beginning with questioning what television is today, Lutz states that TV is both a “technology and a tool for cultural storytelling” (pg. 3). I agree completely! This reminded me of the first thing I learned in my Intro to Media Studies class- the Integrated Approach to analyze media. Social context (intertwined with the text, industry, and audience) plays an important role for producing, distributing, and viewing media. I love how television can give representations of our culture- all from drama shows to newscasts. It can impact our culture, while our culture can impact television. Yet with time this cycle is forever changing, as well as the definition of TV.

To understand today’s television; Lutz explains that we need to know the history of its progression since its start. She establishes three eras of TV history: the “Network Era”, the “Multi-Channel Transition” and the “Post-Network Era” (pg. 7). These eras emphasize the shifts and changes of television- explaining who and what transformed, how, and why. Many factors are incorporated in the development of TV, with technological advances being a major one. New technologies like the internet and DVR give the audience personal and numerous options for watching TV, which is highlighted in the post-network era.

For example, I recently had a situation alike to Jason Mittell’s scenario (pg. 18) when I babysat two young children. One night, both begged to watch Dora the Explorer. Figuring it was way too late for kid’s shows to be on; I had to persistently tell them that they had to wait until morning to watch. Even so, the youngsters were determined to see Dora- enough that they took the remote away from me, navigated through their VoD menu, and successfully found Dora the Explorer at 10 o’clock at night. (And I thought I was tech savvy…) From growing up in the multi-channel transition era with only broadcast TV, I’m still not comfortable with this technology! This is just one example of how generations are adapting to the ever-changing television, and seeing the shifts being made with time. It is interesting to see how TV has “revolutionized”, while at the same time making me very curious for the future of it. Let’s hope I can keep up with the changes.

~

1)      How easily did you adapt to the changes in television, such as utilizing the interactive technologies, or having a multitude of shows and channels to choose from?

2)      Are the new TV watching apps part of the post-network era, or the start of a transitioning one?

3)      Do you think the audience and/or the industry will redefine television and its accompanying technology that we call TV? What would it be?