Gotcha: The captcha meets advertising

You never know where advertising or product placement will rear its ugly head these days. Sometimes It’s benign and other times it’s slap you in the face with a handful of linguini obvious. Today, I’ve got a linguini story.

I hate captchas, but I hate spam more. So, I begrudgingly put the squiggly letters and numbers into the box when I’m asked to do so. Imagine my surprise when Mapquest used the captcha to advertise Verizon FiOS (see below).

It’s one thing to make me see an ad for FiOS, but it’s totally another thing to make me have a prolonged relationship with the ad. As a consumer, I see the advertiser name, I commit it to memory, and then I type it. That’s three times the product infiltrates my mind.  Sure, it’s a little over the top. However, I think it’s pretty brilliant.

I’m frequently the first to complain when advertising or product placement goes too far. But, utilizing the captcha is too darn clever for me to ignore. As users, we’d have to jump through the captcha hurdle anyway. So, if Mapquest can find a way to monetize it, more power to ‘em!

What do you think? Are you more inclined to remember a product if you’re forced to interact with it in this way?

Is Suri Cruise Baskin-Robbins' new poster child?

While I was standing in line at CVS, I happened to see this issue of Star in the magazine rack.

The cover features Katie Holmes with her daughter Suri. Now, I didn't intentionally look at it. It was more of a glance as my eyes were headed to the candy bars, but what I couldn't help being blindsided by was the Baskin-Robbins cup.

Notice how the logo is front and center? See how Suri's little fingers do nothing to obscure the big "BR" logo? Now, maybe I'm a skeptic, but within two seconds I was wondering if this was flat out product placement.

Sure, paparazzi do their fair share of photo taking, but in this day and age celebrities have been known to submit their own photos to magazines. As such, I couldn't help but to question whether the Cruise-Holmes family had sold the image to Star. And, if Baskin-Robbins had paid Mrs. Tom Cruise to plant the cup, perfectly mind you, in lil' Suri's clutches.

Ok, I can accept the fact that this is starting to sound a little like a conspiracy theory (and I won't even talk about how Suri's top is pink and matches the Baskin-Robbins' color palate). However, don't underestimate the power of Corporate America, people. Product placement is an art. The goal of this multi-million dollar industry is to subtly make you want something you probably don't need.

Surely, I'm not the only one who thinks that the Baskin-Robbins cup is featured just a little too prominently and a little too perfectly. Or, am I?

Let me hear it, folks! Am I crazy? Or crazy smart? I'll defer to the majority on this one.*

* I can be swayed one way or the other on this topic with a scoop of Baskin-Robbins Cotton Candy ice cream. No, I wasn't paid to say that. But, I suddenly have a craving for it. Weird.

Product placement meets Bridezilla

This weekend, my girlfriends and I enjoyed a good, old-fashioned night of chick flicks. One of the films on the playbill was Bride Wars, starring Kate Hudson and Anne Hathaway. The premise is two best friends get married on the same day and battle each other for guests, entertainment, and all the other wedding necessities (bear with me, gentleman, the girl talk is almost over). Kate's character spends an entire scene mooning over a Vera Wang dress and there is much talk about how crucial the gown is to ensure the wedding is perfect. Enter product placement.

Now, it's not uncommon in the least to have a product receive such obvious attention in a film. What is unusual, however, was the Vera Wang bonus feature on the DVD.

"The Perfect White Dress" selection is a seven-minute piece on the history and prestige of the Vera Wang empire. We learn how Vera started out creating wedding gowns, then went on to designer couture for celebrities, and has now added housewares to her inventory. It doesn't have a 1-800 number at the bottom of the screen, but aside from that it is a infomercial through and through.

I watch a lot of films on DVD and this is the first time I've seen a product from a movie get its own bonus feature. Movie studios pay millions of dollars to get a film onto the silver screen, and having product placement seep over onto the DVD extras is a really smart way to secure additional monies. The advertiser gets to build on the exposure already given in the movie, and the consumer can choose whether or not to consume this extra bit of advertising. Win-win, right?

Although I'm not a fan of product placement, I really like this new approach. I suspect this is just the beginning of a shift in how products are shared with audiences. Oh, and by the way, I used a Kensington keyboard to write this post. If you like how my words look, you can learn more about Kensington products HERE (sorry, I couldn't resist!).

Child labor comes to social media

I recently read an article in a publication from England about kids being used to hock product. Children as young as seven years old are being recruited to talk about Sprite, Barbie-themed MP3 players, Nintendo, snack foods, and specific musical artists on their Facebook pages, on message boards, and in instant messages. Apparently, marketing firms coach these "mini marketeers" on how to insert products into everyday conversations without sounding rehearsed. For their time, the kids earn about $37 U.S. dollars a week.

I don't know about you, but this just seems wrong on all kinds of levels. Yes, I completely get that marketing professionals need to constantly find new ways to reach their audiences, but using kids to pimp string cheese and Lady Gaga records? There has got to be a better way...

Product placement reaches new lows

As the new TV season approaches, I can't help but to wonder how many products will be "integrated" into my programs this fall. It used to be that product placement was fairly subtle. A box of Cheerios in the background as a mom prepared breakfast on a sitcom. A guy sitting on the couch holding a bag of Doritos before a killer snuck in the window during a crime drama. But, last season the product placement went up about eight notches on a scale of one to ten.

Off the top of my head, I can remember a few priceless moments where products should have received "guest star" credit.

1) On Desperate Housewives, Bree leads us on a four-minute tour of her new Lexus. She gushes about the features ad nauseum, even leaning in to demonstrate them for her neighbors. The scene ends, of course, with a tight shot of the Lexus logo.

2) On 90210, Annie and Dixon go on a road trip and have to bring Dr. Pepper because it's "not a road trip" without it. Many lingering close-ups on the can, the can in the cooler, the can in their hands, the can with a shirt on that says "I went to Arizona and all I got was this lousy t-shirt" (okay, I jest about that last part).

3) On Smallville, Chloe goes out of her way to mention WebMD.com in a conversation. In the same episode, Jimmy utters a forced reference to CareerBuilder.com. Yes, they added the ".com" to their conversations. C'mon, writers don't really write like that unless, of course, they are told to do so.

4) On 30 Rock, there was an actual plot line where Jack and Elisa are obsessed with the McFlurry that's served at McDonald's. They show them smacking on their ice cream treats several times during the show, with the grand finale landing them at a McDonalds. (Tina Fey denies this was outright product placement, but NBC did manage to land a McDonald's commercial for that particular McShow. Just a coincidence, I'm sure.)

As for production placement in the new TV season, who knows what's in store for us. I can't help but to fear that The Office will have a story line where it's bought out by a major office supply retailer and renamed "The Office" Depot. Hey, it could happen.