NBC to Create Programs Centered on Sponsors

explosivejared writes "It sounds farcical when you first hear it, but NBC has teamed up with an ad agency to produce actual feature programs that are centered around promoting the products of the network's sponsors. The network has already begun production on one sci-fi program entitled 'Gemini Division,' which will act as a platform for products from Microsoft, Intel, and Cisco. The programming will be broadcast via the network's 'digital properties,' e.g. the NBC web site. I guess it was only a matter of time for something like this to come along after product placement became the norm."

Wrong way round

[jmpeax (936370)]

Product placement is, at best, a necessary evil to fund content that is expensive to produce. Normally, product placement is worth the effort because the content is very popular - for example, the promotion of brands like Apple and Cisco in 24 [f5.com].

The significant point, however, is that the show comes first. By reversing the creative process and using product promotion as a starting point, not only is the quality of content likely to suffer, but the effectiveness of the advertising along with it.

What's worse, it seems these plans will give the brands involved an unprecedented level of influence over the content. From TFA:

[It will be] a unique way of giving brands a seat at the table with writers and producers in developing episodic programming that ties directly to brand needs

Re:Wrong way round

[Kamokazi (1080091)]

So what you're saying is, it's a win-win for the TV networks....they can continue to not exert any creative effort and produce crappy shows no one likes, and make money on it like it was moderately successful.

And I don't mind product placement in shows as long as it's subtle. The giant-sized HP logos on laptops always makes me chuckle, but ruins the immersiveness of the show (seriously, they're bigger than the emblem on the 9040 monster printers we use).

Re:

[peragrin (659227)]

that's just it unpopular shows don't get watched.

it becomes lose lose, as they lose both ad revenue, and viewers.

Re:Wrong way round

[by Anonymous Coward]

I don't mind product placement in shows as long as it's subtle. The giant-sized HP logos on laptops always makes me chuckle, but ruins the immersiveness of the show (seriously, they're bigger than the emblem on the 9040 monster printers we use).

When I saw the summary, my first thought was how advertising was done when TV first came out. One sponsor would pay for the whole show, and you would get "The Coca-Cola Variety Hour", or something like that. There would be regular interruptions to hawk the product of that particular company, or if it was a contest, the winners would get the advertiser's featured products. As things got more expensive, more sponsors shared the expense, and today you have the modern commercial. Radio was like this as well. Obviously, at that time, advertisers had a lot of power over content (to ensure proper placement).

Things almost look like they're coming full circle.

Fibber Mcgee and Molly

[A nonymous Coward (7548)]

I've been listening to old radio shows on Sirius satellite when I take long drives, and I have come to look forward to the Johnson Wax spot on the Fibber McGee and Molly show. They usually did a pretty good of working it in more or less naturally; for instance, when getting a spare room ready for a boarder, the sponsor's guy comes for a visit and marvels at how good the floor looks because of its Johnson Wax coat. Part of the fun of it is them not pretending it's not a sponsor's spot. Usually Fibber will make some comment to the audience about cover your ears, once he gets going he doesn't know how to stop, and there's always some good natured ribbing. In fact, I end up looking forward to them. I imagine it was much the same for the listeners back in the day.

If sponsors could do their promos like that old show, it wouldn't be half bad. But most of the others were not nearly so slick.

Re:Fibber Mcgee and Molly

[jollyreaper (513215)]

If sponsors could do their promos like that old show, it wouldn't be half bad. But most of the others were not nearly so slick.

Guy 1: Wow, that is one ugly turd.

Guy 2: You said it. But we need to get it polished up right proper if we're to meet the deadline.

Guy 1: You know what this calls for.

Guy 2: Sadly, yes. Hey, Bob!

MS Bob: Did somebody call?

Guy 1: Yeah, we've got a turd that needs polishing.

MS Bob: No problem! Vista is a cutting edge operating system for your cutting edge lifestyle--

Guy 2: No, wrong turd, Bob.

Guy 1: We need to work your magic on this.

MS Bob: Gee, I don't know if I can do that. This polish is only licensed for Microsoft products. I might get in trouble.

Guy 1: Don't worry, I cleared it with tech support. They say it's totally cool if we do this.

MS Bob: But only just got a new chair in my office, I don't want to lose it.

