Agricultural Brand Placement in Film
Thesis
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
By
Brooke Wood Beam, B.S.
Graduate Program in Agricultural and Extension Education
The Ohio State University
2014
Master’s Examination Committee:
Emily Buck, Ph.D., Advisor
Gary Straquadine, Ph.D.
Copyrighted by
Brooke Wood Beam
2014
2
Abstract
Product placement in films began to gain momentum as an advertising strategy in
1982, and has since become a multi billion-dollar business (Spurlock, 2011). Although agricultural companies are not likely to pay for screen time in films because they have such a small share of the general advertising market in the United States and typically advertise using print advertisements, agricultural products are still present on the silver screen when the plot of the film is agriculturally based. With the agricultural industry only directly connected to less than two percent of the population of the United States who live on farms (EPA's Ag Center, 2012), these products are only relevant to a few number of moviegoers. According to the Motion Picture Association of America, Inc., cinemas annually attract more people than attendance to theme parks and major United
States sports combined (MLB, NBA, NHL and NFL), in 2011 more than two-thirds of the population of the United States and Canada attended a movie at least once, and in
2012 alone the United States film industry grossed more than nine billion dollars (Motion
Picture Association of America, Inc. , 2011) (The Numbers, 2012). Because of the high viewing rate and marketing power of films, it is logical to analyze the agricultural brands present in films to determine which films are marketing the American pastoral image and which companies are reaping the benefits of free marketing services to millions of consumers. This study analyzed over 40 films from the past 25 years to determine how 26
ii agriculturally based brands were placed in the films from varying genres, ratings and production companies to represent the agricultural industry as a whole.
iii
Dedication
For my parents, David and Susan Beam, for always believing and encouraging me to
reach any goal I attempt to achieve.
iv
Acknowledgements
Thank you to all those who have made this study possible, your assistance has been greatly appreciated.
v
Vita
May 2008 ……………………………………………………… East Clinton High School
June 2012 …………………………………... B.S. Agriculture, The Ohio State University
August 2012 to present …………………… Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of
Agricultural Communication, Education, and Leadership
Internships
Spring 2011 ……………………………… Office of Research, The Ohio State University
Summer 2011 ……………………………………………………………. News 5 WLWT
Summer 2013 ……………………………………………… Clinton Community Fellows
Work Experiences
1999 to present ………………………………………………………………. Beam Farms
2005 to present ………………………………………………. Full of Sap Maple Products
Summer 2011 ……………………………………………….. Marvel Eastern Productions
2012 to present ……………….. Graduate Teaching Associate, The Ohio State University
Fields of Study
Major Field: Agricultural and Extension Education
vi
Table of Contents
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ii
Dedication ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….... iv
Acknowledgements ……………………………………………………………………………………………. v
Vita ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. vi
List of Tables …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ix
List of Figures ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. x
Chapter 1: Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………… 1
Purpose of Study ……………………………………………………………………………………... 3
Definitions ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
Chapter 2: Review of Literature ………………………………………………………………………...... 7
Cultivation Theory ………………………………....………………………………………………... 7
Product Placement ………………………………………………………………………………… 10
The Film Industry ………………………………………………………………………………….. 13
Agriculture in America …………………………………………………………………………... 15
Advertising Agriculture …………………………………………………………………………. 16
Agricultural Perceptions ………………………………………………………………………... 17
Chapter 3: Methods ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 25
Study Questions …………………………………………………………………………………….. 25
vii
Research Design ……………………………………………………………………………………. 26
Film Selection ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 27
Data Analysis ………………………………………………………………………………………… 32
Limitations ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 33
Chapter 4: Results ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 35
Findings for Objectives One and Two ...... 36
Findings for Objective Three .…………………………………………………………………. 42
Findings for Objective Four ……………………………………………………………………. 51
Findings for Objective Five .……………………………………………………………………. 56
Chapter 5: Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………….. 59
Recommendations for Practitioners ……………………………………………………….. 67
Recommendations for Future Research ………………………………………... 68
References ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 70
Appendix A: Agricultural Brands ……………………………………………………………………… 85
Appendix B: Film Evaluation Form …………………………………………………………………. 111
viii
List of Tables
Table 4.1. Brands are listed with the films the brands appeared in along with the length of
appearance in seconds. …………………………………………………………. 37
Table 4.2. Table 4.2 lists the films in chronological order providing the rating and genre
of each film studied in the study. ………………………………………………. 51
Table 4.3. Films studied are listed chronologically and each film's box office rank,
production company and number of theatres shown in are included. ………. 53
Table 4.4. Films are listed with earnings generated, box office opening date, and running
time. ……………………………………………………………………………. 55
Table 4.5. Actors who were in multiple films studied are listed with the films they
appeared in. …………………………………………………………………….. 57
ix
List of Figures
Figure 4.1. Bobby Boucher, portrayed by Adam Sandler, shown in the right foreground,
approaches the John Deere mower featured in The Waterboy (Coraci, 1998)
(Internet Movie Cars Database, 2006). ………………………………………… 43
Figure 4.2. Ray Kinsella and his daughter, Karin, ride on the John Deere 8640 during the
film Field of Dreams (Robinson, 1989) (Internet Movie Cars Database, 2012). ..
