i care, i'm with you on this one. i think it's a violation of journalistic ethics, not to mention just plain creepy.
Please explain this concept of 'legitimate advertising'.
I'm with you on this one, old man.
FWIW, I agree. When the news runs ads, they should be identified, not camouflaged. Not acknowledging the cups is much worse than saying "brought to you by McDonalds."
@2: Advertising that doesn't pretend to be something else. Commercials, billboards, banner ads on Slog, "this program brought to you by Brylcreem," etc.—that's legitimate advertising.
Endorsements by sports heroes and product placement in movies (barely) fall on the legitimate side of the fence—the former explicitly treats people like walking billboards (kind of gross, but honest) and the latter happens in a fictionalized world.
Slipping product endorsements into presumably nonfictional situations (newspaper articles, broadcast news reports, State of the Union addresses) is illegitimate, weasel advertising. It's a difference of kind, not degree.
I'm with you on this one, BK.
Can you imagine said "news" stations doing a report on the health issues surrounding fast food?
Not nearly as bad as Video News Releases.
Check out this 2006 report
http://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/execsummary
I was with you in the previous thread, but then technically I too probably qualify as "prematurely old" by the standards of most SLOGers.
And presumably, each McWhatever had to be made from heavy plastic, in order to prevent the anchors from "accidentally" knocking them off the table, and in order to keep the "product" looking "fresh" under hot studio lights for several hours.
Not surprising in the least, given that most products you see advertised are doctored up to make them look much better than they actually do after you remove them from their packaging.
The only way I could see being swayed by this type of thing (who's gonna drink a look-at-it-on-purpose Dennis Bounds latte?) is if, say, Ciscoe dug up a McMocha by accident while he was getting after some shallots.
Local newsbabe Angela King has a sideline vocation crafting lifelike replicas of edibles - especially frozen desserts - in wax.
They are realistic enough you'd want to dig in ... even knowing they're not real.
Same way viewers respond to mainstream corporate news.
The circle is closing.
Yeah I'm going to agree with 4... this makes it seem like the news anchors endorse the product, in which case someone should be paying them, not the network.
Hasn't anyone seen Idiocracy? And doesn't this kind of thing seem an awful lot like a slippery slope to-- well-- "family dinner, brought to you by Pepsi", "Math Class-- proudly sponsored by Hershey’s".
I'm with you, but I'm a crusty old curmudgeon too. Wanna come over and reminisce about the old days while complaining about our ailments?
Why is everyone so into Idiocracy lately? That was a terrible, terrible movie.
I don't disagree with you in principle, but you do know the entire purpose of television, from the networks' perspective, is to beam advertisements into your home, where you watch them voluntarily, right? Like, 20 minutes of them per hour, interspersed with 40 minutes of filler/bait (aka "programming")? They DON'T CARE about any purported obligation to contribute to your informed citizenship.
Getting in an ethical huff about product placement on network TV news is like saying rape is unsanitary -- yes, but that's the least of its problems.
I just saw this old old movie where Andy Rooney was this young teen - and he was shilling for commercial product placements even in that.
Same old guy - same old style.
Advertising in the newsroom. Despicable. It's almost as much of an outrage as the AP not acknowledging the Oxford Comma. Maybe it's in the newest edition...
@15:
Are you perhaps confusing Andy Rooney the newsman, with Mickey Rooney the actor, who played the role of Andy Hardy in a series of movies in the 1930's and 1940's?
back off cardigan sweaters, jack.
Sadly, I own four cardigans and actually wear them around the house.
I would like to have one of the McReplicas. It appeals to me in both the realms of kitch and odd poeticism. Someone, please steal it for me.
Brendan @19, I was about to chime in with support, but now I can't admit to identifying with you in any way whatsoever.
"I am, obviously, a prematurely old man."
As previously noted, an old man would know enough about the history of TV news to realize that overt product endorsement is nothing new.
Realllly @ 23, care to cite some examples of "overt product endorsement" in TV news broadcasts? Not commercials shown in the regular advertising slots on news broadcasts, but actual products purposefully shilled DURING news broadcasts?
@17 - what, they're about the same age, and quite frankly they used to look pretty much the same.
Sorry, there's a difference?
My point being back then product placements were overt, so who the FF gives a carp if they do this?
@24:
A few years ago I watched a season finale of Survivor, followed immediately by the evening news on the local CBS affiliate -- which reported the result of Survivor as one of the top news stories of the day.
I didn't flip through the news on the local ABC and NBC affiliates to see if they deemed events on a CBS show to be equally newsworthy, but I doubt it.
I don't miss watching TV, actually. I think I miss cigarettes more than I miss TV.
TV "news" programs suck so much that none of us are really shocked by this, Brendan. Is it detestable? I guess it could be, if you had previously found some kind of redeeming value in the programming. Otherwise, it's just more of the same old shit.
Comments Closed
Comments are closed on this post.