Comicscape


Comicscape - April 26, 2006

By: Kurt Amacker
Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Greetings, my seething minions, and welcome to another week of COMICSCAPE brilliance. This will likely sound boring at first, but I promise it gets better: last week, The Wall Street Journal published a disturbing little story about product placement deals made between Marvel and DC and a few multinational corporations. For years, Marvel and DC have casually incorporated real products and logos to their artwork in the name of realism. You're more likely to see Peter Parker with a can of Coca-Cola in the Avengers' kitchen than a red can that says "Soda" or something similarly generic. I don't object to that. In fact, I find look-a-like stand-ins distracting in their own right. They just makes me stop and think, "Hey, that looks like a Coke, but it's not." Really, I don't care, as long as Parker doesn't say, "Tony, Cap -- I just couldn't fight evil without the refreshing taste of Coke to keep me in the game!" But, Marvel and DC always incorporated those products as needed, and for free. A few months ago, Marvel decided to accept Nike's advertising dollars to incorporate the company's logo into in-story artwork. They also brokered a deal with DaimlerChrysler's Dodge for the car company's logo to appear similarly in the near future. Following suit, DC plans to launch a six-issue miniseries called RUSH CITY in July with the support of General Motors's Pontiac. It features a new character called the Rush, who very conspicuously drives a Pontiac Solstice. Before I dive in, I'll run a letters column next week. Let me know what you think about product placement in comics. E-mail me at A HREF= "mailto:comicscape@cinescape.com">comicscape@cinescape.com or at kurtamacker@yahoo.com and let me know what you think.




I'll maintain my usual balanced approach on this issue and give everyone the benefit of the doubt where applicable, but I don't like this. As usual, money creates a problem. Prior to this arrangement, when Marvel or DC included a corporate logo or product in their story, it happened without the endorsement or involvement of the particular company. Regardless of the questionable potential for trademark infringement, Marvel and DC, to a lesser extent, have included corporate logos and products in their stories for a long time with no significant interference. The publishers used those images at their discretion, without accepting payment.




As consumers, we should expect DC and Marvel to consider their bottom line. Comic publishers don't stand above corporate media shenanigans. Bitch and moan all you want about the evil corporations. But, unless you live in the hills growing your own vegetables and building bombs, you contribute to corporate practices damn near every time you buy something. And, you probably know about that product through advertising, whether from a store sign, a billboard, or a comic book ad. Short of moving to the Third World, you're practically stuck. Hence, while I look at this move by Marvel and DC with great trepidation, it doesn't shock the sh-t out of me. Both companies provided free advertisement for several companies for years by including cans of Coke, real cars, and the like. Someone just decided they'd like money for their efforts.




Here's the problem: when you accept money from someone, they have leverage over you. They can make demands under threat of cutting off said funds. Both DC and Marvel have reassured us, the readers, that none of the advertisers will exert any editorial control and that the stories will continue as before. However, you can damn well bet there are limitations in place already. I doubt Nike would tolerate the Punisher torturing some thug wearing a shirt with the "swoosh" logo on it, nor would Dodge like Wolverine getting drunk and pissing on one of their cars. Obviously, I'm not privy to those particulars, but I doubt any of the companies would tolerate their logos being portrayed in a distinctly unflattering light. Ostensibly, without advertiser money involved, creators would have more leverage to depict the hilarious examples I mentioned -- depending, of course, on editorial consent. Of course, one could offer that maybe Wolverine could piss on a different car. But, if on the off chance the creator specifically wants to deface a Dodge, they would likely face censorship for fear of advertiser opinion. Both companies have stated that advertisers won't exert creative control, but such a noncommittal relationship will sour if a writer at Marvel or DC pisses off the wrong sponsor. But, I really hate to speculate. I hate when people indict others on what they think someone might do or could do -- "potential rapist," and the like. It's presumptuous and insulting to spin paranoid conspiracies of future misdeeds against anyone. However, no one can tell me advertisers haven't exerted influence on movies and television shows, both through product placement and threatening to withdraw support. I can't see why Marvel and DC would have a special relationship exempting them.





