I am not sure how many of you caught Ben Silverman on Charlie Rose last night but it was quite an interesting interview (http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/9554#frame_top) and got me thinking about the fate of advertising in TV. As they sat and discussed the growing use of time-shifting technology the move of companies wanting to do advertising will move to product placement. That raised a few questions for me that I would love to get people's thoughts on:
1) According to a lot of stuff I have been reading, product placement has not brought the success companies thought (and advertising companies pitched) it would. If this is going to be the de-facto standard what needs to change to make it successful? Is there any meaningful way to measure the success of this type of advertising?
2) Putting my TV executives hat on, I always thought a major way to generate follow up revenue on the success of a series was to eventually license it to someone else on a different network. If this is the case, will NBC want to buy a show from TNT stuffed with product placement ads from GM if their advertisers are Toyota? I am assuming there will be a fine line between what people (read: viewers) are willing to accept vs. an infomercial-esque TV series (Vincent D'Onofrio using a Dell laptop vs. him eating a sandwich from Jimmy's Deli and drinking a Coke while interrogating a suspect).
3) If product placement advertising isn't the answer to save TV, then what is? My quick thoughts on this is that product placement will only work in a subtle fashion and will demand consistency, not only from a particular series but on a given network. Haven't done the market research but I am willing to bet that people have a strong tendency to cling to a network so if every show on ABC uses Dell laptops people will likely think of buying from Dell next time. I would love to see the statistics of the recent success of Taittinger champagne, as Bravo has clearly 'placed' it in nearly every show on the network. I also strongly believe the corresponding web portals will move away from being bolt-on aspects and become a critical component right from the start. Executives will have to think carefully about how best to use these tools as they will play a huge role and will become a major selling point for advertisers.
Would love to hear what other people are thinking about this especially when companies are moving towards using only proven advertising models and/or have short attention span for experimentation.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Saturday, January 5, 2008
A Rough Discussion of Candidacy
Throughout this election I continue to hear candidates talk about change, but I am unsure if they fully understand what it means to transform. As history shows, many presidential candidates have talked about change in Washington and how the “machine” is broken. Many have presented quixotic platitudes about how their plan and their methods will not only fix that which is broken, but more, continue to keep the US the most powerful nation in the world. My inherent problem is that everyone speaks about the ends, but no one talks about the means to get there. Not only will our next President need to have a thoughtful and comprehensive course of action, but he must also be able to bring people from both sides of the aisle together. Will the next President be able to not only talk about change but have the necessary skills and experience, both in life and political prowess, to enact change? Will the next President have the necessary strength to stand his or her ground even if it isn’t possible to make the changes as quickly as the American people want it? Focusing on results rather than thoughtful planning can lead to extreme disappointment. When the end never comes to fruition, people lose hope in their political figures and their ability to effect change. The problem is, that a result should never have been asserted, only research and plans of action should be set forth.
In the past eight years we have had an administration destroy everything we hold sacred as American citizens, a form of progress that harmed our democracy. The current administration understood the system, knew how to effect change within it, and sadly, also knew how to work around it. My hope is that the next administration will have the same skills but use them in a positive way; first undoing all that was done as well as propelling this nation forward.
The American people trust that a candidate will bring every promise to fruition. The common misconception is that these promises will automatically be brought to pass, when in actuality candidates only assert goals for the future. They sign checks that only hard work and cooperation can cash. Unfortunately people are not patient or active enough to understand what it takes to even move the machine, let alone change it. I am afraid for my generation and generations that follow that there are not enough people, especially the young people, examining the real issues this country faces. I fear that many people see the issues solely through the eyes of the candidates and media and have not examined the issues for themselves, which in my opinion taints any final conclusions.
Before people embrace candidates that speak about change, voters must understand the issues they plan to “change” from multiple perspectives and only then determine which candidate has the best solution, best plan of action and the skills to produce results. Candidates must have the right answers but more importantly, must ask the right questions. Sometimes, a politicians view of the country and of the issues that our nation faces, are overly simplistic. In order to create a catchy sound bite and inevitably produce a result, they choose to neglect the dimensionality of the issues. Changing the system requires thoughtful progression and deliberate actions. We should not only expect imagination and planning from our elected officials, but we, as the public, must also be aware of the issues and the questions that should be asked. If more people do this I am confident we as a nation will continue to hold our place among the greatest superpowers in the world since we will then have a more holistic approach to the problems we face, and will have representation that can effect those goals.
We are a nation of multi-taskers. We reward productivity rather than independent thinking and imaginative problem solving. To force our candidates to be result oriented rather than geared toward purposeful planning, I believe, would be a grave disservice to our nation. Just as we should live our lives more through the means than the ends, so should our representatives. Let us take back the humanity and dignity that has been stripped from our collective national consciousness. Let us hold our politicians to a higher standard, and allow them the freedoms that we hope for ourselves.
In the past eight years we have had an administration destroy everything we hold sacred as American citizens, a form of progress that harmed our democracy. The current administration understood the system, knew how to effect change within it, and sadly, also knew how to work around it. My hope is that the next administration will have the same skills but use them in a positive way; first undoing all that was done as well as propelling this nation forward.
The American people trust that a candidate will bring every promise to fruition. The common misconception is that these promises will automatically be brought to pass, when in actuality candidates only assert goals for the future. They sign checks that only hard work and cooperation can cash. Unfortunately people are not patient or active enough to understand what it takes to even move the machine, let alone change it. I am afraid for my generation and generations that follow that there are not enough people, especially the young people, examining the real issues this country faces. I fear that many people see the issues solely through the eyes of the candidates and media and have not examined the issues for themselves, which in my opinion taints any final conclusions.
Before people embrace candidates that speak about change, voters must understand the issues they plan to “change” from multiple perspectives and only then determine which candidate has the best solution, best plan of action and the skills to produce results. Candidates must have the right answers but more importantly, must ask the right questions. Sometimes, a politicians view of the country and of the issues that our nation faces, are overly simplistic. In order to create a catchy sound bite and inevitably produce a result, they choose to neglect the dimensionality of the issues. Changing the system requires thoughtful progression and deliberate actions. We should not only expect imagination and planning from our elected officials, but we, as the public, must also be aware of the issues and the questions that should be asked. If more people do this I am confident we as a nation will continue to hold our place among the greatest superpowers in the world since we will then have a more holistic approach to the problems we face, and will have representation that can effect those goals.
We are a nation of multi-taskers. We reward productivity rather than independent thinking and imaginative problem solving. To force our candidates to be result oriented rather than geared toward purposeful planning, I believe, would be a grave disservice to our nation. Just as we should live our lives more through the means than the ends, so should our representatives. Let us take back the humanity and dignity that has been stripped from our collective national consciousness. Let us hold our politicians to a higher standard, and allow them the freedoms that we hope for ourselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)