Is Conan O’Brien a Corporate Shill?
Written by Edward ChampionPosted on September 30, 2009
Filed Under Advertising, Television
We saw Prime Minster John Key on David Letterman’s show pushing Cinnabon while reading the Top Ten List. But what happens if you’re a world leader who appears on a late night program and you don’t even have a choice? Take Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s September 28, 2009 appearance on The Tonight Show. The production team grabbed a clip and decided to add subtitles featuring Subway products. Indeed, Conan O’Brien’s zeal for Subway is so strong that he interrupts jockey Joe Talamo, which you can see at the 0:47 mark. Does Conan just like Subway sandwiches or does he have a sponsor to appease?
This is the third video in the “corporate shill” series, which follows Jay Leno and David Letterman. In deciding whether or not Conan O’Brien fits the shilling bill, you may want to ask why O’Brien makes reference to two recent consumer events (The Gap founder dying and The Wizard of Oz DVD coming out this week) two nights in a row.
Comments
11 Responses to “Is Conan O’Brien a Corporate Shill?”
Leave a Reply
Beyond Heaving Bosoms by Sarah Wendell and Candy Tan. The famed writers behind
Alice Fantastic by Maggie Estep. This wild and highly enjoyable narrative involves two sisters (presumably, the third one was still being rented out by Chekhov), a hippie ex-junkie mother who lives with seventeen dogs, a murder, gambling, and libidinous Hollywood actresses who live in Woodstock. But this is the wonderful Maggie Estep we're talking here. And what seems at first like a quirky yarn becomes something unexpectedly moving about connectivity. What I love about Estep's work is the way that she'll juxtapose an extremely astute observation (now that you mention it, why do cab drivers always have somebody to talk with on the phone past midnight?) with an often outrageous story development.
Generosity by Richard Powers. It doesn't come out until September 29th, but Richard Powers's latest will have anyone committed to books reconsidering their literary fervor. I foresee some animosity from the vanilla critics hostile to idea-driven novels, but book bloggers, YouTube chroniclers, and MFAs would do well to plunge into this chance-taking narrative, which introduces vital questions about what the reader's relationship is with media, scientific dissection, and "creative nonfiction." Are we rats fleeing to happy cities? Or can we find the humanism within the purported plague?
Pieces for the Left Hand by J. Robert Lennon. Lennon is one of the most underrated fiction writers working today. Much as On the Night Plain proved that Lennon had a lot more in the toolbox than heartfelt (and often very funny) suburban satire, this slim but fascinating volume juxtaposes 100 small-town anecdotes -- arranged by category -- in a manner that reads, at times, like Nicholson Baker's passions for minutiae and, at other times, Stewart O'Nan's concern for psychological detail. The result is fiction that makes us wonder about whether one person's subjective view of particulars can entirely be trusted. This book never found a publisher in 2005. But thankfully, Graywolf has released it in the United States, along with Lennon's latest novel, The Castle.
Wonderful World by Javier Calvo. This wonderfully raucous volume has been completely ignored by the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times. But it's probably one of the most delightful reading experiences I've had this year. Calvo cavalierly mashes up multiple genres and manages to mix up familial subtext with larger-than-life, almost cartoonish characters. (Indeed, one might argue that one mobster's penis is a character of its own in this sprawling novel.). This is not an easy thing to pull off, but Calvo makes it work. And it's helped immeasurably by Mara Faye Lethem's idiom-specific translation. (
The Means of Reproduction, Michelle Goldberg This thoughtful book tackles the complicated (and little discussed) subject of reproductive rights from numerous angles, which includes a number of unpleasant but necessary ones. The upshot is that there isn't a quick fix solution for declining birth rates and fundamentalist abuses. Just about every political faction has contributed to the friction. But you'll want to read this book anyway to refamiliarize yourself with the topic, but also to understand just what's occurred during the past several decades to get us where we are today. (
Could it be that pop culture is so pervasive that this is how we talk? Also, consider that O’Brien has a team of writers who are searching headlines and sites for material that will resonate with the broadest and most general audience. So, while I see your point–taken to heart, it is–I must profess that it’s a coincidence.
To keep it interesting, go back and find old ’80s monologues and see how those fare? Letterman’s and maybe Carson’s? And then compare Late Night O’Brien with Tonight Show O’Brien. Are the references the same or was there a drastic change?