Unfortunately for both comic publishers and fans, advertising revenue keeps comics in print and on the shelves. Sales alone don't cut it. Comics have always featured paid advertisements. Hence, corporate advertisers have taken the next logical step -- into the stories. Advertisers seek to target consumers as often as possible. If Coca-Cola can sponsor a school event where all the kids have to arrange themselves to spell "Coke" on the field for an aerial photograph, you know we're in trouble. Advertisers rarely pull back. They'd probably advertise in your dreams if they could. Walk outside, and in a matter of minutes, you will see an advertisement. I know that sounds conspiratorial and left-wing, but moving into stories makes sense from the sponsors' point of view. They want to target you where you were previously (if briefly) out of their reach. And, if we accept an advertiser-driven industry, we should probably accept this as the next step. Comics without ads would cost more. I already think $3.00 is a bit steep, and you know it's only going to increase.




In fact, were this move predicated on lowering the cost of comics, I might accept it more readily. However, unless Warren Ellis and Ben Templesmith consolidate the industry in a bloody, GODFATHER-inspired takeover, that won't happen. So, the costs won't decrease, and we'll have to deal with a few little Nike logos and a couple of titles conspicuously pushing cars with non sequitur names like "Solstice." It doesn't sound like the apocalypse, but it seems endemic of comics moving into the same tepid waters occupied by so many mainstream art and media. It's a small step in a bad direction. As a visual medium, comics get away with more sex, violence, blasphemy, and all-around weird sh-t than movies or television have or ever will. If advertisers' opinions mean more in the future, that could change.




On the other hand, advertisers and financiers of all stripes will always have a say in any corporate art. Yes, I've ranted about the potential influence of Nike and Dodge on Marvel, but it's not as if they've never had to worry about sponsor opinion. Whatever record label or television studio buying full-page ads could just as easily complain and threaten to withdraw support. Having logos in stories just makes it a bit easier, in my estimation. And, to be fair, the product placement system at Marvel isn't the most draconian arrangement. Over at Newsarama, Joe Quesada said that there would be a certain number of product placements available in a given month, and they would allow creative teams to pick them up if they were interested. For instance, there'd be one for a car, one for soda, another for deodorant, and the creative teams would be made aware of them and allowed to pick one, if interested. For now, anyone working at Marvel could diplomatically avoid product placements if they didn't volunteer for them. How long those logistics remain in place remains to be seen. As of right now, I'm unaware of the policy in place at DC.




Some have argued that licensed comics already serve as giant advertisements, as do t-shirts and any other non-comic merchandise or tie-ins, including films and video games. They think that by buying a STAR WARS comic, you've effectively purchased a 32-page advertisement for the movies. Hence, the issue of product placement expands on an industry already supported by advertising. I disagree. While the two issues may seem similar, they differ in subtle ways. If I buy a licensed comic, I want to read about STAR WARS, ARMY OF DARKNESS, ALIENS, or whatever. I sure as hell don't want to see Ash fire off a few shells from the boomstick and then stop to conspicuously drink a Pepsi. I wouldn't buy a shirt with Glenn Danzig "doing the Dew" on it, either. While licensed products advertise a particular franchise, they also serve as products in their own right -- a comic you can read, a shirt you can wear, or a poster you can mount on your wall.




Marvel and DC have agreed to something more pervasive than licensed comics and full-page advertisements. With this model, every time you reread a comic, Nike or Pontiac advertise to you. Before, could elect to ignore the ads or just wait for the trade paperback. Now, if you read, you'll see the ad regardless. If you buy the trade, you'll still see it. Some may downplay this issue and say that seeing a Nike logo in a Spider-Man comic won't make anyone run out and buy shoes. However, product placement works. Advertisers wouldn't spend millions of dollars to put a can of soda in a movie if it didn't. Advertising is far more pervasive than simply telling someone about a product, who will then make an informed decision about purchasing it. It's far more subtle than that. It relies on creating positive impressions and associations over time that go beyond a consumer's utilitarian decision to buy a pair of sneakers. When you see a Nike logo in a comic, they're building that emotional association. I don't give the average consumer credit enough to make decisions based on simple cost and utility. If people thought like that, generic brands would outsell name brands by a wide margin.




