Yearbook of radio and television (1960)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




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.

DECEPTION IN ADS? . . . Animation Offers Freedom By TOM GOLDEN Animation Dir., National Screen Service Corp. WITH so-called "deception" and "misleading advertising" in television commercials a subject for public discussion, the diiiiculties facing the advertising agency and manufacturer of products, which do not lend themselves properly to the limitations of live photography without some adaptation, have become a matter of serious concern within the ranks of those responsible for television commercial production. To the experienced, the line between photographic necessity and deception is clear and well defined, but this is no longer the entire issue. Utterly confused by charges and countercharges the viewer is incapable of making the distinction. He has been given the impression that photogeny and misrepresentation are synonymous and the climate of suspicion and distrust which has been created, distracts him from the sales message and puts him in the mood to examine all advertising claims circumspectively and to be wary of camera trickery in live filmed television commercials. We feel that there is an answer to this perplexing uncertainty of what can and what cannot be done — an answer which both solves the problem and avoids the controversy: Animation! Animation, by its very nature, provides the artistic license that live photography has now been deprived of by this dispute. It is no secret that the use of animated commercials and combinations of animation and live footage has increased tremendously in recent years. Among the many advantageous factors inherent in the use of animation in television commercials, is the opportunity to create completely distinctive personalities. Here we have limitless freedom to design characters of nearly universal appeal, who become identified with the sponsor's product to such an extent that they begin to sell the iixoment they appear on the screen. Animation also makes it possible to enjoy unlimited continuity of these characters without the many obvious shortcomings of using live personalities. In addition, the production of animated commercials can, in many instances, be accomplished at a substantially lower cost than studio or location shooting. But most important is the ability of the animator to combine entertainment with advertising, humor with sales message, and to interweave both into a likeable commercial. The flexibility of the cartoon character permits the use of material and situations which might be difficult or impossible under live conditions. By no means do we suggest that animation should be used in all television commercials. Far from it! The major share of our business is — and always will be — live production. Most products or situations have no photographic problems or their problems can easily be corrected to the full satisfaction of the most skeptical viewer. There is plenty of room for imaginative photography and creative presentation in the studio or on location without running afoul of those inclined to be cynical. 120