Trend: UK Product Placement Rules Defined by OfCom

There has been growing enthusiasm for product placement in British television programming. The debate reached its finale yesterday with Ofcom releasing a set of rules that will define how and where products can be placed within television programmes and also what types of products will be allowed.

The move towards product placement is unsurprising, it has been a staple in US advertising for many years and with the advent of on-demand television and programme recording the reach of traditional advert breaks have been questioned. The result has been the pursuit of in-programme advertising.

The rules stipulate that a logo must be shown before the start and end of each programme featuring product placement advertising, including in between advert breaks, although this logo will only take a small proportion of the screen in the corner. Interestingly Ofcom has also stated that there must be editorial justification for including any products in a programme, an innocuous term that may be open to some interpretation.

Product placement adverts will naturally have to adhere to the existing UK advertising rules meaning that no cigarettes, alcohol, gambling or medicinal products will be shown, neither will any foods that have high percentage of fat, salt or sugar.

The type of programming will also determine whether it will be possible to place a product. For example, Ofcom have stated that children’s, religious, current affairs and consumer advice shows will not be able to show any products, and understandably no BBC television programmes will show products in accordance with its charter.

Whether the adverts will be as blatant as Wayne’s World’s five minutes of on stop product placement is unlikely, hopefully, if the rules are followed the product placements should not affect the quality or integrity of the programming, instead providing another revenue stream for independent television in the UK.

The Idea of Launching a Social Network Group Page to Commence (Provoke) a Riot!

Facebook networking causes joy or sadness, depending upon the circumstances. It appears that it can also cause a concern and statement.

Considering the influence of the mass media as a mobilising force of dissidence, loosening the Soviet’s grip on the monopoly of media power during the final years of the USSR (Kotz and Weir, 1997:60-61), we can see that technology is an immensely important facilitator of popular unrest in the modern era. Certainly, there should be no doubts as to the intrinsic value of new media, particularly digital media, to the success of the protests unfolding in the Middle East at the present time. In Libya, for instance, social networking and news websites including Facebook and al-Jazeera Arabic have been blocked as the state seeks to re-stamp its authority upon a dissenting people (BBC Website; first accessed 19.02.11).

These websites, as well as images and videos captured on mobile telephones, are immensely important means of perpetuating civil unrest in the contemporary era. Not only do these new media platforms connect dissenters, they act as verifiable proof of human rights atrocities in states where foreign journalists and independent watchdogs are routinely banned. This, in turn, only serves to increase the sense of resentment at a grass roots level, further fuelling the schism between the state and the people. As a result, we can see that, the masses can only begin to feel a sense of injustice at the hypocrisy of political leaders when they are made aware that they are being lied to in the first place. It is consequently essential to highlight the significance of the mass media as a facilitator of change at a political level. This is especially true of new media solutions where it is increasingly clear that the “perception of the world and access to it have been transformed.” (Street, 2010:164)