unforum

[Rolerbe]

I think the cover girl story does not predate our discussion of it by much. Some are very bothered by it, but (surprise to me) most are not.

[thebruce]

well we'll find out soon enough I guess, release is right around the corner...

[Phaedra]

Update on the 42 site about the book.

[Caspian]

[matt_the_pale]

Hey guys, the message on the phone number has changed since the beginning of this thread. This is the original message:

[Fi]

Some more info on the Powells website:

[Phaedra]

[ArchaicDome]

Riddle

[matt_the_pale]

Re: Riddle

[dmax]

I'm sad, so sad, to see that no one mentioned how Ian Fleming had sold his literary soul to the devil for specifically mentioning the "Aston Martin" or "Walther PPK," and wished instead that Bond had "jumped into his automobile and grabbed his firearm."

Kids.

[Fi]

Some more press in USA Today

[theShaggy]

[impboy]

Hey, kids. So after a longish period of lurking, I feel it's time I weighed in here regarding the product placement controversy.

It's quite distressing to me to see that most of you really can't be bothered with concern over our kids, and how there's virtually no place left for them to go anymore where they aren't barraged with messages telling them to buybuybuy. I am very entranced with the notion of ARGs, but not with the fact that most of them are glorified commercials. I'm sorry, Sean Stewart, but a commercial is not an "art form," unless consumerism is the only thing that defines our lives.

I have a stepfather who runs a bookstore in Western Massachusetts, and while he was unaware of this book, he himself had problems with the notion of product placement in a book geared towards young adults. (think about it: would you have trusted Judy Blume as much if Sheila The Great was little more than a fictional spokesperson for Pepsi?) It's also telling that it's two MALES in their 30s-40s are pushing cosmetics, and by extension beauty standards, on young teenage girls. It starts to sound vaguely predatory to me, especially considering the condescending way the book addresses its potential audience on the 42 site. ("Cathy's Book speaks teen (omg!)") The fact that a 42 member is a former branding staffer for Procter & Gamble is also telling as well.

I'd refer you to the excellent PBS Frontline series "The Merchants Of Cool" or Alissa Quart's "Branded" for a deeper analysis on the issues. If you're a youth marketing or advertising type, this sort of argument is basically the enemy. But I think it spells out a code of ethics that I feel are sorely lacking in the ARG world and the machinations of its pioneers.

[thebruce]

hm. Well, here's my perspective and understanding on the issue.

First of all, the book wasn't written for product placement. As has been said numerous times, the book was already written, with generic product references, which then became brand names. The intent is not in your face advertising, it's not like reading commercials. If anything it's in passing, you'll recognize a name and think 'hey, that's real'.

Secondly, they're not "hey go buy this", as above, they're passive references to products. The reader then has the choice to say 'hm, I might try that', or continue reading and shrug off any brand names they read as simply a part of the story (which most will do anyway).

Thirdly, it's not like this is the be all and end all of novel artistry and novelist integrity. This is one book, and there's no doubt that another book like this won't exist for a while, and even then the novelist will have to be taking a risk with their career simply because of the controversy surrounding this novel. Let alone the fact that most novelists will still consider writing an art form and like the critics, won't 'give in' to commercialism in their writings. So no conspiracy theory here about commerce taking over our last realm of pure creativity and literary art.

Fourth, no one is being forced to buy this book, it is buy choice. You know how many books out there sit on shelves not getting bought simply because they're not liked? Same goes with this one - if it's successful, it means people want it, not that they're being force fed it.

Fifth, perhaps in the future some time, there will be a book that's funded by some brand name or product as advertising for it. But that time isn't now. This isn't a novel intended to be an ARG for Cover Girl. It's an independent ARG, attempting to break new ground in novel form, then agreeing to an unpervasive partnership with at least one company in order to make the novel world that much more realistic to the reader - not an attempt at selling that company's product. The direct benefit is for both sides - for the novel, it's a more immersive environment; for the company, it's additional exposure to the brand name that isn't intrusive (at least that was the intent, which is the whole subjective controversy right now).

Both sides win. And people would realize the entire situation without blowing it out of proportion, then one could sit down and enjoy what we can expect to be an amazing storytelling experience that breaks beyond the boundaries of the novel's pages.

But, as usual, this is all IMHO

[imbri]

impboy: I think the accusation that we can't be bothered with concern over kids is a bit of an insult.

I am concerned about advertising to children. I am also concerned about the pressure that children are under today, not just the pressure of consumerism, but the pressure of competition and the lack of actual free play and quality entertainment. I know of children that have more stress in their lives than I do and, unlike me, they are not provided the free time or space to work through that stress. They get up and go to school. After school, it's straight to ballet/soccer/piano/scouts where adults tell them where and how to play and supervise the activity. Then it's straight home to eat dinner and start in on homework. When they're done, they may have a few hours to kill before bed. They'll probably spend that time watching tv, online, or playing a video game.

So, here I see a book written by an award winning writer. A writer whose other works (books and online experiences) I have read and so I know the caliber of the writing (and, as a woman, I've always been remarkably impressed with how well he writes female characters). I know that he has daughters and feels the concerns of parents everywhere. And, this book that he's written will engage their imagination and get them to read and to think and to work through some simple logic (something that many girls in that age range are intimidated to do). Could they do this with another book? To a degree, yes. But this book is more than just words on paper or the mention of eyeliner or lipstick, it is an interactive mystery. It will take kids out of the pressures of their everyday lives, lives where their actions are dictated by adults without the ability to explore their own thoughts and give them that opportunity.

It is because of my concern for children that I would much rather see my niece (and nephew! don't want to sell the boys short here) engage with something like Cathy's Book than whatever teen drama is on tv. I would much rather see her reading this than Seventeen or Cosmo where the images inundating her are unrealistic and advice given is often beyond her years (though, unfortunately, not her understanding). I would much rather have her puzzling through the story mystery than exploring any number of other websites. And, honestly, if it takes changing a few minor lines in the book from one product line to another to get this out there, than it is worth it to me. The benefits far outweigh any risks, as far as I can see.

Though, I do recognize the fears that you may have and I do not want to discount them. I would encourage any parent or consumer to research the products they allow their children to have. Just as I would hope that a parent wouldn't close their eyes to a television show or a video game, they shouldn't do the same with a book. So, before passing judgement and declaring that it's nothing but a big commercial, I encourage you to read it. Certainly, you wouldn't be making judgement based on hearsay and press alone.