Guy 2: What's this I see in front of me? Am I looking at a mangina? Gonna cringe and cry at the thought of a little harsh language?

MS Bob: Ok, fine, I'll do it! Now what do you want me to polish?

Guy 1: Got it right here, Operation Enduring Justice.

MS Bob: But this is an invasion plan! It says Iraq here but you crossed out the 'q' and wrote in an 'n'.

Guy 1: Told you we needed some help.

MS Bob: I think I need more polish.

Re:

[CSMatt (1175471)]

They can get away with that because Sirius is primarily funded by subscriptions, not advertising.

Re:

[skuzzlebutt (177224)]

My first thought was "30 Rock"...that's basically a shill for NBC and SNL, but IMHO a very decent sit-com. It's not just self-depracating, but they do actually mention GEs other ventures on the show, if only in jest; but that's the point, right? NBC can make fun of GE all they want as long as you remember that they make sitcoms AND toaster ovens. And lightbulbs. And jet engines. And financial services.

They sure have a lot of shit to sell.

Re:Wrong way round

[Baricom (763970)]

Interestingly, it's more full circle than you might initially realize. The primary reason that spot advertising became popular was not the expense of television shows, but the desire for the television networks to break the control of advertisers on network programming. Spot advertising was first introduced on NBC by president Pat Weaver. Prior to that, shows were typically produced by the advertiser, not the network.

Re:

[hardburn (141468)]

Maybe not, though I don't think the truth is necessarily any more favorable to the "average Joe". People forgot that there before TV, people would read, have hobbies, take a walk, have a picnic, etc. Now people put on American Idol and say how much they hate that show. When asked why they still watch it, they respond that there's nothing else on.

Re:Wrong way round

[Goldberg's Pants (139800)]

Isn't this largely what TV was back in the 50's? "The Colgate Comedy Hour" etc... It's just TV going full circle and back to the pitiful whores they were in the first place.

Primetime infomercials basically.

Re:Wrong way round

[Yez70 (924200)]

Not really. Back then they had a show and did live commercials for the toothpaste or whatnot. Now the show will be abut toothpaste, as a topic.

Re:Wrong way round

[mcrbids (148650)]

Isn't this largely what TV was back in the 50's? "The Colgate Comedy Hour" etc... It's just TV going full circle and back to the pitiful whores they were in the first place.

You whiner.

I just don't get the NEGATIVE ATTITUDE that comes from this. I mean, 24x7, you're getting shows that cost a TON OF MONEY to create for FREE. How about "gee, thanks!"??? You could go and support local community theater, but we all know that's something you go to because you think community theater is a "good idea", or because you know somebody in it, not because you'd actually want to go see it every night after dinner.

Don't like the show? Go do something else! Learn to play the guitar! Take your bored dog for a walk! Go have sex with your partner! Or, go find a partner to have sex with! Read a book! Study differential calculus! Learn to cook Mahi-Mahi Flambe.

But, you don't want to do that, and you don't like advertising? Well, you could PAY FOR THE SHOW. You know, buy season DVDs and only watch those. Don't bother with the advertising supported television! No commercials! Somewhere along the line, somebody's got to pay the bill.

The truth is, this is a natural response to the rise of the DVR. I've been wondering how long it would be before this would happen - I haven't watched a standard TV commercial in a long, long time. Any shows that count me as an advertising "eyeball" are lying to their advertisers. And while I appreciate the free ride in the short term, the long term is that this situation is simply unsustainable, as the cost of DVRs drop and adoption continues to climb.

Easy response

[EmbeddedJanitor (597831)]

Click!

Re:Easy response

[maxwell demon (590494)]

You are trying to switch off a Microsoft sponsored show. Cancel or Allow?

With one minor change

[dreamchaser (49529)]

Except that 'Allow' will be greyed out.

Re:Wrong way round

[Original Replica (908688)]

What's worse, it seems these plans will give the brands involved an unprecedented level of influence over the content. From TFA: [It will be] a unique way of giving brands a seat at the table with writers and producers in developing episodic programming that ties directly to brand needs

I'm not sure how that is so different from magazines with "product reviews" that are directly funded by the producers of the products they are "reviewing". As long as they don't marketing start producing the Evening News or writing content taught in schoolrooms, it won't be any worse than most of the mass market tripe that passes for entertainment. I find it far more disturbing when marketing is presented as a factual news program than when presented as a key part of a fictional storyline.

