In a message dated 12/17/2010 11:32:22 A.M. Central Standard Time, wbmutbb-requ...@wbmutbb.com writes:
I think the problem with showing brand names on TV is self-explanatory.? Even on Public Television Stations the names of products weren't shown - apparently the people who sponsored the programs didn't like the idea of showing another firm's brand name unless they were paid advertisements.? That's close, but I'm not sure that's totally it. Sure, Post executives probably didn't want to see a box of Cap'n Crunch on the Taylor breakfast table, but I think the issue runs deeper than that. I think it's more of a question of plugola. Some advertisers often slipped money or merchandise under the table to reward someone for giving their product a free plug. It was really bad in the 1950s with radio DJs but it even ran rampant on the set of "Late Show With David Letterman" in the 1980s, with Dave giving the network headaches by boasting on the air whenever a firm gave out freebies (like Eskimo Pie for instance). So it wasn't a sponsor issue as much as it was a legal issue as well as ethical. And if you look now, prominent logo placements that are paid for are now disclosed in the closing credits (like "The Office," for instance). In fact I suspect the Ford reference in the closing credits of TAGS was itself a product placement disclosure requirement. Dixon _______________________________________________ WBMUTBB mailing list WBMUTBB@wbmutbb.com http://www.mayberry.com/tagsrwc/wbmutbb/
