Product placement or just simulation of real life? versie 2
Product placement or just simulation of real life?
Sjoerd Z. 24 september 2007
Product placement is a trend in the marketing that’s getting bigger and bigger. Advertisers are searching for new ways to reach the consumers. The modern consumer has created a shield to protect himself against all the advertising he gets to see everyday and everywhere. The advertisers have to replace the in-your-face ads with softer ways of advertising. Product placement is a possible solution and is getting more and more popular. But is this development a good thing for the film industry? Who wants to see a film that is one big commercial? Some say this is a bad thing and others say that it’s just a simulation of real life.
What kind of products are using product placement?
Famous examples of product placement are: Ray-Ban sunglasses in the movies: Risky Business and Men in Black 2, Pepsi Products in the movies: Back to the future and Austin Powers and Apple in the movie you’ve got mail. Using Product placement is popular by the following kind of products: Drinks, food, cars, computers and clothes. This is because this products are taking part in the daily life’s of the costumers. In films people are getting to see the daily life’s of other people surrounded by this products. But is it necessary to put the brand names on the screen?
Is product placement going to far?
There are many people who are saying that the advertisers are going too far. Filmmaker David Lynch has only one word to say about this growing trend: “Bullshit” This is the answer he gave in an interview about product placement on the question: “How do you as a filmmaker feel about this growing trend?”(adformatie 2007) This is an answer you can expect of a filmmaker who is trying hard to make beautiful films. If this trend continues there comes a day that all films are polluted with the advertising of brands. This is something people like David Lynch don’t want to think about. However, there are filmmakers with another opinion about this subject. Michael Bay known from the movie Transformers is saying: “There are products in everything in everyday life. Do people think there shouldn’t be brand names or something? Everything is branded. I hate commercials when they take logos off of stuff. It’s not real life.”(howstuffworks 2007) So he is saying that seeing the names of brands in films in undeniable. If there were no brand names in films the films where unrealistic according to his opinion.On the other hand there are brands you see very often in television shows and not that much in real life. For example it’s a little bit strange that the apple computer appears in a lot of TV shows while Apple has only 5% of the US computer market. I wonder what Michael Bay has to say about that.
The conclusion is that some brand names in movies are undeniable. Brands as Coca-Cola and McDonalds are spread over the whole world and are taking part of many life’s. There is a difference when brand names in a movies and television shows are not showing a realistic view of the real world. Like for example the brand name of Apple.
Bronnen Howstuffworks (zj). Katherine Fordham Neer How product placement works. Geraadpleegd op 24 September 2007 van: http://money.howstuffworks.com/product-placement1.htm
Howstuffworks (zj) OJ Fagbire Product placement- Next level marketing. Geraadpleegd op 24 September 2007 van: http://www.howstuffworks.com/framed.htm?parent=product-placement.htm&url=http://www.productplacement.biz/
USA today (10-oktober-2006) Laura Petrecca Product placement – You can’t escape it. Geraadpleegd op 2 september 2007 van: http://www.usatoday.com/money/advertising/2006-10-10-ad-nauseum-usat_x.htm
Adformatie (4 april 2007) Michael van Os. David Lynch over Product placement. Geraadpleegd op 24 september 2007 van: http://blog.adformatie.nl/index.php/entries/david-lynch-over-product-placement/
Washington post (15 april 2006) Sara Kehaulani Goo. Apple Gets a Big Slice Of Product-Placement Pie. Geraadpleegd op 24 september 2007 van:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/14/AR2006041401670.html
Appendix 3B – Weblog article peer review form
Weblog Article Peer Review Form B – Second Review
Writer’s Name _Sjoerd Zijlstra________________________
Assessor’s name _Andrea Hoogland______________
Date _25-10-07______________________________________
Rating Scale: 1 = Yes 2 = Somewhat 3 = No
Rate the article by giving a 1, 2 or 3 for each question. Read the article once to get a general idea of what it is about, then read it a second time to rate it.
1. Is the topic interesting? _1___
2. Is the title original and appropriate? _1___
3. Is the introduction complete? _1___
4. Is the body of your article complete? _1___
5. Is the conclusion well-developed? _2___
6. Is the article well-organized overall? _1___
7. Is the article easy to understand? _1___
8. Is the article interesting to read? _1___
9. Has any plagiarised material been removed? there was none___
Do you feel that the writer has improved the article? Why or why not? Be specific.
Yes he took good care of the points that were said in peer review 1.
Has the writer changed the article adequately according to your suggestions for improvement of your first assessment? Describe the changes and state specifically whether you think they are an improvement.
Yes. The introduction is now more complete. The question if product placement is going to far is now also a part of the intro.
The new information in the conclusion is now set to the body of the text. This makes the article more organized, easier to read and better to understand.
Are you happy to have this article on your weblog? Why or why not? Be specific.
Yes. I think it’s a good article. It is an interesting subject and it’s well written.
Give the writer this completed form.