I have long accepted the fact that commercials are necessary
for television networks to support their programs. If TV networks want to
entertain the public, they need revenue to produce TV shows. In the past few
months, however, I have wondered if advertisements are being used for more than
just supporting the cost of creating TV shows. Perhaps the main goal is not to
entertain us, but to make profit off of advertisers.
I recently watched Season 4 Episode 21 of The CW’s The Vampire Diaries. In this hour-long
airing, there were five commercial breaks totaling in 15 minutes and 14
seconds. That means the other 44 minutes and 46 seconds should be dedicated to
the actual content of the TV show, right? Wrong. In the middle of the episode, Matt Donovan’s
character is shown doing his homework. He pulls out his cell phone and the shot
zooms in on his phone screen, which reads, “AT&T Translator.” Matt utters a
sentence in English into his phone and then the AT&T Translator app reads
the sentence back to him in Italian. Did I miss something here? I thought I was
watching an action-packed show about vampires. What does this random scene
where Matt is using an app to do his Italian homework have to do with the plot
of the TV show? Absolutely nothing. The writers of the show sloppily wrote a
scene around the AT&T Translator app as an afterthought.
Another TV show I watched recently was ABC Family’s Pretty Little Liars. The particular
episode I was watching was Season 3 Episode 11. In this episode Hanna and
Spencer were helping Cece organize a trunk show. The three girls were in the
costume room when Cece looks at Hanna and notes that her hair could “use the
dry shampoo” since Hanna didn’t wash her hair that morning. The shot zooms in
on a bottle of TreSemme dry shampoo. Just like in The Vampire Diaries, this short scene was completely irrelevant to
the plotline.
In The Vampire Diaries
and Pretty Little Liars,
advertisements were blatantly included into the program, whether it be the AT&T Translator app or the TreSemme dry shampoo. In both cases scenes
were added for the sole purpose of incorporating advertisements, not to advance
the plotline or increase the quality of the TV show. This leads me to believe
that the producers of The CW and ABC Family are more concerned about generating
additional revenue than creating quality TV shows for the purpose of entertainment.
Works Cited:
Narducci, Michael, and Rebecca Sonnenshine. "She's Come Undone." The Vampire Diaries. Dir. Darnell Martin. The CW. 2 May 2013. Television.
Goldstick, Oliver, and Maya Goldsmith. "Single Fright Female." Pretty Little Liars. Dir. Joanna Kerns. ABC Family. 21 Aug. 2012. Television.
Works Cited:
Narducci, Michael, and Rebecca Sonnenshine. "She's Come Undone." The Vampire Diaries. Dir. Darnell Martin. The CW. 2 May 2013. Television.
Goldstick, Oliver, and Maya Goldsmith. "Single Fright Female." Pretty Little Liars. Dir. Joanna Kerns. ABC Family. 21 Aug. 2012. Television.
Yes! Perfect. I knew that one or two students would address the ads that are now not-so-inconspicuously embedded into our entertainment. This is definitely a newer phenomenon, at least so far as I can tell. I remember the first Hollywood motion picture that featured explicit advertisement in the actual film. I can't remember the film name, but I think John Travolta was in it, and I think the ad was for Heineken beer. I remember because several media sources covered this groundbreaking advertisement as a revolution in our consumer culture.
ReplyDeleteA couple years ago, a student wrote about all of the products that were secretly advertised in a Lady Gaga music video. This is perhaps the most interesting and invasive type of advertising, because it literally colors the entertainment we watch. Thank you for bringing it to our attention.