How To Watch Television

27. Modern Family: Product Placement

253 27 Modern Family Product Placement Kevin Sandler Abstract: Although television is overwhelmingly a commercial medium, audiences still expect boundaries between commercials and program content, particularly in narrative programming. Kevin Sandler examines an interesting case of product integration: the controversy that surrounded an episode of the hit sitcom Modern Family, the narrative of which conspicuously centered on Apple’s iPad just days before that device became available for purchase. “Game Changer,” a first season episode of ABC’s Modern Family (2009–present), begins with Phil Dunphy all set to wake up early the next day—his birthday—and get in line at 6 a.m. at the Apple Store to buy an iPad. “It’s like Steve Jobs and God got together to make this the best birthday ever!” he says. His wife Claire, thrilled to have a handle on what her husband Phil actually wants for his birthday (her previous idea was light-up barbecue tongs), offers to camp out at the Apple store to get him the iPad. Alas, she falls asleep on the couch, and the iPad is sold out before she arrives. Claire subsequently enlists her two daughters, Haley and Alex, to “Facebook, chat, buzz, bling” their way to an “iPad thingy.” In the meantime, Claire hears about a new shipment of iPads at the Apple Store, only to get thrown out of line with her brother Mitchell (who retrieved her wallet from home) for fighting with a man who cut in front of them. Ultimately, though, Phil’s son Luke obtains an iPad by emailing all of his father’s “geek friends,” claiming that Phil is dying and his final wish is to get an iPad. The episode concludes with Phil getting his iPad and celebrating his birthday with his family. Happy ending achieved, narrative equilibrium restored. Prior to the airing of “Game Changer” (March 31, 2010), Modern Family had received nearly universal acclaim from critics and fans since its debut in September 2009. The show was the highest-rated new comedy of the broadcast season, and eventually won the Emmy Award for Best Comedy Series later that August. By its second season, Modern Family had become the most watched scripted 254 Kevin Sandler broadcast series in the 18–49 demographic.1 In fact, “Game Changer” drew the series’ biggest number in that key demo in almost two months—a 3.8 rating (with each point translating into 1.3 million viewers).2 In what proved to be merely a temporary setback to the series’ reputation, a heated debate ensued in the news media and blogosphere regarding the episode ’s iPad-centric nature. Two distinct camps emerged: one side considered the iPad integration to be unforgiveable and shameless, a profit-driven partnership of Modern Family’s production company, Twentieth Century Fox Television, the ABC network, and Apple. Another faction found it realistic and convincing, a savvy creator-fueled storyline that made sense within the show’s fictional world. Characterizing these divergent positions was a widely circulated pair of posts appearing on the “The Live Feed” blog of the Hollywood Reporter that involved television editor James Hibberd and Modern Family co-creator (with Steve Levitan) Christopher Lloyd. Hibberd suggested that “the iPad scenes felt like an advertisement ,” the end result being that ABC “water[ed] down a brand with the perception of selling out . . . especially if it didn’t sell out.”3 In response, Lloyd claimed, “there was no product placement,” though Modern Family “ha[d] made those agreements with other companies.” In this case, he said, no financial transaction was guiding the iPad’s representation, as “it was all story-driven.”4 The “agreement” that Lloyd refers to here was the season-long product-placement deal for Modern Family that ABC had previously struck with Toyota for its Sienna and Prius vehicles. Unlike the iPad, these Toyota product integrations, which had totaled over eight minutes of airtime up to this point, drew virtually no media response.5 “Game Changer,” however, was a different story. Questions arose akin to Hibberd’s and Lloyd’s contrasting assessments over the motives behind the iPad integration. For instance, had ABC crossed the line in corporate synergy under the influence of Apple CEO Steve Jobs, who, at the time, was the largest shareholder and sat on the board of ABC parent corporation, The Walt Disney Company? Did Modern Family violate its trust with the viewing public, as the series had received a Peabody Award for its “distinguished achievement and meritorious...