www-old.carseywolf.ucsb.edu

Carsey-Wolf Center at UC SantaBarbara

By Cynthia B. Meyers17-22 minutes

Cynthia B. Meyers recently attended the 2014 Media SummitNYC conference as a Carsey-Wolf Research Fellow to learnmore about how advertisers are using “branded entertainment”to sell products. She incorporated that experience into thefollowing publication, a critical essay that also draws fromcurrent research on the integration of advertising andentertainment content.

Brand-produced content seems to be everywhere these days.Rather than interrupt programs with commercials, advertisers(“brands”) seek to integrate their messages into theentertainment itself. The energy drink Red Bull producespopular videos about high risk sporting events. A Hulu series, 4to 9ers, centers on the fast food chain Subway. AT&T’s teenreality series @summerbreak promotes cell phone usage.Restaurant chain Chipotle’s series Farmed and Dangeroussatirizes industrial food production. Brands are alsoexperimenting with short films (Prada) and feature-length films(The Lego Movie). This expanding field has its own trade

association, which promotes the integration of advertising,brands, and content. 

Branded entertainment is an increasingly important element inthe evolving media “ecosystem” that will affect entertainmentsupply chains and help shape new cultural forms. To develop acritical and nuanced understanding of the diverse phenomenacurrently covered by the vague term “branded entertainment,”these are a few things to know.

“Branded entertainment” can be defined either broadly ornarrowly; the role of brands in entertainment also varies widely.

1.

Branded entertainment has a long history.2.

Today’s resurgence of branded entertainment is one way thatadvertisers are responding to connected viewing trends.

3.

Branded entertainment complicates traditional media metrics,goals, and institutional relationships.

4.

The advertising and entertainment industries will likely evolvenew production modes, distribution platforms, and formats toserve brands’ needs. 

5.

1. “Branded entertainment” can be defined either broadly ornarrowly; the role of brands in entertainment also varieswidely.

Broadly speaking, the strategies for integrating advertising intoother forms of content are often referred to as  “contentmarketing” and “branded content”—that is, employing “content”to be associated with a brand. David Lang, the Chief ContentOfficer at the media agency MindShare, defines “content” as

“consumer-focused,” unlike “advertising,” which is “brandfocused,” that is, designed for selling.  Content marketing andbranded content, then, are designed to please audiences whileaccomplishing brand objectives. 

Some forms of branded content are particular to journalism ornonfiction. “Native advertising,” designed to mimic thesurrounding publisher’s nonfiction editorial content, increasinglyappears on news and information sites (as in The Economist’scollaboration with GE). Informational branded content caninclude blogs, recipes, news, and documentary videos. Someadvertisers are creating “newsrooms” and their own “brandjournalism” as in “GE Reports.” 

Other forms include branded content videos that don’t push aproduct but instead build brand image; for example, IBM’s “ABoy and His Atom,” Dove’s “Real Beauty Sketches,” Jean-Claude Van Damme’s gymnastic split between Volvo trucks, andCaterpillar’s giant machines playing a Jenga game. Variety haslabeled some of these efforts “branded entertainment” becausethey are longer than typical commercials, or they featurecelebrities.  

Project "Subway"

Others restrict the term “branded entertainment” to traditionalnarrative forms, such as films, scripted series, and unscriptedseries that are specifically designed “to drive brand engagementand sales.” In this narrower conception, advertisers use multiplestrategies in collaboration with producers. Product placementand “brand integration” may involve merely showing products onsets or centering plot lines around brands, as when ProjectRunway contestants made garments from Subway materials.Cast commercials, in a kind of reversal of product placement,bring a program’s performers into an advertisement so as tokeep the audience's attention during the commercialinterruption.

“Sponsorship” may allow brands that pay for content somecontrol over it, as in General Mills’ sponsorship of MarloThomas’ web program. Full sponsorship may give a brand fullcontent ownership (of its “IP” or intellectual property); however,concerned that audiences might resist overt sponsorship, manybrands underplay their controlling role. Some advertisers, suchas Toyota, prefer the term “brand partnership” to imply a

collaboration of equals in the brand/producer relationship. Otheradvertisers sponsor  “affinity content” in which the brand doesnot appear but the content fits the “brand image,” as in RedBull’s Stratos Jump. Ford, for example, hopes to achieve a “haloeffect” by its association with content such as “This BuiltAmerica.”

2. Branded entertainment has a long history.

Long before electronic media, patent medicine makers sold theirtonics with traveling musical entertainers; these “medicineshows” attracted audiences and baited the hook for the salespitch. 