…………………………………………………………………………………... 45
Figure 4.3. Crawl operates the Massey Ferguson 8460 with ease while learning to
become a farmer in Son In Law (Rash, 1993) (Internet Movie Cars Database,
2014). …………………………………………………………………………... 46
Figure 4.4. The farmer and his family emerge from the storm cellar at the end of Twister.
Notice the farmer's hat, which features the Pioneer Seed logo (de Bont, 1996). …
…………………………………………………………………………………... 48
Figure 4.5. Fern, portrayed by Dakota Fanning and wearing a 4-H shirt, holds Wilbur
while admiring Charlotte's newest web in Charlotte's Web (Winick, 2006). ….. 50
Figure 5.1. Funny Farm poster shows Chevy Chase and Yellow Dog riding on a Wheel
Horse lawn mower, which is featured for 18 seconds in the film (Hill, Funny
Farm, 1988) ...…………………………………………………………………... 62 x
Figure 5.2. and 5.3. Grant Wood's "American Gothic" painting and Son In Law's
promotional poster share a striking resemblance in order to match viewer
perceptions of rural American lifestyles, and include humor in the film's
advertising (Basinger, 2005: Rash, Son In Law, 1993) ………………………... 65
Figure 5.4. John Deere produced a 1/16 model toy tractor of the 2640 tractor driven
by Kevin Costner in Field of Dreams (Robinson, Field of Dreams, 1989) (Ebay,
2014). …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 66
Figure 6.1. Ace Hi Feed logo (Manchester Feeds, Inc., 2010). ..………………………. 86
Figure 6.2. The modern logo for the Carhartt company (Carhartt, 2014). ..…………… 87
Figure 6.3. Although the Castrol logo has changed since 1909, this is the 2012 version of
the company's logo (Castrol, 2012). …………………………………………… 87
Figure 6.4. Caterpillar Inc. logo (Caterpillar, 2014). …………………………………... 88
Figure 6.5. The Cub Cadet logo is correlated with the company colors: yellow, white and
black (Cub Cadet, 2014). ………………………………………………………. 89
Figure 6.6. The DEKALB logo (Monsanto, 2014). ………………………………….… 90
Figure 6.7. The USDA logo (National Agricultural Library, 2014). ……………….….. 91
Figure 6.8. Farmall logo featured on many tractors (Wisconsin Historical Society, 2014).
