When did advertising become a dirt word ?

  Dragon_Heart 23:45 11 Jul 2012

Have you noticed many companies no longer have a simple advert between the commercial TV programmes, they now 'Sponsor' the programme !

Some have a link, at times a very loose link, between the product / service and the programme contents.

By definition “To sponsor something is to support an event, activity, person, or organization financially or through the provision of products or services. A sponsor is the individual or group that provides the support, similar to a benefactor.”

Wikipedia refers to commercial sponsorship as :-

Sponsorship is a cash and/or in-kind fee paid to a property (typically in sports, arts, entertainment or causes) in return for access to the exploitable commercial potential associated with that property. While the sponsee (property being sponsored) may be nonprofit, unlike philanthropy, sponsorship is done with the expectation of a commercial return. While sponsorship can deliver increased awareness, brand building and propensity to purchase, it is different to advertising. Unlike advertising, sponsorship can not communicate specific product attributes. Nor can it stand alone. Sponsorship requires support elements. And, while advertising messages are controlled by the advertiser, sponsors do not control the message that is communicated. Consumers decide what a sponsorship means.

So in my opinion this type of sponsership is an ad' linked to a programme !

What are you thoughts ?

  Condom 17:31 12 Jul 2012

Like many things this "Sponsorship" arrived from across the pond and of course has started in this country the same way that it did in the USA, ie no interference with programme content.

That of course all changed over there and "Sponsors" have got so powerful that they can now interfere in content or direction on content.

I dread to think that that might happen over here but given time it might.

  Forum Editor 23:17 12 Jul 2012

"Like many things this "Sponsorship" arrived from across the pond and of course has started in this country the same way that it did in the USA, ie no interference with programme content."

TV sponsorship was alive and well in America in the 1940s, and before that on radio networks. In the early 1950s the sheer cost of sponsoring a show became prohibitive as far as most companies were concerned, and advertising breaks with ads for several different sponsors appeared in place of the 'and now, a word from our sponsor' breaks that were familiar before.

Sponsors exerted considerable influence over programme content in America, but so far that hasn't happened here.

  Quickbeam 09:10 13 Jul 2012

I think it's been with us on British TV for more than 10 years, that's about when I first noticed it's appearance.

  Condom 11:06 13 Jul 2012

I'm not sure what the FE is getting at here. He is repeating what I said, quoting part of it. I'm not sure if he is agreeing or disagreeing with what I said.

  bjh 11:37 13 Jul 2012

Sponsorship is, of course, why "soaps" are called soaps, so it isn't anything new.

I believe product placement has now become (or is about to become) legal as well, albeit with some funny symbol onscreen at the beginning to alert the viewer.

TV has to be paid for in some way; salaries to meet, studios to rent, film to... er film. So, adverts, sponsorship, BBC license, pay-per-view or whatever. So long as we, the viewer, are informed, so we can make informed decisions, I'm not sure it matters.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

OnePlus 5T review: Hands-on

Illustrator Andrés Lozano on his improv line work, brazen use of colours & hand sketching

iPhone X review

Comment envoyer gratuitement des gros fichiers ?