Despite my trepidation, I accept that comics are an advertising-driven medium. If that doesn't change, we should probably expect nothing less than product placement and more. But, it won't change. If it did, comics would cost a hell of a lot more and we'd have an entirely different problem. The only answer is to stop buying from companies that use product placement, but I'm not going to do that. I like superheroes, and, ultimately, I take the bad with the good. You may feel differently. I'll run your letters next week.



New This Week

By Al Brown and Kurt Amacker



DARK HORSE



Hellsing Vol 1 TP $13.95



Hellsing Vol 2 TP $13.95



Hellsing Vol 3 TP (MR) $13.95



Hellsing Vol 4 TP $13.95

Al: That's...ah, that's a lot of Hellsing trades.

Kurt: Yeah, this series kind of sucks. The cartoon was way better.



Usagi Yojimbo #93 $2.99



DC COMICS



100 Bullets Vol 9 Strychnine Lives TP (MR) $14.99



American Way #3 (of 8) $2.99



Batman #652 $2.50

Al: Yeah, y'know, I like a lot about this massive, 8-part crossover arc. I like that Robin's back; I like the way the two of them work together all smart and all. What I don't like is 8-part crossover arcs. I wish we didn't have to start with one.

Kurt: If it were up to you, it would be eight issues of Robin having a giggling pillow fight with himself.



Batman Legends Of The Dark Knight #204 $2.50



Blue Beetle #2 $2.99



Cartoon Network Block Party #20 $2.25

Kurt: Will there be hotdogs and a spacewalk? I'm not coming if I can't eat a hotdog in the spacewalk.



Catwoman #54 $2.50



Crisis Aftermath The Battle For Bludhaven #2 (of 6) $2.99



Hawkgirl #51 $2.50

Al: Eh, I wasn't as down for the first issue of Chaykin and Simonson's run as I was hoping to be. It seemed awkward, like trying to jog in shoes that totally don't fit. Doesn't help that I'm just not that into the Hawk characters, though.



Ion #1 (of 12) $2.99

Al: Now with less ability to breath!

Kurt: Al, have you test-driven a Saturn Ion lately?



Kamikaze Kaito Jeanne Vol 3 $9.99



Lucifer #73 (MR) $2.75



Skye Runner #1 $2.99

Al: Do you like scantily dressed women with swords? Nerd.

Kurt: Do you enjoy the refreshing taste of Coke?



Skye Runner Variant Cover #1 (of 6) $2.99



Solo #10 $4.99



Supergirl And The Legion Of Super Heroes #17 $2.99

Al: It's all in your mind, man! You're freaking out.

Kurt: For those kind of days, there's Prozac.



Teen Titans Go #30 $2.25

Kurt: Be sure to catch Teen Titans on the Cartoon Network every week at I-don't-know-freaking-when-because-I-don't-have-cable.



Tenryu The Dragon Cycle Vol 5 $9.99



Testarotho Vol 4 (MR) $9.99



Tower Of The Future Vol 3 $9.99



V For Vendetta New Edition HC (MR) $29.99

Kurt: Now, out on DVD, HD-DVD, Blu-Ray, and UMD, it's...wait, it's not even out yet, is it? Buy the comic instead.



Warlord #3 $2.99



IMAGE



Doll & Creature #2 (OF 4)$2.99



Frank Cho Women Selected Drawings & Illustrations HC (MR) $24.99

Kurt: I can only assume that "MR" means there will be boobs. Giggidy-giggidy!



Godland #10 $2.99



Invincible #31 $2.99



Kilroy is Here TP $24.99

Kurt: WHERE!?



Savage Dragon #125 (RES) $4.99



Spawn #155$2.95



MARVEL



All New Off Handbook Marvel Universe A To Z #4 $3.99

Al: Oh my God: seriously, we have a guy named Fight-Man? Best name ever.

Kurt: Does it have an entry for Commander Dew, who get his powers from the awesome, refreshing taste of Mountain Dew?



Amazing Fantasy #20 $2.99



Amazing Spider-Man #531 $2.99



Amazing Spider-Man 3rd Ptg #529 (PP #710) $2.50



Annihilation Ronan #1 (of 4) $2.99

Al: I'm not old enough to really remember all these freaky-ass cosmic dudes (except for Silver Surfer), so I don't really have any idea who Ronan the Accuser is. But that is an awesome name. I mean, it's no Fight-Man, but I'm still totally gonna get this.



