11.22.00
Soupy Sales
-- OR --
And Now Back to Our Ads...
Way back when, if the good Lord was willin' and those checks from the makers of Hadacol kept 'a comin', Hank Williams, Sr. would hayseed his way over the radio waves on the Health & Happiness Hour. And who could forget everybody's favorite well-endowed ol' timer, Uncle Miltie and his Texaco Star Theatre TV show? Sure, it's quaint, but now most broadcast-savvy folks consider themselves mentally-evolved beyond the sponsorship message swallowing stage. Or, are they?

Well, if Campbell's' recent deal with the producers of ABC's female-targeted fluff, The View, is any indication, the answer is ...m'm...m'm...maybe not. As featured in an 11/14 Wall Street Journal article (Product Plugs -- M'm M'm Good? By Shelly Branch), the "food company is the primary sponsor of eight episodes of 'The View.' " And, from the looks of it, Campbell's and the media buy brokers over at Young & Rubicam's Media Edge made out like bouillabaisse bandits on this one. The deal includes two five-minute, Campbell-focused segments, a "sipping contest," Campbell's "billboard" appearances in and out of commercial breaks that also feature the company's regular ads, a "special announcer's message at the beginning and end of the show" and a "prominent link to the soup company" on the TV show's companion website.

Not surprising, the Journal story also reports that other bloated TV stars, namely Oprah Winfrey and Rosie O'Donnell, "have been known to zealously peddle products, from Victoria's Secret underwear to Altoids mints." Hmmm...does Victoria's Secret know about this?

The ad infiltration ensures "that Campbell's stands out in an environment that really features its consumers," according to Bob Igiel, president of Media Edge's broadcast division. He goes on to comment, "[T]he exciting thing for Campbell is to take a regularly scheduled program and become a part of that experience."

And what of the execs over at The View? "We're willing to plug shamelessly," admits co-executive producer Bill Geddie, "but we have limits." Apparently, this guy assured the Journal that the contract allows The View vamps to "poke fun at Campbell." P'p...p'p...puleeze!

The intelligentsia ain't buyin' it. Bob Steele, director of the ethics program at "media think tank" the Poynter Institute, asserts, "We know from a number of surveys that many TV viewers see these information-based entertainment shows as news oriented.... Even if this show is part of its entertainment division, the seeming erosion of independence by the producers, in allowing an advertiser this much influence, raises significant questions."

This is The View we're talkin' about here, guys! Hey, I'll be the first to admit my repulsion by the very nature of what this Campbell's sponsorship represents (not to mention by the notions that The View is newsworthy or that Barbara Walters is a hard-hitting journalist), but let's be serious. I'll start to worry when I see C-SPAN's Brian Lamb hawking Slim Jims.

Potent Quotables
-- OR --
A Very Special Stern Slam
Are you familiar with the "Very Special Episode" voice employed by commercial announcers? Although it was in its prime in the 80's when shows like Diff'rent Strokes and Family Ties tackled serious social issues such as teen pregnancy, alcoholism, and that not-so-fresh-feeling, it's still heard regularly. It's got a certain Casey Kasem death dedication ring to it, ya know? Let's just say you'd know it if you heard it. Howard Stern knows it when he hears it. That's why on 11/16 he launched an extended mocking session of a "Very Special" spot that ran during that day's radio show for an episode of ABC's ER guest-starring Sally Field. Rude, crude and lewd as always, Stern commented, "If it's a very special ER, I expect live f-ing.... Sally Field gets boned by nine million guys." Love him or hate him, you can't afford not to download this very special bit (864KB mp3 file).

Drudge Drop
-- OR --
ABC Can Dish It Up...
How's this for an intriguing sub-plot twist to Campbell's' deal with ABC's The View (see above)? ABC Radio (owned by Walt Disney Co.) has recently dropped Matt Drudge's syndicated talk show. As featured in the 11/13 Cnet News story, Drudge considers his dismissal as a "punishment for reporting on ABC's activities" as well as his criticism of the network's political analyst George Stephanopoulos. The controversial Web reporter surmises, "I guess I was a bad Mouseketeer.''

However, ABC spokeswoman Julie Hoover denies Drudge's possibly paranoid allegations, noting that it was "strictly a business decision" made without involvement of ABC News or Disney.

So, what has this got to do with The View/Campbell's deal? Well, ABC is arguably uncomfortable with Drudge's dissing of ABC execs or other on-air personalities, yet, according to The View's producer, the agreement with Campbell's allows the soup-hawking hosts of the show to "poke fun at Campbell." Does this strike anyone else as mildly hypocritical?

Hey, I think I've got the perfect solution to the Drudge debacle. ABC News and George Stephanopoulos could develop a house ad-like sponsorship of Drudge's radio show, but in order to limit the shameless plugging, Drudge could poke fun at ABC 'til his heart's content. On second thought, maybe Drudge ought to stick to m'm...m'm...Monica gossip.

