We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
The amendment further notes that multiple product announcements not meeting these criteria (i.e., piggybacks) shall be considered as two or more commercials.
Excluded from these provisions are multiple product commercials of retail or service establishments.
As an aid and a guide to alleviate some of the wholesale confusion that has arisen, the NAB code office prepared and has available copies of a 16mm film called the "Multiple Product Announcements Exhibit." This seven-minute film is composed of seven commercials: two piggyback and five integrated. For educational purposes, it is available to sponsors and agencies who may be interested in viewing specific examples of integrated and piggyback commercials.
Speaking of these examples, the Code Authority advises that an integrated announcement contains the following: Unifying theme; situa
tions or settings that are common throughout the commercial; one or more shots of both products together, if feasible; interweaving of the products in the commercial; a flow of common production values that would include such things as the same voice-over announcer, cast, musical background, lighting, scenery, etc."
Helffrich emphasizes that there can be no specific ground rules to follow. "In some cases," he says, "I have been surprised by the ingenuity of the copywriters who achieved integration in unlikely situations."
Although the NAB enthusiastically favors integration, the piggyback is a healthy commercial vehicle. And the current controversy has all but obscured the stated goal of the amendment:
Fearing possible government intervention as a result of public and private clamor over clutter, early
this year the NAB decided that the trouble lay in the "appearance or impression" of ovcrcommercialization. Singling out the "increasing use of multiple product announcements" as one of the chief causes, NAB code director Howard Bell moved to ban the piggyback. But a modification of this severe stand was instead adopted via the now effective amendment designed to reduce the number of apparently "different" commercial messages aired in a given time period. This will be accomplished, the Code Authority believes, if multiple product advertisers switch from the piggyback to the integrated format. Then, a multiple product "sell" would appear to the viewer as one commercial, rather than as two or more "separate" back-to-back messages.
The NAB's involvement with the piggyback is not new. A forerunner of the amendment was written into the code in 1956, the year that the
)N!OI
Credit: U. S. Tele-Service Corp.
October 5, 1964
33