Astonishing X-Men #14 $2.99

Al: Poor Cyclops. Completely incapable of getting laid with a chick who doesn't secretly want to hump Wolverine. Seriously, how much would that piss you off? He's totally got a short guy complex now.



Astonishing X-Men Vol 1 Gifted TP $14.99



Black Panther #15 $2.99



Daughters Of The Dragon #4 (of 6) $2.99

Al: I'm so converted by this series. Bring on the Afros! From now on the only serious book I'm gonna even bother with is Planetary Other than that, hell with it: I'm all Daughters of the Dragon and Nextwave. Most ass-kickinest book of the week, right here.



Decimation X-Men The Day After TP $15.99



Essential X-Men Vol 4 TP New Printing $16.99



Fantastic Four #537 $2.99

Al: An American Idol-like competition for who gets to be the Fantastic Fifth, which would be a super idea if it hadn't already been done perfectly well. (Yes, I am aware of New Warriors. Which was an even more blatant rip-off of WildGuard.)



Four #29 $2.99



Incredible Hulk #94 $2.99

Al: Years from now people are gonna look back on 2006 and shake their heads sadly, saying, "Man...Civil War coulda been cool. But it wasn't." And someone else will say, "Yeah, and remember the Annihilation thing? That was weak too." And someone else will say, "Yeah but remember Planet Hulk? That was sorta awesome." And we'll all nod.

Kurt: But not as "sorta awesome" as the kick you'll get from Vault energy drink!



Iron Man The Inevitable #5 (of 6) $2.99


Marvel Milestones Beast & Kitty Pryde $3.99



Marvel Zombies 4th Ptg Var #1 (of 5) $2.99



New Avengers Annual #1 $3.99

Al: The marriage of Luke Cage and Jessica Jones, but: don't even bother. Storm and Black Panther is the wedding of the decade. Seriously, Marvel's told me like 8 million times so it must be true.

Kurt: Marvel told me to drink Coke, and now I'm fat.



New X-Men Childhoods End Vol 1 TP $10.99



Runaways #15 $2.99

Al: Apropos of not very much, here's what bugs me: I went in for minor surgery yesterday morning (Tuesday), so I had to sit around on my couch for the rest of the day high on Valium with no comic books because they came out, y'know, today. Highly annoying. Never schedule surgery on a Tuesday, is the lesson here.

Kurt: And never schedule surgery without the peace of mind Old Republic life insurance brings to you and your family.



Sentry #8 (of 8) $2.99



Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane #5 $2.99



Storm #3 (of 6) $2.99



Thing #6 $2.99

Al: Dangerously close to being cancelled, Ben Grimm fights to keep comic books fun for everyone. Won't you help?



Ultimate Fantastic Four #29 $2.99

Al: The only thing is, the FF have been doing a whole lot of universe-jumping lately. I mean, the zombie thing and now this alternate universe where Thor is president and everyone's super (thanks for asking). I kinda didn't need two alternate universes in a row.

Kurt: So, if you're super (thanks for asking), are you going to do a gay musical number? I'm waiting.



Ultimate X-Men Vol 7 Blockbuster TP $12.99

Kurt: Hey, speaking of Blockbuster...f--k it.



Uncanny X-Men Omnibus Vol 1 HC $99.99



Uncanny X-Men Omnibus Vol 1 HC Variant $99.99



What If Mirror Mirror TP $16.99



Wolverine #41 $3.99

Al: Wolverine saves the children! No, seriously. This is the absolute pukiest thing that's ever happened. Next week: Wolverine and Barney hug and hold hands!

Kurt: Man, Barney-bashing was fun in the early '90s. I got weeks of laughs out of that stupid purple dinosaur.



X-Factor #6 $2.99

Al: The origin of Layla Miller, if you care.

Kurt: And I don't even know who that is, so it all works out!



Questions? Comments? Let us know what you think at comicscape@cinescape.com.



More From Mania

David Hine: Comics, Manga, & More!

