Is the guy in the show trying to pretend that in the process of his normal, every day life he has to use all those facilities or is it relevant to the show he is in?
Pa pretends that those are things he does as part of his normal, everyday life, and he just happens to mention/show/thank them, both in the show and in print later.
Which is different, as it is him recommending that company/object/place.
Hope that helps, if not, let me know and I will find another way to explain it for you.:)
He is a hard working celebrity so why would those things not be part of his everyday life
I think they have had complaints or queries anyway but have found to be in the clear and adhering to the guidelines. As they don't accept payment or say one product is better than another.
I think the idea of having something hidden in a show is so that the product placement doesn't take away from the show itself. Although lots of products are used which are simply props and used without payment.
I'm sorry I'm not in a position to have a google around but I think you are allowed to use certain things depending on the show.
They get paid for everything that is used where the product is recognisable and the logo is visible - for example, Coca Cola pays millions to have someone drinking out of a can in films. Mobile phone companies pay to have their products used by stars as long as it is recognisable. That is why product logos are often covered in TV series. It is called hidden advertising and is very widespread.
What was on Pete's show cannot be compared. He went on a coffee tasting trip to Italy with the owner of Costa Coffee - they did not talk about the brand. The diet and training happened to be a project Pete was working on. He did not try to get people to buy it nor did he say it was good - quite the opposite.
I fail to see what the problem is other than it is Pete who is involved and not someone more popular here.
I'm at a loss as to why he needs to go on a diet (other than to make money by shilling it). Didn't all that weight loss happen as a result of stress over the divorce from "the other person"?:rolleyes:
If you watched the programme he said he wants to build muscle back up (which he lost with his weight loss last year). The only way to do that is by a high protein diet and exercise which he started in last night`s episode.
They get paid for everything that is used where the product is recognisable and the logo is visible - for example, Coca Cola pays millions to have someone drinking out of a can in films. Mobile phone companies pay to have their products used by stars as long as it is recognisable. That is why product logos are often covered in TV series. It is called hidden advertising and is very widespread.
What was on Pete's show cannot be compared. He went on a coffee tasting trip to Italy with the owner of Costa Coffee - they did not talk about the brand. The diet and training happened to be a project Pete was working on. He did not try to get people to buy it nor did he say it was good - quite the opposite.
I fail to see what the problem is other than it is Pete who is involved and not someone more popular here.
With all due respect, Liz, you failed to see the problem with his lies and other stuff, so it might be that you don't have a problem with it because it is Pa?
I am fairly equal ops in my dislike for these people cashing in on, selling and exploiting every aspect of their lives in order to make money. I don't like to see any kind of cheating, dissembling, or disingenuous behaviour.
I think using your kids for money is low, and exploiting people's good will for you is lower.
So I do have a problem with him using his show to give free advertising to companies he probably then doesn't have to pay.
In Don't Tell the Bride the names of the Bridal Shops and Florists aren't mentioned by the people appearing in the show, the shop fronts are only shown fleetingly on screen. You would have to watch on demand and pause to find out the names.
I beg to differ. In the episide I watched a couple of weeks ago the name of the bridal shop could be clearly seen. The wedding venue (some country house hotel) was also clearly shown complete with menus
With all due respect, Liz, you failed to see the problem with his lies and other stuff, so it might be that you don't have a problem with it because it is Pa?
I am fairly equal ops in my dislike for these people cashing in on, selling and exploiting every aspect of their lives in order to make money. I don't like to see any kind of cheating, dissembling, or disingenuous behaviour.
I think using your kids for money is low, and exploiting people's good will for you is lower.
So I do have a problem with him using his show to give free advertising to companies he probably then doesn't have to pay.
Given that this thread is about product promotion on his tv show, how has he lied
With all due respect, Liz, you failed to see the problem with his lies and other stuff, so it might be that you don't have a problem with it because it is Pa?
I am fairly equal ops in my dislike for these people cashing in on, selling and exploiting every aspect of their lives in order to make money. I don't like to see any kind of cheating, dissembling, or disingenuous behaviour.
I think using your kids for money is low, and exploiting people's good will for you is lower.
