One of the (many) irritating things about American Idol, as shown on UK television, is the prominent placement of what I assume are red Coca-Cola cups on the desk in front of each judge, which have the logos blurred out whenever they are on screen.
I assume that in the US version, the logos are not blurred – otherwise why would they put these prominent cups on the desk and have the logos turned towards the camera. Presumably the UK syndication isn’t in on the deal, so they don’t show the logo. I can kind of see the point.
But why is it that, in general, even the tiniest inoffensive logo on clothing etc is blurred or pixellated on reality TV shows. I’ve noticed it most often on American imports.
A small Nike logo, or whatever, is hardly major free advertising, and you’d think the time and effort spent blurring it out is more than it’s worth to leave it in.
I found this page where someone has come up with pre-pixellated clothing.
Reading some of the comments, it sounds as if TV stations are worried that they might need “clearance” to show a trademarked logo on screen. Really? I can’t imagine why that would be the case. If you put your logo on clothing, it’s going to be seen in public, right?
So what’s the reason? Is it simply “we won’t give anybody free advertising no matter what”, or is there a legal aspect?
Is there paid advertising on the show you are watching? Is any of it for a product in competition with Coke? That would be my first guess as to the reason for pixilation.
My guess would be No; I’m under the impression the television in England is paid for by taxes, not adverts. In which case, I don’t understand why they’d bother to blur it.
The ITC in the UK does not allow product placement in TV shows. Separate advertisements is OK, but Coke cups everywhere is not.
I remember the ITC used to show a 30 second commercial which mimiced an Australian soap opera with beer cans being placed everywhere, and followed by an announcement that the ITC was there for our worldly good and one should write to them if we see anything too offensive. I guess the rules are an attempt to maintain some sort of quality in TV shows, and whilst aimed at keeping excessive product placement out of dramas etc, the same rules would apply to American Idol.
google of ITC and product placement shows up these rules
Feel free to read 'em if you like, but rule 16 states…
No undue prominence may be given in any programme to a commercial product or service. In particular, any reference to such a product or service must be limited to what can clearly be justified by the editorial requirements of the programme itself. An important practical yardstick is that no impression be created of external commercial influence on the editorial process. In no circumstances may the manner of appearance of a product be the subject of negotiation or agreement with the supplier. Branded products should not, as a general rule, be referred to in audio by brand name, or shown in close-up or from an angle which displays the branding to best advantage, or for any significant length of time.
Anybody else feel this idea is counter-productive? Don’t know about you but nothing gets my attention more than when things are pixelated or blanked out.
Ever see Big Brother with the big white label over the can of pringles? Like what else in the UK comes in a can that size and shape? Wouldn’t have even noticed if it wasn’t blanked out but that big sticker made me think, mmmm, pringles
I agree it is probably counter productive, although in the case of BB, I am not sure if they do that because of OFCOM regulations (the gov reg body that the ITC is part of) or for more commercial reasons. The coke bottles on American Idol are clearly product placement and no doubt covered by the regs. The random snack food is not an issue, however on an unscripted program you have several problems
It may just get left in shot and thus land you in hot water as some random biddy with nothing to do gets pissed and wants to complain
Sticking a lable over it is an aide memori for the contestans not to say squat about the product in hand
It avoids any potential competitor gripes about unfair blahdeblah. These guys may also be thinking about buying advertising space and no doubt Fatarsefood Inc does not want any sign of advertising for Lardybutt Unlimited taco shaped salty products, and TVcrapCo does not want to hand a negotiating stick to Fatarse to get a small break on advertising cost, lest they threaten to pick up the phone to OfCOM and bitch about item 1.
The above is purely a WAG and should you be foolish enough to mistake it for informed opinion, please don’t. Mind you it does make me wonder if there is money to be made in offering service to bigarsefood inc to watch reality shite incessantly and bitch to the ITC on any slight sign of product placement by the competition. My biggest problem would be getting any form of independent contractor health and mental wellbeing insurance.
Hope you don’t mind, but I liked your disclaimer and now wish to use it as my own. We can negotiate royalties later…
I first noticed this being done while watching poker tournaments on TV. At the time I figured it was because poker was becoming quite popular and advertisers were approaching the top players to wear their logo’d items. Money was changing hands, but the sponsor of the Poker tournament wasn’t getting any of it, so they covered up the logos to prevent their poker tournaments from looking like Nascar with all the logos on everything.
There was a lawsuit about this in racing. Jockeys were showing up with logos on their pants, placed to be most visable during the race. Some of the tracks didn’t like this so they told them they couldn’t wear the logo’d pants. The jockeys sued and won. There are some restrictions though. The tracks can veto certain companies if they have a good reason.
The reason the tracks fought to stop the jockeys was because the jockeys were negotiating their own deals. The tracks wanted to be the ones to negotiate the deals so they could get the money. I figured this was why poker and some other places block out the logos. If they can’t be part of the deal, why let someone else make money off of the event they are putting on?
I saw another instance of this on American Idol recently. They blurred out the signs on the portapotties while filming outside one of the mass audition locations. Wouldn’t want millions of Americans to run out and rent the wrong brand of outhouse!
I was about to ask the same question about “House of Tiny Terrors”. In one episode, a kid’s favorite toy was blurred the entire time. (I think it was Ernie from Sesame Street.)
Oh, I can understand why they blur out vehicle license numbers. Imagine this: you’re watching the news. There is a car wreck. You notice your best frind’s licence plate protruding from the twisted mass… and then you remember that you haven’t heard from him all day.
Also, they don’t want TV-watching wackos looking up the owners of plates that have been seen in the vicinity of Suspicious Incidents. Reduces the spread of false and malicious gossip.
In North American car commercials and movies, they often use ‘generic’ plates so that the car could be from any state or province, really. Sometimes thay are colour-matched to the car to de-emphasise them.
Problem is, I’m not talking about news programs (where I’ve never seen that done), but pedestrian programs like While You Were out where the license plate just happens to be part of the background.