Maxwell House Coffee on Show Boat

In the 1920s-30s US commercial radio evolved into a sponsoredmedium when broadcasters sought to impose the cost ofprogramming onto advertisers. Brand sponsorship at first wasevident only in program titles (e.g., Eveready Hour) but radiorapidly evolved into a fully advertiser-controlled entertainmentplatform. Advertising agencies, such as J. Walter Thompson,conceived, produced, scripted, and cast programs such as Kraft

Music Hall  for their clients. Ad agencies oversaw the integrationof advertising into entertainment through product placements,cast commercials (as performers sipped Maxwell House coffeeduring Show Boat), and brand-appropriate programming (e.g.,soap operas for selling soap to housewives).Like brands today seeking a “halo effect,” many radio sponsorssought to build “good will” among audiences rather than sellproducts; for example, Du Pont sponsored the BBDO-producedCavalcade of America, a docudrama about Americantechnological innovation, in order to polish its tarnishedcorporate image. Single sponsorship, or the control of aprogram by one advertiser, declined only in the late 1950s andearly 1960s when high television production costs, combinedwith advertisers’ need for more flexibility in reaching audiencesacross the broadcast schedule, resulted in the separation ofadvertising from program production.

Although audiences can now distinguish between programs andcommercials as easily as they can between magazine editorialcontent and advertising pages, the content of all commercialmedia has always been determined by the needs of advertisersto reach audiences attracted to that content. TV networks arenot in the business of providing programs to audiences; theydeliver audiences to advertisers by selecting the programs thatproduce the audiences advertisers are targeting (e.g., 18-34year olds). Branded entertainment and the increase in directadvertiser influence over program content, then, is actually areturn to rather than a break from past practices.

3. Today’s resurgence of branded entertainment is one way

advertisers are responding to connected viewing trends.

Nonlinear digital media, which allow audiences to watch whenand where they want, have disrupted brands’ access toaudiences attached to content provided in time-limited linearfeeds. Not only are audiences more mobile, so too is content,thus making it harder for advertisers to capture mass attention ina fragmented marketplace. Mobile devices also haveundermined banner ads and cookies. Brands can no longer relyon “pushing” advertising onto audiences, forcing exposure asthe “price” for content (as in “pre-roll” ads before online videos).Furthermore, as Joan Gillman from Time Warner Cableexplains, brands are frustrated that emerging contentdistributors, such as iTunes, Netflix, and Amazon, do not rely onadvertising to subsidize their content offerings and thereforeoffer fewer opportunities to spread brand messages.

Whereas on scheduled linear television audiences must tolerateforced exposure to commercials between program scenes,some observers, such as Abby Marks at OgilvyEntertainment,argue those interruptions may be “detrimental” to the brand. AsJonathan Carson from Vevo explains, interruptive commercialsmay seem “inorganic” and thus “inauthentic.” Instead brandsshould try to “pull” audiences in to their messages by enticingthem with content, as Andrea Redniss, Chief Activation Officerof Media Storm, claims Chipotle’s long form video Scarecrowand Dove’s Real Beauty videos do. Although older audiencesmay be habituated to interruptive ads, many advertisers believethat younger audiences (“millennials”) must be reached in newways.

Traditionally, advertisers have paid media entities to carry theiradvertising: this is known in the industry as “paid media.” Butnow advertisers can also reach audiences directly through theirown platforms, called “owned media,” such as Mountain Dew’sGreen Label music and culture blog. Additionally, advertisersseek to “earn” audience attention by “seeding” content on socialmedia platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, andPinterest. Advertisers who attract audiences on social media(without having paid for the media space) usually refer to those“views,” “likes,” and “shares” as “earned media,” as when RedBull “earned” 8 million YouTube views for Felix Baumgartner’sjump from space. Through “earned media,” advertisers can bothspare themselves traditional “paid media” costs and avoidalienating audiences bothered by interruptive ads.

Advertising agencies (like Ogilvy and JWT) and their siblingmedia agencies (Universal McCann) have been quick toestablish branded entertainment divisions to serve theirclients. Mike Wiese, Director of Branded Entertainment at JWT,explains that agencies must begin to think more like Hollywoodstudios: “Produce a story that resonates with consumers andcreates an emotional connection to the brand. Work withpremium talent and production partners that will reach thedesired audience. Distribute the content via paid, earned andowned media, integrating the story and character into traditionalmarketing. And build programs that extend the story throughmerchandise and technology.”

4. Branded entertainment complicates traditional mediametrics, goals, and institutional relationships.

Traditionally advertisers measured effectiveness by reach andfrequency (how many people are exposed to a message howmany times), sales figures, and surveys of brand awareness.Exposure is measured by the number of issues sold, by thenumber of viewers counted by Nielsen, or by the number ofunique IP addresses that visit a web site. Advertisers hadalways assumed that increased exposure translates intoincreased effectiveness, but branded entertainment does notexist as standardized measureable units like 30-secondcommercials and its effects are difficult to quantify. Still,advertisers are reluctant to give up this basic metric because theprices are negotiated on the basis of exposure levels (the largerthe audience, the higher the price of ad space).

Instead of amassing large audiences for forced ad exposures,branded entertainment proponents urge advertisers to considerit as a tool for “engagement.” They advocate immersiveexperiences that “pull in” audiences and can be distributed onmultiple platforms that allow sharing. For example, content fromAT&T’s @summerbreak, which concerns high school graduatesduring the summer before college, appears on YouTube, Tumblr,and Twitter. According to Teddy Lynn, formerly Content Directorat BBDO, @summerbreak is not “pushed” or advertised ontelevision networks like MTV but instead is promoted by socialmedia “influencers,” who “pull in” their teen followers bydistributing clips, interviews, and sample content on their socialmedia feeds.