Re:

[dpilot (134227)]

Years/decades ago I read a science fiction story set in a time when this ad-as-show trend had played to its logical conclusion. In this world, all music was commercial jingles, and musicians would play the popular "coms" for their live shows. The protagonist of the story was a musician who began creating music for its own sake. Queue the obvious, add a dash of O'Henry, bake until done.

Title, author forgotten.

Re:

[NuclearError (1256172)]

Would the show suffer so much if it was sponsored by Victoria's Secret, Smirnoff, and Trojan?

The Program Lifecycle

[NetSettler (460623)]

I can understand how shows like Night Court (in which Harry Anderson, playing Judge Harry Stone, always had a Macintosh in his office [macosg.com]) could feature a product without having it get in the way of a show. And certainly there are car companies that have had cars featured on shows or in movies, such as James Bond [carblog.co.za]. But those were never central to the plot, so they didn't manage to drag things down like the proposed sponsor-centric content promises to. Even the show-within-a-show of The Truman Show [imdb.com] didn't seem to have the nasty property they're talking about, since the plot focused on the character... the ads were just incidental ways to add revenue, kind of like hyperlinked ads in and around web articles or the hypertext-captioning of the Interstellar News Network on Babylon 5 [imdb.com].

The significant point, however, is that the show comes first. By reversing the creative process and using product promotion as a starting point, not only is the quality of content likely to suffer, but the effectiveness of the advertising along with it.

Your putting it this way made me realize--it's not just the creation but the ongoing generation of new episodes, not to please a fan-base but to exploit a fan-base. Moreover, as the product evolves, the show has to evolve to match... not just as the starting point of the series but for each episode. This means they can't take it where the show wants to go, they have to take it where the product wants to go, and that's going to reach a divergence. It also means that if the product is upgraded or sold or someone wants a "fresh angle", the show is going to be canceled on a dime without any regard for what the public wants. Because shows are about "what viewers want" and ads are about "what we want viewers to want".

This divergence of purpose bodes ill.

I used to write regular parodies [anotherwayout.com] of The Young and the Restless (out of irritation for where the writers were taking the show). In the process, I found that writing for characters that viewers understand is something where you can't "lie" in the writing. If you do, you lose the viewers. I'd start to write something trying to make it go a certain way and the voice of the characters would tell me "No, you have to go another direction. That direction is not true to my character." And it worked best to just roll with it and see where the characters would naturally take me. I came to a belief that what makes good writing is when the characters are alive like that in your mind, and the characters are writing a "true" story--not in the sense of non-fiction, but in the sense of following how life would really go. Sort of like method acting [wikipedia.org] but for writing... (Ah, I see. There are no new ideas in the world. Google tells me that the term method writing [dickbentley.com] I just made up is an already elaborated theory. But yes, like that. Count me an instant believer that there is merit in this line of thinking.) Anyway, my point is that the kind of cynical "we can make it go where it needs to go" writing is quite suspect...

So Easy!

[eldavojohn (898314)]

Make TV shows from ads?! That's so easy a caveman [wikipedia.org] could do it!

Re:

[jd (1658)]

Or a sailor, or a bunch of turtles. Commercials and infomercials disguised as regular TV programs are old-hat, but not necessarily on the scale being talked about, and certainly not by the IT industry. However, I guess it was inevitable. With the exception of publicly-funded TV stations, funding - and therefore control - has been from advertising. Costs are going up but the time available for regular adverts is constrained by the need for regular programming. The obvious solution is to make adverts that are

50's here we come...

[vanyel (28049)]

Like they say, nothing new under the sun...

Re:50's here we come...

[TheWanderingHermit (513872)]

Thanks for that point. People seem to forget that product placement used to be the norm. It was also done in many cases in radio shows. Listen to the old Jack Benny show (you can find episodes at the Internet archive: http://www.archive.org/details/oldtimeradio [archive.org]). They mentioned the sponsor quite often in shows and even joked about it. I can't remember the show, but in early TV there was a detective who would often stop in a tobacco shop during the show and talk about his favorite brand of cigar or cigarette with the people in the shop. It was an ad, but done as product placement. TVLand did a service a while back by showing an original (yet updated) version of the original "I Love Lucy" pilot and during such shows the stars would often do the ads themselves or the ads were integrated into the show.