…………………………………………………………………………………... 92
Figure 6.9. International Harvester logo, prior to the merger with Case in 1985 (Koenig
Equipment, Inc., 2012). ………………………………………………………… 92
Figure 6.10. The FFA emblem (National FFA Organization, 2014). ………………..… 93 xi
Figure 6.11. Ford Tractor logo, featured on tractor models from the 1950s (Ganzel,
2007). …………………………………………………………………………... 94
Figure 6.12. The John Deere logo, which was last updated in 2000, features a leaping
deer. Previous logos used a landing deer (John Deere, 2014). ………………… 95
Figure 6.13. Justin Boots logo, as shown on their website (Justin Boots, 2014). ……… 96
Figure 6.14. Kent Feeds remains a family owned company after 87 years of operation
(Kent Nutrition Group, 2014). …………………………………………………. 97
Figure 6.15. Kenworth trucks are designed for optimum driver comfort and efficiency
(Kenworth Trucks, 2014). ……………………………………………………… 98
Figure 6.16. The Komatsu logo was previously a "little pine tree," but was changed in the
late 1990s to the current logo (Komatsu America Corporation, 2014). …………99
Figure 6.17. In 1932, the first bulldog adorned the hood of a Mack truck (Mack Trucks,
Inc. , 2014). …………………………………………………………………… 100
Figure 6.18. The current Massey Ferguson logo (Massey Ferguson, 2012). …………. 101
Figure 6.19. The New Holland logo, as shown on the corporate website (New Holland,
N.D.). …………………………………………………………………………. 102
Figure 6.20. Pioneer Seed is part of the DuPont Corporation (DuPont Pioneer, 2014). …
…………………………………………………………………………………. 103
Figure 6.21. Quality Seeds Ltd. provides a wide variety of seeds and plant services
(Quality Seeds Inc., 2014). …………………………………………………… 103
xii
Figure 6.22. In the 1980s there were large marketing campaigns for the REAL Seal,
boosting awareness of additives in dairy products (National Milk Producers
Federation, 2014). …………………………………………………………… 104
Figure 6.23. The Red Wing Shoe company produces work shoes for both men and
women (Red Wing Shoes, 2014). …………………………………………… 105
Figure 6.24. Snapper products are all painted "Snapper red" and the company makes
push, riding and zero turn mowers, as well as snow blowers and other outdoor
equipment (Briggs & Stratton Power Products Group, LLC, 2014). …………. 106
Figure 6.25. This version of the Versatile logo was released in 2008 (Buhler Versatile
Inc., 2014). ……………………………………………………………………. 107
Figure 6.26. The Wheel Horse logo, as shown on the Wheel Horse Collectors Club
website (Wheel Horse Collectors Club, Inc. , 2014). ………………………… 108
Figure 6.27. The White Farm Equipment Company's logo before being purchased by
AGCO in 1991 (Tractor Data, 2013). ……………..………………………….. 109
Figure 6.28. The 4-H emblem is a representation of the youth organization's brand
(National 4-H History Preservation Program, 2014). ………………………… 110
xiii
Chapter 1: Introduction
In 1927, a silent film called Wings won an Oscar for Best Picture, and with its success came the acknowledgement of the first featured product placement, a Hershey’s bar (Bukszpan, 2011). Product placement continued in the film industry, but it was not until the early 1980s, when it began to exponentially expand with the use of Reese’s
Pieces in Steven Spielberg’s 1982 hit, E.T. (Walton, 2012).
Today, the leading brand featured in movie product placement is Ford, having been placed in films 158 times (Brand Cameo, 2012). Ford is followed in frequency of appearance by Apple, Coca-Cola, Chevrolet, Mercedes, and Budweiser (Brand Cameo,
2012).
However, agricultural companies have a much smaller audience compared to internationally exporting vehicle or computer companies, therefore it is not an essential marketing tool for agricultural companies to put their products in films. Agricultural products, however, still make their way to the big screen when the plot of a movie is, or partially is, agriculturally based. Product placement, whether it is paid for by the respective company or not, is profitable for the brands featured, if it is portrayed in a positive manner.
1
As less than two percent of the population of the United States is directly involved in agriculture, the majority of the population of moviegoers does not know if the representation of agriculture through the lenses of Hollywood portrays an accurate image
(EPA's Ag Center, 2012). The United States film industry grossed more than nine billion dollars in 2012 alone and progressively is turning to advertisement, or product placement, to increase profitability of films (The Numbers, 2012) (Spurlock, 2011). Therefore, this research study will examine a selection of films that focus around the agricultural industry and determine what agriculturally-based brands appear in films, so agricultural communicators may know more about the content being shown in film to audiences who are, for the majority, uneducated on agricultural livelihoods.
Agricultural brands represent the agricultural industry through a corporate identity, which is usually how the non-agricultural viewer sees the agricultural industry - as a representation of a company’s brand image. Product placement in films, television, radio programming and advertisements are popular marketing tools for selling products.
Product placement can help or hurt a brand’s successfulness when shown to a large enough audience. As more American’s are adopting digital video recording technology
(DVR), advertisers are turning to product placement in film to promote their products, because consumers cannot skip the commercials in a film or television program if they are built into the story line (Spurlock, 2011). Therefore, what agricultural brands and products are placed in films? How are the brands represented? Do agricultural brands placed in films project an overall positive or negative representation of the agricultural industry?