Lurid Lures for Li'l Ones
-- OR --
Brand Scam
All around the world wide Web, lurid ladies lurk and handsome himbos hide. They only want one thing: control of your children's minds. They don't want the credit card numbers of full-grown adults. In fact, they really don't want to profit at all. That's just a cover up for their devious intentions; don't you see?

It's all too clear to the smart cookies at software firm, Envisional. They weren't born yesterday, after all. Thanks to them, we can put our minds at ease knowing that the wee-ones are safe from the inherent evil of Internet pornography. As reported by The Register in a 11/17 story, the company, "whose business, utterly coincidentally, is protecting brand names online -- has shown that thousands of porn sites feature toy brands in their meta tags." Through the firm's research, it was discovered that when "26 brand names including Barbie, Pokemon etc." were used in keyword searches, 30 percent of the subsequent links were categorized as "hardcore filth."

In typical good humor, The Register notes Envisional's CEO as commenting, "I'm horrified that youngsters... [blah blah blah etc etc]." And, in true sleuthing spirit, the publication's staff performed their own study by searching under keyword "barbie" on Google. According to the article, they "gave up when link number 80 still didn't herald any porn." An Excite search garnered similar results.

Our Lowbrow Lowdown lackeys went one step further in the quest for the truth. We realized that the real way to attract the smarter-than-some-think kiddies is to include actual porn-related terms in meta tags. And so, in the spirit of research that can only serve to benefit the li'l munchkins in the long-run, we added a few dirty words to LowbrowLowdown.com's site code . And what was the outcome of this oh-so-scientific study? Well, to our dismay, no kids showed up at all. Instead, the only visitors to the site were uptight, perverted Envisional busy-bodies lookin' for a good time. Go figure....

Get It Up North
-- OR --
Blame Canada's Beer
Hey gals, have you ever been disappointed when too many beers hamper your man's ability to uh…get his love gun...umm...locked and loaded? Sadly, many of us have been there. Hey, the Dead Kennedys even wrote a whole song about the lamentable situation (give it a listen)! In light of this unfortunate imbibing side-effect, would you believe that creators of some Canadian beer ads actually have the audacity to link alcohol with improved sexual performance?

That's not all, though. An 11/15 CBC News brief reveals that Ontario's Alcohol and Gaming Commission is worried that the "beer ads go too far." So, the organization is debating "whether the government should set some sort of standards for alcohol advertising."

There's little doubt that some standards should be in place for all advertising. And sure, this is Canada we're talkin' about here; beer drinking is somewhat of a national pastime up there, but c'mon. Is a nation's ability to perform sexually really an appropriate governmental concern? Of course, in this case, the commission is more concerned with false claims than with the nature of the claims themselves. However, if anything, the Alcohol and Gaming Commission should get its priorities straight. I mean, who wants improved sexual performance when, oftentimes, drunkenness can lead to sexual encounters with the eyesores of the sober world? If the Alcohol and Gaming Commission really wants to help beer consumers, it should mandate that all beer containers display prominent warning labels. I can see it now: "WARNING: Excessive consumption of this product can lead to beer-goggle formation. Proceed with caution."

Macro-man on Micro-payments
-- OR --
Ebert Expounds
When one thinks of Internet business pundits, several names leap to mind. My guess, however, is that Roger Ebert would show up on about as many lists as would Miss Piggy. Somehow that seems to be of little concern to Ebert, or Yahoo! Internet Life, though.

The lone thumb has a few things to say about Web content models. It seems that he's pondered the possibilities for quite some time now, too. In his 11/15 Yahoo! Internet Life commentary, Ebert forebodes, "[S]ooner or later the free lunch has to end. Information wants to be free, but information providers want to be paid." Wow...is this guy way ahead of his time, or what?

From whence will the money come, oh sage? From micro-payments, forecasts Ebert; that's the term used to apply to "charges of a few cents for every page view." He goes on to note, "Once users get accustomed to the idea, other sites will follow. Some will offer free pages on top, pay pages underneath. This will happen for a simple reason: It has to." Hmmm…perhaps before considering the success of micro-payments, Ebert ought to look into micro-meals.

The concept is not a new one. Comics wise-man, Scott McCloud has high hopes for micro-payments and the role they could play in transforming Web-comics creators into profit-producing citizens. It's certainly an intriguing idea, and one that could work in some cases, although I doubt all. At this point, it seems like the only things that can keep a content model afloat are dedication and pure luck. Oh, and having a print edition that's been a household name for a few decades helps, too.

The thing is I'm confused. Why is Roger Ebert commenting on this topic? Since when is he the net expert? Shouldn't he be expounding on the virtues of the latest Adam Sandler flick, scripting some more Russ Meyer-inspired soft-core slop or nuzzling up to Arnold Schwarzenegger's arse? Oh well, I guess if this column is any indication, people will read any idiot's commentary.