'Message Placement': Is It a Good Idea?

Do noble intentions justify mass propaganda? If you're Bill Gates, the answer is yes.

The New York Times reports today that the Microsoft founder's philanthropic foundation is partnering with Viacom in an effort to promote education through messages "embedded" into the fabric of shows on MTV, VH1, Nickelodeon and other networks:

While Viacom is donating on-air time for public-service announcements, and foundation officials are consulting with programming executives, the foundation is also putting up money for production -- not just to make public-service announcements but also to indirectly subsidize Viacom's programming.

The foundation has also used its clout to influence the portrayal of topics including H.I.V. transmission on shows including E.R., Law & Order: SVU and Private Practice. Likening it to the product placement now common in prime time, especially on reality shows, the Times labels the phenomenon "message placement," and notes that philanthropies like the Kaiser Family Foundation have long sought to influence entertainment programming -- though never before by helping to finance it.

Though no one's questioning Gates's intentions, the idea of using cash to induce writers and producers to weave socially-responsible themes into their scripts carries some unsavory associations. Back in 2000, Salon revealed that the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy was paying the networks to include anti-drug plot lines in their sitcoms and dramas. The semi-covert nature of the program ensured a backlash once it was exposed, and the ONDCP let it expire a few months later.

The Viacom/Gates deal is a bit different. "Stay in school" is a less controversial message than "Support our government's failed and costly drug war," for one thing. And it sounds like both parties recognize the need for transparency to dispel the whiff of Big Brother-ishness: The partnership will be formally introduced with a programming block across all Viacom channels on Sept. 8.

Still, I can't help but wonder if it's a good idea. Product placement, particularly in scripted entertainment, requires a high degree of finesse to pull off. Done wrong -- eg. "Oh, Daddy, the Rogue!" -- it turns the product (or message) into an object of ridicule. As anti-drug and pro-abstinence campaigns have shown, efforts to influence the behavior of teenagers often have negligible or even perverse results. This money might be better spent elsewhere.