TALK OF CROSS-PROMOTIONS AT UPN HAS WATCHDOGS WORRIED
Media watchdogs say they're closely monitoring negotiations between Viacom’s UPN and advertisers for signs that product placements will become rampant in cable network’s fall shows. With increasingly bleak economy and tough ad environment for TV concerns, watchdogs expressed reservations about $30 million deal between UPN and advertisers represented by Omnicom Group, including Cingular Wireless, Gillette, McDonald’s, State Farm Insurance and others. Deal already is done, UPN official said, but details of “value-added” elements still were being worked out. Still on table are product placements in shows themselves, logo “bugs” in corner of TV screen and other corporate sponsorship ideas. “If commercial speech overwhelms artistic expression, that’s a source of concern,” critical observer said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Although watchdogs admit product placement in media is nothing new, UPN case is particularly worrisome, they say, because many of its shows, including Buffy the Vampire Slayer, The Hughleys and Girlfriends appeal to young audience. Some suggestions of Buffy’s eating at McDonald’s or Mr. Hughley’s buying State Farm Insurance, for example, would be inappropriate, critics said.
UPN deal is sign of “arrogant broadcasting industry” where executives feel they can “do absolutely anything they want with impunity” because FCC has shown reluctance to intervene, said Andrew Schwartzman of Media Access Project. FCC and FTC said they had no jurisdiction unless advertisers made misleading statements about products during shows or product placements involve children’s programming. UPN doesn’t carry Saturday morning cartoons and the like as defined by Children’s TV Act. However, critics point out that industry data show young age skew for many of shows.
In passing Communications Act, Congress said it considered excessive commercialization harmful and expected FCC to protect against such harm. However, when FCC deregulated commercial limits in 1984, commissioners said they expected marketplace to provide restraints. In affirming FCC, U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., said it believed Commission would act if commercialization became problem. “The question this raises is whether the FCC is going to decide that the point has come where commercialization is excessive and they must act,” Schwartzman said. However, he and other watchdogs acknowledged that by citing First Amendment concerns of broadcasters and cable operators, current Commission again showed unwillingness to become involved.
Commission reluctance raises specter of watchdog groups’ forcing issue by filing complains with FCC, seeking congressional help or court intervention, Center for Media Education Pres. Kathryn Montgomery said. “I just think this whole trend is a very disturbing one because it’s completely obliterating the lines between commercialization and content,” she said. “It has all become advertising.” Center already has filed comments with FCC on issue of advertising and separation of content for children, particularly those 12 and under.
Recent report from Center for Digital Democracy warns that advent of digital interactive TV (ITV) could represent “advertising nirvana” for companies seeking to monitor habits of viewers. Center’s Jeff Chester said he believed overcommercialization would “ultimately backfire” on industry because public would demand privacy measures. In meantime, heavy competition for ad dollars in tough economy has led UPN to “resort to a desperate act,” he said.
UPN spokeswoman stressed that nothing “has been set in stone” on value-added deals with individual advertisers on shows. Company doesn’t comment on negotiations, she said. What’s more, UPN is aware of FCC regulations on children’s programs and is “completely in compliance” with those rules, she said.