Home› US TV Shows
Click here to check out Digital Spy's US TV section for the latest news, updates and reviews of your favourite shows.

Is this the worst example of Product Placement?

koantemplationkoantemplation Posts: 101,293
Forum Member
✭✭✭✭
in US TV Shows #1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFIrmOAMqxg

An episode of Royal Pains features a blatant advert for AutoTrader as part of the plot.

The ones for Toyota are pretty bad but this has got to be the worst I've seen.

Comments

  • Matt DMatt D Posts: 13,153
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #2
    That's awful!


    White Collar and Warehouse 13 were bad for blatant car adverts - scenes where a character would specifically point out a product or a feature in an unnecessary and obviously-an-advert style way.

    Stuff like "Hey, look at my Prius' (or whatever) new entertainment/navigation system!" <camera focuses on said item, and on the logo on the front of the car> etc. Really blatant.

    Hawaii Five-0 can be bad for MS stuff. Not just characters all using MS products, loads of shows do that (or with Apple products, like in Grimm), but actually making a point of showing something. They even had one character tell another to "Bing it" once. Really. Has *anyone* ever actually said that in real life, in a serious way? But the ads in H50 are nothing compared to the car stuff in W13 and White Collar.
  • The_don1The_don1 Posts: 17,448
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #3
    TV shows are very expensive to make and with downloading, on demand where you fast-forward adverts etc means the revenue has to come from somewhere so this is the logical step
  • LMLM Posts: 63,500
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #4
    The_don1 wrote: »
    TV shows are very expensive to make and with downloading, on demand where you fast-forward adverts etc means the revenue has to come from somewhere so this is the logical step

    I was just thinking the same thing

    Product placement is a bit cringey when used in an obvious way but it helps pay for the show.
  • The_don1The_don1 Posts: 17,448
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #5
    little-monster wrote: »
    I was just thinking the same thing

    Product placement is a bit cringey when used in an obvious way but it helps pay for the show.

    You want the company to pay big bucks and it needs to be in a obvious way, No company is going to fork over millions for a shot in the background.

    Its nothing new and has been done from day one but its being more and more obvious nowadays due to the way we watch tv.

    Its just something we are have to get use to as the way we consume TV changes
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 124
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #6
    Ouch, that's extremely blatant !. I thought it was bad enough on the last episode of Amazing Race when Ford were continually mentioned throughout the show.
  • DarthFaderDarthFader Posts: 3,882
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #7
    Catfish is pretty bad. The only reason cameraman Max is co-host is PP. Odd how most of his hand held shots of the laptop are actually looking like filmed on a tripod they are so steady and why else use a compact camera not a dslr?
  • phil solophil solo Posts: 9,669
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #8
    Chuck used to have some comically blatant plugs for Subway sandwiches (and also frequent 'culprit' Toyota) to the extent that I thought they must have been deliberately taking the piss by making the product placement sponsorship spots as teeth-grindingly obvious as possible.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,280
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #9
    Wow. I mean wow. That Royal Pains one was just cringe worthy. It almost feels like the actors are breaking the fourth wall.

    I agree with the Chuck one. Even though their plug-in for Subway was really blatant, in some ways, it looked funny. Cougar Town is the culprit for many obvious plug-ins like Subway and the episode with Dr Pepper where they even made kind of a plot, relating to the episode. An Australian drama, Offspring, did one with Ryvita biscuits. The characters were chatting and one said "Can I have a Ryvita biscuit" to which the other (who was holding the Ryvita box the whole scene!!!) replied "No!" I think. :D:D:D:D
  • 007Fusion007Fusion Posts: 3,657
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #10
    Matt D wrote: »
    That's awful!



    Hawaii Five-0 can be bad for MS stuff. Not just characters all using MS products, loads of shows do that (or with Apple products, like in Grimm), but actually making a point of showing something. They even had one character tell another to "Bing it" once. Really. Has *anyone* ever actually said that in real life, in a serious way? But the ads in H50 are nothing compared to the car stuff in W13 and White Collar.

    For me, it is the cars in Hawaii Five O. Not only do the task team drive the same company cars. Their suspects and civilians do too.
  • XIVXIV Posts: 21,567
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #11
    Product Placement is a necessary evil in the film and television business but it can be done well, the Reese's Pieces scene in ET comes in mind. The Bond films are chock a block with product placements with Aston Martins, Sony products, Heneiken and Omega watches but the worse product placement was in Transformers Age of Extinction where they had Mark Wahlberg opening and drinking a bottle of Bud Light in the middle of an action scene.

    Elementary has had a scene where Sherlock needs to search for something and uses a Surface and he actually take the time to put the type cover and then goes on Bing. I think CBS must have a product placement deal with Microsoft. This is the scene in question:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsiXfW75598
Sign In or Register to comment.