Talk:Product placement

Purpose
Are we only going to mention companies placed in films or shows because they paid to have their product in them, or all instances of a real-world products being used, like Guinness? - 19:04, April 23, 2011 (UTC)


 * We could have both in the same article, with paid placements in a section and other real-world products in another. In that case, it would probably need to have a different title.  If we don't want to have a combined article like that, then I would agree with limiting this one to just paid placements.--31dot 19:22, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

I don't think we would need to change the title if we include unconfirmed product placements, since for all we know the prop guy was slipped a $50 to put that sign on set. Also, are we even sure about the current ones listed? I added Pacific Bell because I assumed they paid to have a wall sized ad in the movie, but it could have just been added, as they say today, "for the lulz." - 19:37, April 23, 2011 (UTC)


 * To be honest, I hadn't really considered that. I created this article based on statements scattered around on various articles, since I thought it was best to keep a list in one place. I assume this proposed split confirmed/unconfirmed (in text, not in pages) is like bottle show?


 * I'll keep an eye out for citations that X product was considered a product placement. seems well-covered, so hopefully some stuff for the others will turn up as well.–Cleanse ( talk 00:31, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * As for another one to keep an eye out for, the bottle of Dom Pérignon in is claimed to have been product placement in our article for  (sic), which based on a quick google search may or may not be true :D -- Capricorn 17:30, May 28, 2011 (UTC)

Specifics
JD was not actually featured in STV, but was thanked in the end credits. It was, however, shown and mentioned in STXI. -- sulfur 19:55, April 23, 2011 (UTC)