NEWS RELEASE
For More Information Contact: Robert Weissman (503) 235-8012
For Immediate Release: June 27th, 2008
COMMERCIAL ALERT RESPONSE TO FCC PRODUCT PLACEMENT RULEMAKING: AGENCY SIDESTEPS REAL SOLUTION
For More Information, Contact:
Robert Weissman, 202-387-8030
For Immediate Release:
June 27, 2008
COMMERCIAL ALERT RESPONSE TO FCC PRODUCT PLACEMENT RULEMAKING: AGENCY SIDESTEPS REAL SOLUTION
Following is the statement of Robert Weissman, managing director of Commercial Alert, in response to the Federal Communications Commission’s announcement of notice of rulemaking and inquiry on the issue of product placement:
Five years ago, Commercial Alert petitioned the Federal Communications Commission to address the problem of hidden advertisements aired on television through the device of product placements. We finally have a response.
In the five years since our petition, product placements have grown by an order of magnitude, subjecting viewers to many tens of thousands of hidden ads every year. Nielsen reports that $360 million was spent on product placement in 2003; the figure for 2007 was $2.9 billion, according to PQ Media; and product placement was up 39 percent in the first quarter of 2008.
Is the FCC’s decision to announce a rule making and formal inquiry into product placement issues a case of better-late-than-never? Perhaps. But the Commission’s proposed new rule is wholly inadequate to address the problem of product placement deception. The FCC’s announcement shunts the real issues off to an investigative process. We and allies will certainly work to ensure that the investigative process ultimately leads to a proper remedy—mandatory disclosure of product placement advertisements at the time they air—but the best-case scenario is that viewers and consumers will be denied proper protection for a still-longer period. The worst-case scenario is that advertisers will succeed in arguing that the inadequate remedy proposed by the rule obviates the need for meaningful steps.
In its new notice, the Commission proposes to mandate larger lettering for product placement disclosures at the end of television programs and to require that disclosures air for a pre-determined period of time. It is of course true that the current disclosures at the end of programs—with small and rapid crawls—are a farce. And disclosures in larger type, aired for a longer period, accompanied by an oral statement, should be required at the start and end of programs product placements. But the most robust system of disclosure at the start and end of programs will necessarily be inadequate.
As a practical matter, many people will not see disclosures, however prominent, at the start or end of a program. Many using DVRs will fast forward past such information—fast-forwarding is an important (but not the only) factor in why advertisers are turning to product placement advertisements in the first place. Even those watching conventional broadcasts are likely to leave the room when a program is over, or not pay attention even if they stay in the room.
The more fundamental problem is that disclosures separated in time will fail even if viewers do watch them. The emotional and persuasive power of a product placement advertisement, like other advertisements, occurs at the moment it airs. It is at that moment when viewers are being marketed to; it is at that moment when they are seeing a product portrayed favorably and forming an opinion, without recognizing that they are being advertised to. Being told earlier or later that the portrayal is an ad will not cure the deception perpetrated at the moment it happens. This is especially so given that disclosures at the end or beginning of shows will not be able to identify every disclosure precisely.
The fundamental principle of broadcast and fair advertising law in this area is simple, ethical, and grounded in common sense: Viewers have a right and need to know when they are being advertised to. The straightforward principle demands an equally straightforward response in the product placement context: they must know about product placement advertisements at the moment they occur.
Viewers experience an authentic portrayal of a product—whether used or talked about by real people, or by fictional characters in a context where no financial conflicts exist—in dramatically different fashion than when seeing an advertisement. They know to have their guard up for an advertisement, and to discount the puffery normally associated with ads. They apply no such filters to what they understand to be authentic portrayals devoid of financial motivation. That is why, when exposed to product placement advertisements, they must be told, at the moment of exposure, that they are being subjected to an advertisement.
See the FCC’s Notice of Inquiry and Proposed Rulemaking here.