You act like you’re surprised that these shows have lots of product placement. I mean, seriously, this is all advertisers have left now that everyone watches on Hulu or has Tivo or whatever.
Is The Onion a corporate shill?
Kyle W.: Then explain to me Conan’s incongruous interruption of the jockey to mime eating a Subway sandwich. That’s not coincidental. Subway regularly conducts product placement on NBC.
Eric: The problem is that guys like Kyle W. begin to believe that product placement is “coincidental.” Thus, it’s necessary to point these things out. In this case, you have the Gap and the Wizard of Oz DVD two nights in a row. Why must we tacitly accept all this or pretend that it doesn’t happen? Why do we buy Tina Fey’s lie that the McFlurry isn’t product placement on 30 Rock?
Shane: No. Well, mostly no.
Conan is usually much more upfront about his product placement. They had that “Please Blow Up My Car” and that was definitely product placement. A lot of the examples in the video are probably coincidences though. Conan probably wouldn’t mind getting paid for them, but that’s not why they’re telling the jokes. On one of the first shows, for example, he happened to mention Choco Tacos as part of a joke. Later, the people that make them sent a case of them to the studio as a thank you gift, but Conan didn’t know that was coming. He was just making comedy. Conan should be allowed to make references to things that are part of everyone’s lives without being labeled as a “corporate shill.”
I think the point being missed here is that all of them work for corporate-owned networks that are in return sponsored by corporate-owned products. To call them corporate shills is slightly misleading since they don’t pretend to be otherwise nor could they. It’s interesting but a non-story nonetheless.
all good points. pop culture is pervasive, makes the jokes more tangible to the consuming viewers. still, though, they’re not writing heady jokes devoid of product references, which, i’m sure, they were doing in their stand-up days. it’s mostly ‘in the news’ type stuff, current events. but the prevalence of taco bell, doritos, gap, what have you at nbc & cbs & abc is most likely due to the suits saying work this in. do you think these people are this unfunny? comedy for the masses works on major networks. i prefer craig’s monologues because there’s a bit of storytelling in them. i can’t remember if there’s a lot of product name-dropping on the late late show; i’m sure there is, but it has more of a stand-up vibe.
I think the rest of the comments sum it up nicely, Ed. It’s a non-story. If by “corporate shill”, you mean someone who blatantly, and with total disregard to the aesthetics of their art, hock an item for money, then yes, they are all shills. Cause who else is going to give them enough capital to run the show? The Onion would be a good one to study here. This all reminds me of D.F. Wallace, though. O’Brien, especially. The way he tries–or tried–to subvert the need to shill by acting corny, employing irony and such. But now it’s old hat and boring.
What’s most interesting to me out of all this is how adept young people are to sussing this out. They don’t need older people to explain it anymore. They’ve reached a saturation point. I teach freshman comp. at a state school, and my students are well past the need for decodifying rhetorical stances in Pepsi ads and the like. Not that there isn’t strata to unearth with them. Teaching them subtleties and modes of composition that are straightforward. Whatever. I feel like I am typing into the aether here. Hope all is well with whomever reads this.
I don’t get all the fuss about Conan, Dave, and Jay, and all the others being corporate shills. That’s the whole point of all these shows anyway. Every guest is there specifically to promote their latest book, show, movie or cause. In-between whoring guests we get actual commercials hocking real goods. Why would the hosts be any different?
It’s certainly no different than it ever has been for the television industry. Advertisers pay for the shows, so if you don’t like it I guess you’ll have to find entertainment where they charge admission.
Your video doesn’t even scratch the surface on how Conan’s show has changed over the years (Considering “Tonight” and “Late Night” one in the same) – I mean, it’s not unusual at all for him to have an entire 3-minute or so long sketch devoted to a sponsor, like a month or so ago when he and Andy knocked down an arrangement of Domino’s employees, or the other night when he decided to interview the Intel developer who invented USB. It does seem silly to point out how commercial these shows are getting since their second halves have always been commercials anyway – but there is something depressing about the fact that even the straight-ahead comedy portions are starting in a marketing department before the writers/performers are then charged with making something funny/watchable out of it.
Stephen Colbert is charming enough to make you almost not notice that he’s got tons of product placement in his show.