A vote for product placement

The Economist magazine has come out in favor of product placement - something I've drawn attention to in the past (see, e.g., Can we avoid the ads any more?). The news peg is that the European Union is planning to legalize product placement, which has not surprisingly led to some stiff opposition in a continent that is often less friendly toward commercial interests than is the case in the U.S. My natural inclination is with the European critics - to say "No more ads, please!"; but the economically libertarian Economist demurs, and bases its argument for allowing product placement precisely on the point that annoys so many about so much modern advertising: its ubiquity and the relentlessness of its commercial message, both at the conscious and subconscious levels. In a commentary piece, "Ride and Prejudice" (paid registration required), the journal reminds us that

if advertising that slips imperceptably into people's brains were to be banned, a great deal of what goes on would be outlawed. After all, drivers spinning past hoardings don't necessarily consciously clock the message they've seen; often they file it unconsciously -- as you, flicking through these pages [of the magazine], may well absorb the notion that an expensive watch or a new phone will change your life in some vague but enticing way.

So the argument for allowing product placement is that product placement is already all around us, in every sphere of our lives, thanks to ever-increasing advertising "clutter" in all walks of life in our society; deal with it! European TV producers should at least be able to make some money under the circumstances. Unfortunately, it's an argument as compelling as it is sad.