I was catching up with the weekend’s football last night and revelling in the enjoyment of the Manchester derby.
As Mike Phelan was being interviewed after the match, I took a proper look at the hoarding behind his head and was astounded.
I think we all know that the BBC’s policy on advertising has slipped a little in the past few years, but just how blatant is it on MoTD.
I looked closely at the screen (pic as you can see on the left) and realised there were none other than 7 different brands/companies being plugged. And that’s not forgetting the BBC Sport logo.
OK, so football is a different animal anyway because of the hoardings on the side of the pitch and on-shirt sponsorship, but the post-match interview is completely separate from that part of the game, isn’t it?
I get annoyed with the constant plugging of their own programmes in between other shows, but this is a step too far, surely.
4 thoughts on “How much advertising can the BBC get away with?”
Great match! Firstly, it’s important to note these comments are my own and not the BBC’s/
Secondly, I think you are a little off with the facts. This is not BBC advertising. It is the Premier League advertising to the public. Not only does the BBC make no money from this advertising, they have to invest a significant amount into securing rights to show the games.
It’s the same with advertising in Formula 1, where advertising is not part of the game, but the whole F1 circus.
Advertising is part of football, but you are seeming to hate the game and the player.
Your google ads cover your comments box, by the way, so I can’t see what I’m typing half the time when I leave a comment.
OK, I know it’s not true BBC advertising – I’m being deliberately incendiary -but it’s still offensive being bombarded by all the different logos.
I suppose it seems a little odd to have the BBC Sport logo in the middle of the hoarding, surrounded by all the other brands. I know that the Premier League have things sewn up big time when it comes to merchandising and rights.
I could forgive it slightly if it was a live match, but this is pre-recorded highlights, so it seems far more unforgiveable.
And I really don’t hate the game and the player – although I can’t help wondering if football would be better off if some of the money disappeared.
I see your point.
There is a problem with the organisers or brand owners.
It’s rediculous how I can watch baseball highlights from the US (ie international rights), within 45 minutes of the game ending, and watch them again weeks later for free. In fact for $20 a YEAR ( A YEAR!!!) I can watch live games on my PC and store the game on my PC in case I miss any of it or want to watch it later, without any advertising. And their players are paid more. I think the whole model is broken.