Digital Debate
(Wednesday, September 20, 2006)
Comicscape February 2, 2005
(Wednesday, February 2, 2005)
Comicscape - April 28, 2004
(Wednesday, April 28, 2004)
Comicscape - May 3, 2006
(Wednesday, May 3, 2006)

See more related content
More Content By Kurt Amacker
Comicscape: Something is Always in the Way
(Wednesday, October 8, 2008)
DAREDEVIL #110
(Wednesday, October 8, 2008)
Comicscape: The Kirkman vs. Bendis Steel Cage Match
(Wednesday, October 1, 2008)
Comicscape: Saving Superman's House
(Wednesday, September 24, 2008)
Holy Shitaki, Batgirl
(Wednesday, September 17, 2008)
X-FORCE #6
(Wednesday, September 17, 2008)
PUNISHER: WAR JOURNAL #23
(Monday, September 15, 2008)
Comicscape: What Expands Must Contract
(Wednesday, September 10, 2008)
Comicscape: Warner Bros. Takes DC to the Movies
(Wednesday, August 27, 2008)
Comic Review: DRACULA MEETS THE WOLFMAN #1
(Monday, August 25, 2008)
Fandango Logo
Comments/Responses
1
• Apr 26, 2006, 06:50am •
It is just product placement. It's supposed to be in the background. It's not suppose to have Spider-Man talking about how delicious he finds Coke to be, or that he thinks it might have contributed to his super-powers. If the Punisher is going to torture someone (I guess that shouldn't really be an "if") then that person won't be the character wearing the Nike shirt. This is such a non-issue. I'm sure advertisers who pay for whole page ads give more money than a company only paying for a product placement, and thus would have more influence. Do you feel that any advertisers have heavily influenced stories so far? And if product placement slows down cover price increases, I'm all for it.

• Apr 26, 2006, 07:53am •
Yes advertisers have influenced stories and recently.

A few months ago, Marvel increased the number of advertising pages in some comics so that they appeared on virtually every other page. Several comics also had a two-page ad for a car early in the comic. It was seriously distracting.

Marvel stopped that and I think it was unintentional if I remember correctly, but it was certainly influencing how the comics were presented. Now they're including several ad pages in the backs of several books, which is better in my opinion.

I'm against putting advertising into the comic art, even if it is only product placement. Right now, I can just skim through the ads as I want, but now I'll "be forced" to see the ads. And yes, seeing a Coke can does take me out of a story. It does during movies and tv shows too... this is escapist entertainment after all. It's subtle sure, but it happens.

Seems like comics that are more "street level" will be the hardest hit, as cosmic stories like Silver Surfer and Infinite Crisis would have less opportunties for someone to be drinking a Coke. So I'm thinking comics like Daredevil, Spider-man and Batman will receive the most ads(even with the voluntary thing Marvel, and presumably DC, will set up).

It would be different if the comics were all cheaper as a result, but they won't be. Hopefully, they'll all stay at around $3 for the next couple years. Maybe product placement will help that happen... but they aren't saying that as a selling point so it's doubtful.

But I'm not stupid and know they need to earn all the advertising revenue they can. Maybe it's just a necessary "evil." I just worry that this could affect stories in the future, even if it's completely minor... like needing to fit that last deodorant placement ad into a comic... anywhere.

• Apr 26, 2006, 08:37am •
As long as the product placement doesn't change the focus of the story or the characters, I really don't care. And, if product placement revenue helps, limit price increases, or allows the companies (especially Marvel lately) put out a better product (writing and drawing - the 65th anniversary "special" for Captain America was absolutely horrible), I'm all for it. What will probably happen though is the companies will just absorb the money for more impressive numbers for their investors/shareholders.

• Apr 26, 2006, 11:56am •
I am opposed to paid advertising within the art panels of comic books. Unless the product is put in by the artistic team in a "natural" fashion, I think it *always* affects the expression and focus of the character and the story. By "natural", I mean a choice made solely by the artistic team to add a realistic, visceral sense of mis-en-scene or just because they like the product themselves and it's their "in-joke".