So I do have a problem with him using his show to give free advertising to companies he probably then doesn't have to pay.
By the way, I am not a fan of Pete. I would feel exactly the same if others had done the same things as he has.
And I will have no problem whatsoever when Katie uses her wedding/blessing to give advertising to various companies in return for favours without clearly stating it to be such. I am pleased to hear that it is the same for you.
With all due respect, Liz, you failed to see the problem with his lies and other stuff, so it might be that you don't have a problem with it because it is Pa?
I am fairly equal ops in my dislike for these people cashing in on, selling and exploiting every aspect of their lives in order to make money. I don't like to see any kind of cheating, dissembling, or disingenuous behaviour.
I think using your kids for money is low, and exploiting people's good will for you is lower.
So I do have a problem with him using his show to give free advertising to companies he probably then doesn't have to pay.
I`m sorry but I do not think you are being respectful to Liz suggesting that her judgement is clouded.
In Don't Tell the Bride the names of the Bridal Shops and Florists aren't mentioned by the people appearing in the show, the shop fronts are only shown fleetingly on screen. You would have to watch on demand and pause to find out the names.
A fraction of a second is enough - as was shown by the success of now banned subliminal advertising.
If you watched the programme he said he wants to build muscle back up (which he lost with his weight loss last year). The only way to do that is by a high protein diet and exercise which he started in last night`s episode.
There isn't enought money in the world to entice me to watch a fake like Andre slime his way across my screen.
Aren't there three or four Pa obsessives who do the same, only supporting him?
Or is it only bile when it is against him?
No actually i dont think ive read such bile from this particular group of harpies for anyone else its totally reserved for Peter and Claire and any post the 3am girls make about Peter even if it dosent reference Claire, has Claire dragged into it for streams of vile abuse by this group of posters, any Katie article they drag in Peter and Claire and abuse them the same way in replies.... Just thought i'd throw that in there, and its not an imagined VENDETTA as someone tried to say the othernight its very real. Its very abusive and ive reported it many times. Thats not debating the subject its abuse for the sake of it and I fail to see why anyone would defend such behaviour.
I can understand people not being andre fans, but i wish they would stick to the facts.:rolleyes:
Ive caught then same person on 3names lots of us did but it dosent suit the 3am girls to let that proof stay it dosent suit their agenda they know what theyre doing they know anything with Peter in will get reams of abuse for Peter and Claire.:sleep:
No actually i dont think ive read such bile from this particular group of harpies for anyone else its totally reserved for Peter and Claire and any post the 3am girls make about Peter even if it dosent reference Kerry or Claire has Claire dragged into it for streams of vile abuse by this group of posters, any Katie article they drag in Peter and Claire and abuse them sthe same way in replies.... Just thought i'd throw that in there, and its not an imagined VENDETTA as someone tried to say the othernight its very real. Its very abusive and ive reported it many times.
I can understand people not being andre fans, but i wish they would stick to the facts.:rolleyes:
Ive caught then same person on 3names lots of us did but it dosent suit the 3am girls to let that proof stay it dosent suit their agenda they know what theyre doing they know anything with Peter in will get reams of abuse for Peter and Claire.:sleep:
The vitriol and abuse against Pete and Claire Powell on that website is truly disgusting and the perpetrators should be ashamed of themselves.
There isn't enought money in the world to entice me to watch a fake like Andre slime his way across my screen.
But then you do not really know if it was blatent advertising or not. I personally do not think it was
As with Katie's show, they have to fill one hour per week and have to film whatever they happen to be doing. In Pete's case, yesterday's show included a trip to the coffee shops of Italy and Ferrari and the diet sheet and training for a new project. At no time did Pete drink or talk about Costa Coffee nor did he have a single positive word for the diet - and he didn't say anyone should do it. That is not my idea of advertising.
The vitriol and abuse against Pete and Claire Powell on that website is truly disgusting and the perpetrators should be ashamed of themselves.
They act like spoilt little brats, ive even had a threatening email after exposing one poster as posting on three different names, she wanted to meet me "outside":rolleyes: of course i replied i was only to happy too but like most who sprout abuse on the net they do it as they dont have the bollox to do it to someones face.
