When Crystal Egger delivers the weather each morning on Fox’s “Good Day Colorado,” she appears behind a cup of iced coffee branded with a McDonalds’ logo. It’s not that she’s a caffeine junkie; the prominent cup of joe is part of a six-figure product-placement deal, paid for by the fast-food chain.
The cup also serves as a jolting reminder of how the line between advertising and editorial content in TV newscasts, once starkly drawn, has gotten thinner. (It’s not even coffee, by the way. It’s a prop with no liquid.)
To be sure, the business of TV news is changing. From anchors-turned-pitchmen to hybrid segments that are part public service, part paid commercial, local TV operations are testing new ways to increase revenue, sometimes borrowing the tactics of their entertainment- department counterparts.
For viewers, telling the difference between news, entertainment and outright infomercials can be a challenge.
“Toyota has product placement at Coors Field; the movie industry, TV and sports have all used product placement,” said Fox 31 KDVR general manager Dennis Leonard, who has no problem with the McDonald’s cup or the WalMart ticker that runs along the bottom of his newscasts.
Today’s viewers, he said, are savvy and “more forgiving.”
Not everyone agrees. Citing “evidence of the increasing penetration and sophistication of embedded advertising,” a coalition of consumer groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, asked the Federal Communications Commission last week to crackdown on product placements and other “advertorial” content.
Even if consumers aren’t fooled, media monitors say, product placements in the news harm credibility. “The effect may be even worse on the people who discern that this is a paid placement because it says that the news is for sale,” said Andrew Schwartzman of the Washington, D.C.-based Media Access Project.
Product placements, like the Coke cups on “American Idol” and the Ford that Jack Bauer drove on “24,” are established advertising methods now in entertainment television. But the breach of the wall between news and advertising is, to some, a startling next step.
Only Denver’s Fox station has ventured into product placement in a newscast. And they hold the line at the weathercast. “The coffee prop only appears in the weather,” said KDVR’s Leonard. The deal doesn’t allow McDonalds to dictate content, he said. McDonalds, which spends more than $1 billion a year on advertising, has bought similar placements on morning news shows on Fox stations in Las Vegas, Chicago and Seattle.
And stations do have their limits. Recently, marketers for the new family film “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs” offered to pay for having weathercasters mention the movie title on the air.
“We said no,” said Patti Dennis, KUSA news director. So did Denver’s other stations. “That crosses a line.”
But the door is now open for new offers to be made. “Industry-wide, we are seeking ways to generate revenue that I don’t think we would have in the recent past,” said KMGH News director Jeff Harris.
“The real question is, what is the impact on the credibility of the newscast?”
In some ways, product placement brings TV news full circle: Remember, Edward R. Murrow gave a nod to his sponsor, ALCOA, before launching into his 1954 report on Sen. Joseph McCarthy on CBS’s “See It Now.” And the “Camel News Caravan” of 1949 put the sponsor in the title.
The trend died as TV news grew up, and now the FCC requires broadcasters to inform viewers or listeners at the time “if matter has been aired in exchange for money, services or other valuable consideration.” The agency reportedly is weighing even tighter rules for how sponsorships on TV shows are disclosed.
Regulating “embedded advertising” in editorial content can be tricky, since it comes in many forms — not all as blatant as the $10 million tie-in Starbucks purchased for MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” chat show.
Infomercials spreading
TV stations now routinely weave paid programming into shows that offer consumer advice. Whether recommending a plumber or a plastic surgeon, some of these pay-for-play pitches can be confusing.
Channel 4’s “Haystack,” which debuted in March, features program-length commercials. And it was created under the purview of the news department.
The program is essentially a referral service, sort of a digital Yellow Pages with paid listings, promising customers background checks on its clients.
“I helped in the creative process, but it is not under my supervision,” KCNC News Director Tim Wieland said. Haystack has its own staff and set on the sales floor. “TV and radio and every other form of media are looking for ways to generate revenue, and this is a way to do it,” Wieland said. “They’re completely upfront about saying these are shows where clients pay to talk about their products.”
Wieland said product placements like the McDonalds coffee cups will never occur on KCNC as long as he’s news director. But the relationship of the TV station to a government agency has raised eyebrows.
KCNC’s ongoing “Beating the Recession,” in conjunction with DORA (the Department of Regulatory Agencies), looks like a traditional report. But it is a public relations expenditure on the part of the government. It may offer citizens helpful information or lead them to bargains, but it’s not journalism.
“On the news side, ‘Beating the Recession’ is editorial only,” Wieland said. “On the sales side, the DORA project is a sales project, non-news, no news talent, no news time. Viewers probably think its a helpful resource. I don’t know whether they think of it as a news product or not. It’s a commercial.”
The longest-lived effort in this direction is “Colorado & Company” on Gannett-owned KUSA. The infomercial that is “Colorado & Company” is strictly separate from the newsroom, has its own staff, and is clearly labeled on the air. The show is prohibited from using archival footage from the news department and avoids showing the 9News logo in studio shots.
“CoCo” customers pay anywhere from $1,000 to $3,000 for an eight-minute segment, depending on ongoing contracts. The 5-year-old program doesn’t worry about ratings. It’s all about profit.
“It works. It wouldn’t be doing so well if it didn’t work,” says KUSA’s Steve Carter, VP of marketing and promotion. Yet, even after five years on the air, viewer confusion persists. “We still get people calling up and saying ‘you’re just trying to sell something!’ or ‘that’s an infomercial!'” Carter said. Yes, it is.
Tom Martino’s “Martino TV,” on Channel 2 and Channel 31, is a trickier example. The longtime Denver newsman is no longer part of the news staff. He has become a cottage industry, taking money from the companies he features in reported segments. He gets $1,500-$2,600 for a seven-plus-minute feature. Yet the audience may not realize his non-news status because, in the past, Martino took money for endorsements even while appearing on the news.
His reputation as a newsman, unspoken, hangs over the show, and “Martino TV” gets a lengthy promotional push within the station’s morning newscast.
Martino has a waiting list to get on his show, and claims he turns down more clients than he accepts.
“We’re very careful to label the paid segment. We do not try to hide it,” said Carolyn Kane, KDVR VP-content.
“I call it consum-o-tainment,” said KDVR general manager Leonard.
Martino acknowledges the waters may be muddy. “All I can do is what I do. My referral list clearly spells out it is advertising with accountability.”
Joanne Ostrow: 303-954-1830 or jostrow@denverpost.com
