Saturday, February 28, 2009

Ads Now in Soap Opera Scripts; Products Plugged on Fox News

The New York Times - Earlier this month, the ABC soap opera “One Life to Live” featured a scene in which Todd, the publisher of the local newspaper, and Tea, his lawyer, had a conversation about Todd’s legal problems, which ranged from being a murder suspect to being on trial for kidnapping.

Tea: I warmed up some soup for you. I don’t want you to go to the police station on an empty stomach.

(Already we are on new ground since characters in soap operas do not, as a rule, ever eat anything.)

Todd: What kind of soup is this?

Tea: It’s Campbell’s. It’s healthy, good for your heart.

Todd: (spooning away) Yeah, it’s good.

Before we go any further, let me just say that I understand soap operas are not high on your list of concerns, what with the economy flat-lining and all. However, the two things are somewhat related.

... Which I will explain after pointing out that I do not actually spend my afternoons watching “One Life to Live.” Do we have that clear? O.K., let’s move forward.

For some time now, characters in daytime dramas have been taking time from their normal activities, like having amnesia, to engage in animated discussions about the sponsors’ products. The ABC soap actors spent February talking about how Campbell’s soup and other assorted products are good for your heart. (And tasty, too!)

Lynn Leahey, the editorial director of Soap Opera Digest, pointed to an episode of “As the World Turns” in which Margo needed to get her hair fixed before a date with her husband (don’t ask) and reached for a bottle of Nice ’n Easy Root Touch-Up. “I feel like I took off 10 years in 10 minutes!” she exclaimed.

And here’s the thing. Viewers don’t complain. “Oh well... To keep the soaps on the air. To keep the actors paid,” wrote a philosophical e-mailer on a soap opera chat site.

Daytime dramas are swimming in choppy waters these days. Ratings are down. Shows are getting canceled. “They’re struggling to find a business model that works,” said Leahey, in a remark I have heard a time or two lately in other contexts.

So, the viewers acquiesce. In fact, for all the complaining about car bailouts and greedy bankers, people have become extremely tolerant of irritating behavior on the part of struggling corporations. Lines we never even bothered to think of as lines are being crossed. Last summer in Las Vegas, the anchors on the local Fox station started delivering the news with two prominently placed cups of McDonald’s iced coffee in front of them. A spokesperson called it a “nontraditional revenue source.” It’s only a matter of time before TV reporters conclude interviews with disaster victims by asking if they wouldn’t like a refreshing glass of V-8.http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/28/opinion/28collins.html

1 comment:

Eagle in NYC said...

Boy, do I feel like an idiot. I actually believed your headline, that "Fox News" (with BOTH words featuring initial CAPS) used product placement. (“Plugged product”.) Enough to read your piece, and when I couldn’t find the promised report there (only something about a Las Vegas Fox affiliate at the end of your piece), I actually went and read the original NY Times article that your blurb was linked to. And, lo and behold, that story did not relate ANYTHING to "Fox News" either, but rather something about a local Fox affiliate in Las Vegas. So, no "Fox News" news in your blurb. No "Fox News" news in the linked NY Times article. Just something in that linked article about a local Fox affiliate - KVVU in Las Vegas – which is owned by Meredith, which in turn owns magazines, book publishing, as well as CBS, NBC, MY Network, and Fox affiliates.

Now, your profile says that you work for the “Fox News Channel”, and you write a blog that purports to comment on the “business” of “journalism”, so I must confess to incredulity that you would purposefully slander your own employer. You headline an allegation of impropriety against “Fox News”, when the actual story is no such thing.

Again, the Fox Broadcasting Company and the Fox News Channel are different companies, and the local Fox affiliates themselves are owned by different companies than even the Fox Broadcasting Company.

I mean, this seems rather necessary knowledge for someone with the ostensible hobby of commenting on the “business” of “journalism”. No?

Especially someone who claims to work for the very network, Fox News Channel, he slandered. Unless, of course, you no longer work for them because of your idiotic calls for the nationalization of the airline and oil industries?

Heck, KVVU's web site is even maintained in association with CNN. Not “Fox News”.

Damn, I feel stupid for believing your headline.

But then again, imagine how stupid YOU must feel?

Videos

Watch videos at Vodpod and more of my videos

Search This Blog

Loading...

Blog Archive

WSJ.com Video

WSJ.com: What's News US

NYT > Business

CNBC Top News and Analysis

BusinessJournalism.org