# The move from products sponsoring shows to commercials

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-move-from-products-sponsoring-shows-to-commercials/564788>\
**Category:** Cafe Society\
**Created:** [December 20, 2010, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-move-from-products-sponsoring-shows-to-commercials/564788 "2010-12-20T02:52:39Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![etv78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d78d45/32.png) [@etv78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/etv78)\
**Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-move-from-products-sponsoring-shows-to-commercials/564788/1 "2010-12-20T02:52:39Z")

</div>

Several years ago, the person credited with the move from products sponsoring whole shows (e.g. “Texxaco Star Theatre”) died, I’m blanking on his name. Incidentally, what started this trend?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\
**Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-move-from-products-sponsoring-shows-to-commercials/564788/2 "2010-12-20T03:23:34Z")

</div>

There were two main reasons for the change:

1. The official public answer: the sponsors censored the show’s content so that they would not allow certain references. The case cited was a show about the German concentration camps sponsored by a natural gas company that ordered no references be made to gassing the prisoners.

2. The more likely answer: it made more money for the networks. If you had a sponsor, you were paid a set amount. If you switched to the “magazine format” (as it was called), you could charge more for an ad if the show was a hit. The down side was that ratings became much more important; a sponsor might be happy with middling ratings – they got their name out there to plenty of people. But a network wanted high ratings so they could charge more for ads.

I also think one issue was that the networks didn’t have money for programming. Having a sponsor paid for the show allowed them to do better, and in the early days, independent TV producers did not have top-quality talent. In the mid-50s, though, the movie studios started producing TV series (I think Warner Brothers were the first), so the networks didn’t need the sponsors to pay for production.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\
**Post date:** [December 20, 2010, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-move-from-products-sponsoring-shows-to-commercials/564788/3 "2010-12-20T03:36:41Z")

</div>

> [@RealityChuck](#):
>
> There were two main reasons for the change:
> 
> 1. The official public answer: the sponsors censored the show’s content so that they would not allow certain references…

The words “luck” and “lucky” were never mentioned in dialouge on **I Love Lucy** because the show’s sponser, Philip Morris, didn’t want anything that could make people thing of Lucky Strikes.