Margaret's blog post, now with extra McDonald's references!

Back in 2001, I said that the future of advertising was product placement. Alas, there were no witnesses to my brilliant observation, so you'll have to take my word for it. But since then, product placement has been seen as a sure fire cure for the revenue blues. Declining ad dollars from Detroit carmakers in particular have put the economic pinch on broadcasters. In a particularly funny/cruel twist, the Las Vegas morning news show featured
fake, not real cups of McDonald's ice coffee on the news anchor desk. To taunt anyone with a simulacrum of caffeine at 7am is beyond cruel.



The CW of product placement as a cash cow is challenged, however, by this story about the continuation of a UK ban on product placement on the BBC channels:

There is a lack of evidence of economic benefits, along with very serious concerns about blurring the boundaries between advertising and editorial.

I'm puzzled by this seeming contradiction: does product placement generate revenue or doesn't it?

Could it be that product placement has a high opportunity cost? The BBC representative was very protective of the BBC brand. Could it be that media properties free of product placement are Porsches compared to the McDonald's infused Yugo programs?