I don`t recall her asking that in this thread so therefore I feel my original comment was justified.
Right, well, off topic again in order to answer your attack again:
Liz wrote this:
Originally Posted by Liz G-S View Post
They get paid for everything that is used where the product is recognisable and the logo is visible - for example, Coca Cola pays millions to have someone drinking out of a can in films. Mobile phone companies pay to have their products used by stars as long as it is recognisable. That is why product logos are often covered in TV series. It is called hidden advertising and is very widespread.
What was on Pete's show cannot be compared. He went on a coffee tasting trip to Italy with the owner of Costa Coffee - they did not talk about the brand. The diet and training happened to be a project Pete was working on. He did not try to get people to buy it nor did he say it was good - quite the opposite.
I fail to see what the problem is other than it is Pete who is involved and not someone more popular here.
The bit I emboldened is the bit I was replying to. As Liz did not immediately behave like I had attacked her and merely responded, equally politely, to the point, I don't feel she saw it as me either misreading her, nor attempting to diminish her.
Now again, can you show me where I have been disrespectful to Liz in this exchange, because I genuinely don't feel I have, and I would genuinely apologise if she felt I had.
Otherwise, can we go back to the topic, rather than just pulling my posts apart looking for faults.
I don`t recall her asking that in this thread so therefore I feel my original comment was justified.
I didn't, at least it was meant as a general comment. Many, many celebrities and other public figures endorse products every day - only Pete has been criticised, in fac it seems to have evoked anger. Therefore, I expressed the opinion, that the reason for the, in my opinion, excessive reaction is perhaps the person, in this case Pete, rather than the act itself.
Right, well, off topic again in order to answer your attack again:
Liz wrote this:
Originally Posted by Liz G-S View Post
They get paid for everything that is used where the product is recognisable and the logo is visible - for example, Coca Cola pays millions to have someone drinking out of a can in films. Mobile phone companies pay to have their products used by stars as long as it is recognisable. That is why product logos are often covered in TV series. It is called hidden advertising and is very widespread.
What was on Pete's show cannot be compared. He went on a coffee tasting trip to Italy with the owner of Costa Coffee - they did not talk about the brand. The diet and training happened to be a project Pete was working on. He did not try to get people to buy it nor did he say it was good - quite the opposite.
I fail to see what the problem is other than it is Pete who is involved and not someone more popular here.[/QUOTE]
The bit I emboldened is the bit I was replying to. As Liz did not immediately behave like I had attacked her and merely responded, equally politely, to the point, I don't feel she saw it as me either misreading her, nor attempting to diminish her.
Now again, can you show me where I have been disrespectful to Liz in this exchange, because I genuinely don't feel I have, and I would genuinely apologise if she felt I had.
Otherwise, can we go back to the topic, rather than just pulling my posts apart looking for faults.
Personally i feel if youre saying someone is biased which is basically what you did, then you have to accept shes going to be offended by that.
I didn't, at least it was meant as a general comment. Many, many celebrities and other public figures endorse products every day - only Pete has been criticised, in fac it seems to have evoked anger. Therefore, I expressed the opinion, that the reason for the, in my opinion, excessive reaction is perhaps the person, in this case Pete, rather than the act itself.
I agree, dressed up to be "for the concern of his fans".
Comments
He is a hard working celebrity so why would those things not be part of his everyday life
They get paid for everything that is used where the product is recognisable and the logo is visible - for example, Coca Cola pays millions to have someone drinking out of a can in films. Mobile phone companies pay to have their products used by stars as long as it is recognisable. That is why product logos are often covered in TV series. It is called hidden advertising and is very widespread.
What was on Pete's show cannot be compared. He went on a coffee tasting trip to Italy with the owner of Costa Coffee - they did not talk about the brand. The diet and training happened to be a project Pete was working on. He did not try to get people to buy it nor did he say it was good - quite the opposite.
I fail to see what the problem is other than it is Pete who is involved and not someone more popular here.
If you watched the programme he said he wants to build muscle back up (which he lost with his weight loss last year). The only way to do that is by a high protein diet and exercise which he started in last night`s episode.