Measuring “engagement” without counting “exposures” isdifficult. What should count? Number of views?  Completionrates (how many viewers watch entire video)? Number or qualityof comments? Retweets? Shares? Click-through rates to brandsite? Sales? AT&T is not expecting @summerbreak to sellphones but is hoping the program encourages teens to usemore AT&T cell services. Engagement, then, may be ameasurement resistant process; some, like Andy Marks atMatter Inc. and Robert David at Ogilvy define engagement asjust a “conversation” between brand and audience.

As in the radio era, today some question the effectiveness ofbranded entertainment. “Should brands spend millions tounderwrite other people’s content?,” asks one analyst. Areadvertisers who aim for a “halo effect” simply hoping for toomuch? In the past, advertisers assumed strong media effectsand so based their sponsorship decisions on the belief that“sponsor identification” with entertainment would producegrateful audiences wanting to buy their products. Today,

advertisers make no such assumptions when faced with amobile and distracted audience.

Taking control of content, however, presents advertisers with adilemma. If their control is too overt, brands risk audiencesdismissing the content as “only an ad.” If the brand isunderplayed, as in Accura’s sponsorship of Jerry Seinfeld’s webseries, the brand risks not being associated at all. Some brandsprefer to be “partners” or “underwriters” of content producers togive an impression of editorial integrity and creativeindependence. Some producers, such as Dan Goodman atBelieve Entertainment, prefer to integrate brands at a late stagein the process to preserve that sense of authorial integrity, whilethe producers of Emma Approved have included advertisers atthe outset to create a more “organic” integration. Finding anappropriate balance challenges advertisers who seek“authenticity” and who also worry that their involvement isexactly what undermines such authenticity.

Branded entertainment presents other issues for advertisers.When collaborating with content producers and star talent,which entities should own the content and in what proportions?Should brands allow producers to retain syndication and othersales rights? The use of social media platforms that are “free” toaudiences and content producers raises pressing questionsabout how stakeholders divide up costs and revenues: whoshould pay whom for access to what and whom? Shouldaudiences pay for content or should advertisers pay for accessto audiences? What about the role of star talent? Celebrityassociation, a long established advertising strategy, can backfire

when a star misbehaves, or become impracticable when he orshe demands too much control. If creating authentic contentrequires talent autonomy, brands must be especially carefulwhen choosing talent. These challenges make it likely thatbranded entertainment, narrowly defined, will not fully replacetraditional stand-alone advertising.

5. The advertising and entertainment industries will likelyevolve new modes of production, distribution platforms,and formats to serve advertisers’ needs. 

Companies specializing in branded entertainment productionare arising in nearly all sectors of the advertising, media, andentertainment industries.  They include traditional televisionproducers (Chernin Entertainment), creative advertisingagencies (OgilvyEntertainment), media agencies (IPGMediaBrands), specialty advertising agencies (Brand Arc and72andSunny), digital production companies (R/GA), digitalimagery agencies (Corbis Entertainment), television networkdivisions, talent agencies (CAA), and production companiesfounded by star talent like Liev Schreiber (Van's General Store)and former network executives (Electus and AstronautsWanted). Advertisers themselves are creating in-houseproduction departments. The entertainment supply chain, then,is becoming more complex.

Traditional mediators between producers and audiences, suchas TV networks, are becoming  “disintermediated”; that is,producers may no longer need network gatekeepers fordistribution because of alternative distributors like YouTubemulti-channel networks (MCNs). Meanwhile, TV networks are

trying to maintain their role by producing programs withintegrated brands and by matching programs with brands, aswhen ABC created cast commercials for Target stores withperformers from Modern Family and The Middle. Advertisingagencies, also worried about being left out, hope to be “brandstewards” and oversee their clients’ branded entertainmentventures and perhaps, according to Doug Scott of OgilvyEntertainment, even begin to share in the ownership of thecontent.

Traditional entertainment strategies are being similarlyreconsidered. The half-hour sitcom, designed and structured forcommercial interruptions, is now competing for audienceattention with such new formats as the six-second Vine video:as Vine producers become major social media stars, brands arerapidly recruiting them. Branded entertainment, then, maybecome a more significant force in emerging formats andgenres than in legacy formats, where audience resistance toovert product placements and sponsorship may persist.

At this stage, it is unclear who will emerge as winners in thebranded entertainment industry. While many legacy mediaentities may be struggling to maintain dominance, the rise ofbranded entertainment also may be providing new opportunitiesfor content producers.  No longer dependent on traditionalgatekeepers, some content producers are profiting from directrelationships with brands, keeping a larger share of revenue forthemselves and, if some are to be believed, enjoying morecreative freedom. This may expand the market for content, buildnew audiences, and further disrupt legacy media supply chains. 

Appealing to audiences is difficult; the failure rate in theentertainment industry has always ranged from 50% to 90%, sobrands’ interest in financing entertainment could eventuallywane. However, the resurgence of branded entertainment isstimulating experimentation in business models, modes ofproduction, advertising strategies, content forms, anddistribution methods—and, as in all forms of culture, some willbe for the better and some for the worse.