I dislike being inundated by logos on a perpetual basis, but such is the nature of life in the 21st century. Today's citizens advertise their brand loyalty as a fundamental indication of their identity. Look at the uniform of the males of today: baggy pants/shorts and a t-shirt with a big, honking logo on it. Often, they *pay* for the privilege to own these shirts and then wear them without compensation. It's a win-win situation... for the advertisers!

Anyway, back to comics... I cannot imagine why a creative team would "volunteer" to choose to add select, advertised products in their books. They could just add the products without checking in with Joe Quesada to see which brands were the anointed choices of the month. And what if Pepsi is paying that month? Will the creative team be forced to erase their references to Coke? How much longer will the program at Marvel remain "voluntary" if no creative teams opt to incorporate advertising into their books?

As Kurt says, "It’s a small step in a bad direction." Except, I would change the word "small" to "big". This is not an ideal way to drive profits for the comic industry. Compelling stories, great graphics and the excitement of the unknown will always win the day.

• Apr 27, 2006, 10:29am •
"Yes advertisers have influenced stories and recently.

A few months ago, Marvel increased the number of advertising pages in some comics so that they appeared on virtually every other page. Several comics also had a two-page ad for a car early in the comic. It was seriously distracting. "

This isn't advertisers affecting stories. This is poor placement of ads hurting the flow of the story. I'm talking about advertisers (current full page advertisers, not new product placement) saying "Oh, we don't want Captain America to be against Hero Registration because we don't want people to think that Coca-Cola hates the government." I can't think of any instance where advertisers have tried to take control of a story, and I don't think product placement will change that. Also, I don't see how having characters use real products can take you out of a the story. The majority of Marvel characters live in a real city, does that bother you? As long as the characters aren't saying things like "Boy Batman, the Joker was real tough tonight. I think I'll relax with the cool refreshing taste of Coca-Cola!" product placement is no big deal.

mckracken • Apr 27, 2006, 09:44pm •
its when the publishers get carried away and "REALLY" make the product placement "SPOTLIGHTED" instead of subliminal.

I have a cartoon of Batman on my site right now, and on the belt where the BAT logo goes, is a Nike check... nobody has said anything about it either way. LOL!

also read this Marvel and DC:
DIAMOND DISTRIBUTION IS A FREAKIN MONOPOLY... MONOPOLY'S ARE VERY BAD!!! REMEMBER "PAC BELL"?
(subtle hint #1: WE KNOW!!!)

anyway, drink Coke.
peace out.
-Mck

• Apr 28, 2006, 07:34am •
"Do you feel that any advertisers have heavily influenced stories so far?"

My initial response about the number of ads affecting a story was addressing that comment. In a general sense, advertisers were affecting the stories by the ad placement. I don't know who placed the ads technically, but I was seeing ads and not additional comic panels... therefore, the advertisers/advertisements were affecting the comic story. I think we're both reading a rather general comment differently, that's all.

Seeing products anywhere takes me out of a story. It's just something I notice and probably doesn't affect everyone, but each time I see a product in a movie, I think "eh, product placement."

Honestly, it's just too much. Comics already cost $3 each (at least), are full of ads, and now they are going to add product placement into that art of the comic itself? I wonder how much comics would be with no ads... $5, $10? Maybe that wouldn't be so bad.

And yes, I know I see a billion ads a day or whatever.

This simply sets a bad precedent. When Marvel and DC were adding the ads for free, they were in charge of where they were put and how frequently. Now, these give the advertisers just a little more leverage and DC and Marvel get another "boss" who can dictate what's appearing in their comics.

And these will affect comics. Advertisers are going to be paying for their products to be noticed and they'll know the best ways for this to happen. They are professionals. That just seems bad to me.

By the way, Pepsi-man could beat Captain Coke in a fight, especially if he's given time to prepare. Just figured I'd start preparing for "the future of comics." :)


• Apr 29, 2006, 06:13pm •
Marvel and DC put enough advirtisements in their comics, maybe product placement will mean's they might actually stop taking up over half the pages in an average issue of anything.

mckracken • May 01, 2006, 07:18pm •
not likely Keith... not bloody likely.
I'm waiting for DC's new anti-Hero the Rio, who drives a KIA RIO and fights Evil Agents of P.E.P.S.I. every month!
how about the Dodge Viper who drives a... or forget it.

1
Login to post a comment!