With all due respect, Liz, you failed to see the problem with his lies and other stuff, so it might be that you don't have a problem with it because it is Pa?
I am fairly equal ops in my dislike for these people cashing in on, selling and exploiting every aspect of their lives in order to make money. I don't like to see any kind of cheating, dissembling, or disingenuous behaviour.
I think using your kids for money is low, and exploiting people's good will for you is lower.
So I do have a problem with him using his show to give free advertising to companies he probably then doesn't have to pay.
I beg to differ. In the episide I watched a couple of weeks ago the name of the bridal shop could be clearly seen. The wedding venue (some country house hotel) was also clearly shown complete with menus
Given that this thread is about product promotion on his tv show, how has he lied
Past tense, OC.
By the way, I am not a fan of Pete. I would feel exactly the same if others had done the same things as he has.
And I will have no problem whatsoever when Katie uses her wedding/blessing to give advertising to various companies in return for favours without clearly stating it to be such. I am pleased to hear that it is the same for you.
I`m sorry but I do not think you are being respectful to Liz suggesting that her judgement is clouded.
A fraction of a second is enough - as was shown by the success of now banned subliminal advertising.
Sorry ?
OC, why are you looking for insults when none exist - unless you think being called a fan of Pa is an insult?
Liz has asked if my judgement may be based on my dislike of Pa, I merely pointed out that the opposite could be true.
Why do you need to take this so personally? Liz and I have managed to discuss things we don't agree on for years without attacking each other.
Read the original post again, OC.
No actually i dont think ive read such bile from this particular group of harpies for anyone else its totally reserved for Peter and Claire and any post the 3am girls make about Peter even if it dosent reference Claire, has Claire dragged into it for streams of vile abuse by this group of posters, any Katie article they drag in Peter and Claire and abuse them the same way in replies.... Just thought i'd throw that in there, and its not an imagined VENDETTA as someone tried to say the othernight its very real. Its very abusive and ive reported it many times. Thats not debating the subject its abuse for the sake of it and I fail to see why anyone would defend such behaviour.
I can understand people not being andre fans, but i wish they would stick to the facts.:rolleyes:
Ive caught then same person on 3names lots of us did but it dosent suit the 3am girls to let that proof stay it dosent suit their agenda they know what theyre doing they know anything with Peter in will get reams of abuse for Peter and Claire.:sleep:
The vitriol and abuse against Pete and Claire Powell on that website is truly disgusting and the perpetrators should be ashamed of themselves.
But then you do not really know if it was blatent advertising or not. I personally do not think it was
As with Katie's show, they have to fill one hour per week and have to film whatever they happen to be doing. In Pete's case, yesterday's show included a trip to the coffee shops of Italy and Ferrari and the diet sheet and training for a new project. At no time did Pete drink or talk about Costa Coffee nor did he have a single positive word for the diet - and he didn't say anyone should do it. That is not my idea of advertising.
Ah apologies - I asuumed you had watched it as your question was pertinent to last night`s episode.
They act like spoilt little brats, ive even had a threatening email after exposing one poster as posting on three different names, she wanted to meet me "outside":rolleyes: of course i replied i was only to happy too
Right, well, off topic again in order to answer your attack again:
Liz wrote this:
The bit I emboldened is the bit I was replying to. As Liz did not immediately behave like I had attacked her and merely responded, equally politely, to the point, I don't feel she saw it as me either misreading her, nor attempting to diminish her.
Now again, can you show me where I have been disrespectful to Liz in this exchange, because I genuinely don't feel I have, and I would genuinely apologise if she felt I had.
Otherwise, can we go back to the topic, rather than just pulling my posts apart looking for faults.
I didn't, at least it was meant as a general comment. Many, many celebrities and other public figures endorse products every day - only Pete has been criticised, in fac it seems to have evoked anger. Therefore, I expressed the opinion, that the reason for the, in my opinion, excessive reaction is perhaps the person, in this case Pete, rather than the act itself.
I agree, dressed up to be "for the concern of his fans".
They dont seem concerned at all?:rolleyes: