So the BBC has a strict ban on brand names and logos being visible in shows, resulting in silly cover ups of the Apple logo with post it notes and the like. However, I was watching the mockumentary series 'W1A' on Netflix and noticed the sheer amount of times the Apple logo and product names are shown (e.g. MacBook Air).

Curious to know why some shows have strict rules whereas other shows seem to have no rules? Does anybody know why there are differences between shows?

the BBC has no ban on names etc
Just read the guidelines http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidel...uct-prominence

Fully agree. No point to the thread, lack of research.

Then the BBC broke their own guidelines with the program...

The Apple logo, plus the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro featured heavily during the entire series. No attempt was made to hide the logos or names. There were even close ups showing the brand names!

Have you watched the program in question recently? I also mentioned the rules the first poster referred me to, seems less like a lack of research on my part and more a lack of intelligence on your part.

Moreover, I don't see the label 'Moderator' under your username, why do you think you have the right to say which threads have no point to them?

Aaron, you appear to completely misunderstand Internet forums.

You post a new thread, people post their responses and opinions. You sought views, you got a response, but you do not like it.

So you jump to name calling as soon as someone has a different opinion to yourself.

You seem to take an unhealthy interest in my viewing habits, to be honest it's not relevant but yes I watched W1A it's a favourite show of mine, you may wish to view Mrs Browns boys when " She" has tape around a IPhone then takes it off with a joke at the BBC.

I suppose the post-it notes etc. are used to comply with this rule:-

We should normally ensure that branding is not clearly visible, and close-ups are avoided when real products are used as set dressing. When brands are shown it is normally difficult to editorially justify a verbal reference as well as a visual one.

ADP, you seem to completely misunderstand what responses are considered 'on topic'. Your response was not on topic, it didn't even reference the topic in hand. I sought views on the issue of the BBC giving heavy provenance to Apple products. I did not seek views on your opinion of how worthy the thread is. Understand now?

Interesting, makes you wonder how they justified the close up shots of Apple computers in W1A. One example includes the quite funny section where 40 hours of Top Gear must be viewed. In this section, a close up of computer with the 'MacBook Pro' name was visible fairly frequently through the episode. This could easily have been covered, surely?

Because that wouldn't have look weird at all would it?

"Why are the BBC showing what are clearly Mac Book Airs with the logos covered up. It's ridiculous!"

etc.

Personally I couldn't care less if they do show brand logos.

As long as we don't get to this level of "undue prominence" I'll be perfectly happy.

So yes, just another pointless BBC-bashing thread. IMO

This is still my fav for taking the biscuit... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPuz8LpsGMw

Well I personally think the BBC are giving undue prominence to post-it notes!

Not BBC bashing whatsoever actually, it was simply a question. In fact, I actually praised the show in question and said it was funny. So, I'd love to know how you've arrived at the judgement that this is BBC bashing?

I don't mind the BBC showing logos, I don't particularly care. However, I was merely interested in why some shows have strict rules and others don't.

All shows follow the same rules & guidelines. The only difference is the context of how (and why) those logos appear within the programme concerned.

How about the TAG Heuer ( think that is correct ) Logo
It pops up next to the score on MOTD
It's a Premier League advertising on live games this season
MOTD still use it

If an Apple logo visible on a computer on the BBC is "advertising" then it is also "advertising" on ITV or CH4 so should it count towards the maximum amount of advertising allowed each hour?

It irritates me during the snooker when they keep referring to the sponsor of the event. They could just say "The UK Championship", but had to drop in "The (sponsor name) UK Championship". Why? Are they getting paid for that? Dennis Taylor makes it very prominent with his slow speech.

Aren't they obliged to mention the sponsor's name a certain number of times per broadcast?

Correct.

How many?

The crucial difference between the BBC and other broadcasters Aaron is that the BBC isn't paid to display brand names within their programming therefore there is no impact editorially.

It's also part of the name of the championship no? I don't like it when brands are part of an event title like 'The Flora London Marathon', for example, but a championship name is a championship name isn't it.

As far as I am aware .....

As many as might be required in the contract, BUT a number that is commensurate with the Editorial Guidelines.

In other words, giving fair credit but without being promotional.


This probably covers it:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidel.../guidance-full

But if they keep saying it, it would sound like they're giving prominence to it, and in any event, it just sounds odd. You might say to someone "Are you watching the London Marathon?", not "Are you watching the Flora London Marathon?"

Indeed...I agree with you. That said, if you are being paid to comment on an event, you have to refer to that event by it's full and proper name don't you. You could say that 'the brands' have played a blinder by having their names installed within the title of an event, building or venue. The O2 Arena, Emirates Spinnaker Tower and Benson & Hedges Cup (cricket) anyone?

Maybe Ofcom needs to look into it? Should brands be part of an event name if said event appears on the BBC, for example?