It's not new and it's tiring to see all these people that think it is.

Re:50's here we come...

[merreborn (853723)]

It's not new and it's tiring to see all these people that think it is.

Are you suffering from frequent fatigue? You may be a victim of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. Have you tried new Sleepitrol? Sleepitrol: from the makers of Spleenhance. 4 out of 9 doctors agree, it probably won't kill you!

Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom.

[khasim (1285)]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Kingdom [wikipedia.org]

You don't even need to go back to the 50's. And it was a GREAT show.

Wow..

[rastoboy29 (807168)]

Another great reason to continue avoiding network tv.

Re:Wow..

[azuredrake (1069906)]

I need a mod -1: Bad Font. :(

Who didn't see this coming?

[flanksteak (69032)]

I guess it was only a matter of time for something like this to come along after product placement became the norm.

And after the DVR makes commercial-skipping so much easier. The business model must evolve. Unknown if it will survive. And while I know everyone will say that this will turn most viewers off, the truth is if it's entertaining people will watch.

I love this quote:

The collaboration ... offers a unique way of giving brands a seat at the table with writers and producers in developing episodic programming that ties directly to brand needs.

BSOD jokes aside, I'm trying to figure out how you can communicate helpful technical product information in a science fiction drama show. Is it going to be like the time Jeff Goldblum used Mac OS 9 to take down the alien computer systems? Or is Rosario Dawson going to chase aliens and time travel with a Zune and an MSDN subscription? It's one thing to have a Coke can sitting in plain view, it's another to show how the protagonists succeed using shrinkwrapped software.

Re:Who didn't see this coming?

[DarkOx (621550)]

No Scifi makes perfect sense, only in scifi could the protagonist succeed using Microsoft and Cisco products.

piracy

[timmarhy (659436)]

So when i pirate this quality content, are they going to try sue me? after all marketing is the entire point of this.

Re:

[NotQuiteReal (608241)]

are they going to try sue me?

Of course they can, even content-less commercials are copyrighted.

However, if this model becomes popular, you can just side-step the networks and distribute direct.

A few years back there was a BMW series of movie shorts that were unabashedly product placement pieces, but they were quite enjoyable.

In fact, I just found them again [bmwusa.com]

Of course, fast cars are inherently entertaining to many folks. I can hardly wait for the next episode of Kleenex Man!

sooo.....

[hurfy (735314)]

So that means Knight Rider was picked up as a series?

Nothing new here.

[Steauengeglase (512315)]

This was the norm on old radio programs.

Jack Benny centered who knows how many of his jokes on Jello. In the Whistler, people were always pulling into Signal gas stations. Sometimes going miles to fine one of those "fine signal gas stations". Fibber McGee & Molly even made the Johnson Wax pitchman the crux of their plots.

With lower costs in producing this kind of stuff it makes perfect sense. Everything old is new again.

We've come full circle.

[Seor Jojoba (519752)]

They aren't really trying anything new so much as going back to the old ways of advertising. Ever heard the Jack Benny Program (also called "the Lucky Strike Program", "the Chevrolet Show", and other sponsor-reflecting names)? The show would seamlessly include little bits where the entertainers themselves sell you on the benefits of their sponsor's products. And the sponsors were definitely "at the table" affecting content in the shows.

I can't blame the networks. They have to get the money from somewhere.

Coming soon to Fox...

[zamboni1138 (308944)]

Just wait, the "Mattel and Mars Bar Quick Energy Chocobot Hour" can not be far off. Check your local listings.

It might actually be an improvement over current Fox shows.

Oh My God

[FranTaylor (164577)]

Between that thing they called a debate and this, I'm beginning to feel like I am living on the set of the movie 'Network'.

Sad thing is...

[Secret Rabbit (914973)]

... that I don't think that people will notice. I mean, with the crap that's on today people are used to sub-standard programming. And that's given story centric shows. So, if you're masochistic, try imagining the raging pieces of crap that are product centric.

