* This blog is dedicated to the bich (oh yes, I KNOW I spelled it wrong!), moderators at TWOP. Without Strenga et AL, I'd be happily posting-away along with the best of them. Unfortunately, TWOP is a little too heavy-handed, high-falootin' and downright unfriendly.
*(added 2011)-Amended to mean Strega's Real Housewives forum(s) and of course those Bravo Blogs that eat your comments w/o posting them. I still visit TWOP for the best snark.

*(Added April 30th, it has come to my attention that some of the rumors posted on this blog are definitely FALSE. Most rumors are clearly labeled as such, but in case I missed any, please keep that in mind)

Saturday, December 10, 2011

Why I don't like Sponsor Boycotts

The post directly before this one, is a plea to see less of the Kardashians. No where in that post, did I suggest boycotting, or even contacting the sponsors of the show. On my NJ Housewives blog, my most recent post does mention my own personal-protest, which involves my resolve to NOT tune-in to The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills, except for re-runs. So, that is a bit of a boycott, but in no way do I ask anyone else to join me in my protest. I DO support letting producers, (Bravo), and responsible parties know how we the viewers feel about what is broadcast. And yes, I support organising-efforts in that regard (link to my NJ Housewives blog here) , and in the instance of certain highly controversial events, for example allowing the people who didn't want to be known-as the White-House Party-Crashers, to appear on The Real Housewives of DC.
I recently visited a site called, "Boycott Kim Kardashian", http://boycottkim.com/ and I was surprized to see the call for a massive sponsor boycott, which takes-up the bulk of the site.
In yet one more example, (with a twist of course), today on Reality Blurred (link to article here), I see a request to avoid a sponsor, because the sponsor pulled its advertising from a reality-show that could be considered controversial.
Advertising and sponsoring popular programs has been-around longer-than television. Its the reason why AM/FM radio is still "free". "Soap"-operas, got their name from the companies who advertised their products to the audience. Even William Shakespeare had wealthier patrons who supported, (and they still do!), bringing entertainment to the public. And that is why you will never see me calling BOYCOTT!, on a sponsor.
Why punish the sponsors for giving us something? I consider it to be a compliment, that a sponsor would choose to spend its advertising dollars to pay for my entertainment.
Advertisers do extensive research in viewer demographics. One thing that the BOYCOTT people and I agree-with, is that most commercials and ads are not random. They are specifically targeted to reach YOU and ME, and what they have identified as reality-television viewers. How can alienating sponsors, or asking them NOT to pay for reality-television, benefit the viewers?
Ultimately, sponsors can determine advertising effectiveness with product sales. There is an old rumor that razor companies produce sharper and better razors, to entice consumers to stick with their brand, to coincide with the increased sales that are expected as a result of the Superbowl Sunday advertising blitz. 
So we develop intimate relationships with these companies, and when something disturbs us in the shows that they sponsor, we naturally want to hold someone responsible. The list-of sponsors that we are asked to avoid on the Boycott Kim page, is so extensive that if anyone seriously tried to abstain from all of them, it would make shopping difficult. I saw one brand-name in there that I use due to allergies to other products. How would my family breaking-out in hives, affect the Kardashian empire? It wouldn't. And that's another reason why I'll leave the manufacturing-of quality products to the companies who advertise. And the responsibility for the content of the programs with the networks and those that have more direct input into the editing and production of the shows.