I Look Forward To This

[rsmith-mac (639075)]

Bring on the The Mattel and Mars Bar Quick Energy Chocobot Hour [wikipedia.org]! I know that what I really want in TV is amazing advertising and a by-the-numbers plot, not cruddy shows where the writers are unconstrained by advertisers and free to write based on the artistic merit of their ideas.

Now if they'd just replace the news (it's depressing and boooring) with this kind of quality programming, TV may be worth watching again.

If done well, they can work.

[DrEldarion (114072)]

The problem is, they have to be done REALLY well. Some great examples of advertisements in programming adding to show quality rather than detracting from it can be found in 30 Rock and The Colbert Report.

Examples against it are, well, most everything else.

Obligatory Futurama

[CSMatt (1175471)]

"Tonight the world watches in horror as an Earthling is eaten alive on network television. This grim scene of unimaginable carnage is brought to you by Fishy Joe's. Try our new extreme walrus juice. 100% Fresh-Squeezed Walrus. Ride the walrus!"

Soap Operas

[Xaroth (67516)]

You know, they're called "Soap Operas" for a reason. It's because the early dramas were funded primarily by detergent manufacturers in some of the earliest - and most effective - product placement programs.

This is a very, very old idea that seems to make the rounds every so often. No doubt, this will get tiresome after a couple decades, and the next generation will have this "radical" new idea to encapsulate the advertisements in separate spots rather than integrating them into the programs, and everyone will scoff at what a ludicrous suggestion that is. I mean, won't people just turn off the radio? Er, TV? Er, webpage?

Consider the Disney Model

[hanshotfirst (851936)]

(Have young kids, can't help but watch sometimes) Disney Channel - few, if any, traditional ads, but the whole bloody channel is an ad for itself and its Disney products - Hanna Montana, Kim Possible, High School Musical out the WAZOO. I can't think of a single commercial for something that is not a reciprocal ad for something on the channel itself. While it seems like show A sponsors show B sponsors show A (how could either make money if that were all), what ends up happening is each show's brand is built - and then they make a bazillion dollars on clothing, toys, posters, and concert tickets. While I'm not that impressed with the production value much of the time, the marketing approach's success is hard to deny.

Everything old is new again

[JSBiff (87824)]

Granted, the networks and advertisers are kind of taking this to a whole new level, but this isn't such a new idea.

Ever listen to old time radio? I often find myself driving home from work in the evening at a time when my local NPR station plays an hour of old radio shows. Instead of cutting from the show to commercials, they often had commercials built in as part of the broadcast of the show. Burns & Allen, Bob Hope, Jack Benny, etc all often had their skits transition directly into an announcement fro

Re:wait...

[Deathlizard (115856)]

If its The Microsoft Matrix" [google.com] I'd watch it.

Re:

[jd (1658)]

That's why a lot of "purist" sci-fi fans prefer to use the more generic label of SF, as that includes "Science Fantasy", which most of the shows you mentioned could reasonably be listed as, and "Speculative Fiction".

Science Fiction is usually reserved for programs or stories that are "close to" the known laws (but can violate one or two for dramatic purposes). Star Wars' "force" could be considered a single violation, their hyperspace the second, so that's still within what could be classically called Sci

Re:

[Digi-John (692918)]

Us Slashdot readers are far more intelligent, parking ourselves in front of a WoW screen with fly agape, saying "Thank you, Blizzard, may I have another month of grinding? Here's your cash".

Re:

[AlHunt (982887)]

If I had mod points today, you'd be insightful or funny. I'll have to settle for reminding the group of Mr. Data'somment in ST:TNG episode 126 (The Neutral Zone) that television died as an entertainment medium early in the 20th century.

Scifi has a long history of correctly predicting the future.

Re:

[Doc Ruby (173196)]

Do you mean "early in the 21st Century"? Because even on Star Trek TNG, incorrectly predicting the past != correctly predicting the future. Even in the TV Show at the Edge of Being Entertaining.

Re:

[maxwell demon (590494)]

Well, I've found a show where there's absolute no advertising whatsoever, not even hidden. It's obviously very old, from the time when there was no sound, and no colors. Indeed, it's so old that even white was not yet discovered; the screen is just black. That show seems to be sent 24 hours a day without a single advertising break, and no product placement either. It's not easy to find, because they didn't put it on those numbered buttons you usually use to select your channel, but they put it on a separate