2
Purpose of Study
In 2012, there were 677 films released with over 39,000 movie theatres in the
United States for consumers to patronize (Motion Picture Association of America, 2012).
This study is needed because of the enormous power films have to influence viewers perceptions about a subject, whether fact or fiction. Product placement can either help or hurt an industry, as with the success of Ray-Ban Sunglasses and market stunting for
Merlot, but for agricultural communication to be effective, agricultural communicators should be aware of the content movie-viewing individuals are seeing and retaining from films, which will ultimately influence their opinion on the brands associated with the agriculture industry in the United States (Cuellar, 2009) (Leinster, 1987).
With this understanding, communicators can appropriately market products, develop public relations strategies, and form public policies. Agricultural communicators understand that all communication about the agricultural industry may not come from those who are adequately informed or portray the correct image, and therefore they must assess multiple media outlets to understand what is influencing consumer’s opinions.
The purpose of this study is to determine how agricultural brands are featured in films, including their prominence in the film and the frequency of the brand appearance.
The following research questions will be used to guide the study:
1. Which agricultural brands are present in popular films?
2. How often are the agricultural brands shown in popular films?
3. How are the agricultural brands positioned in the film (Is the brand name clearly
shown, is it the focus of the frame?)
3
4. Are there trends between the films in which the agricultural brands appeared?
5. Are there trends with the actors or actresses who appear in the popular films that
feature an agricultural or rural setting?
Definitions
To narrow the selection of films for this study, a definition of agriculture must be established. Agriculture, as defined by Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (2003), is “the science, art, or practice of cultivating the soil, producing crops, and raising livestock and in varying degrees the preparation and marketing of the resulting products”(pg. 26.). To accurately answer the research questions, the definition provided is too vague. Most modern movies feature only a small portion of the film to show agriculture, because of this the definition of agriculture must be broadened to include a wider range of categories.
Therefore, agriculture shall be defined, for this research question, as any and all aspects of agricultural or rural lifestyle. Including, but not limited to: crop production, livestock production, county and state fairs, food safety practices, food production and preparation, agricultural byproduct production, product marketing and branded agricultural products or retail locations.
Crop production shall be representative of the process of cultivating, planting, spraying, and harvesting a crop of any nature, and marketing such commodities to a market. Livestock production shall include all animals kept for either profit or pleasure and the practice of animal husbandry skills. County and State Fairs should be
4 representative of either crop or livestock production, 4-H or FFA practices or annual rural entertainment attractions (ex: tractor pulls).
Food safety practices start on the farm and continue to consumption by a consumer. Food safety, food production and preparation may be considered agriculture when demonstrating animal health treatments, processing, packaging, preparation of raw food and consumption. Food will not be considered agriculture when it is representative of a branded company, such as McDonald’s, Burger King or other national chains.
Agricultural byproduct production begins with a raw agricultural product transformed into another product for an intended use. For an agricultural byproduct to be considered agriculture in film, it must be clear to the viewer where the agricultural product originated. An example of an agricultural byproduct, which would be acceptable for consideration as agriculture in this study, would be ethanol and ethanol production from corn.
Agricultural products being displayed, either in a farmer’s market or grocery store, are representative of the agricultural industry, however these brands are commonplace items that any grocery shopper would recognize. Agriculturally based companies, such as John Deere, Case IH, Tractor Supply Company and Purina Feeds will be considered agriculture because of their brand recognition is specifically associated with the agriculture industry.
The term rural can refer to a broad meaning in the United States. Depending upon how rural is defined; portions of U.S. populations can be considered rural areas anywhere between 17 to 49 percent of the total population (Cromartie & Bucholtz, 2008).
5
Definitions range from the use, whether it is for administrative purposes or economic development; however, rural areas are closely associated with populations under 10,000 people (Cromartie & Bucholtz, 2008). For the purpose of this study, rural will be defined as any area which features an abundance of farming imagery, as well as small towns or villages.
Product placement is defined as “the inclusion of a product in a television program or film as a form of paid advertisement” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary, n.d.).
However, for this research project, product placement will be synonymous with product appearance, as it is unlikely all of the agricultural brands that appear in the films would pay for an appearance. Therefore, any placement of an agricultural brand or product will be considered product placement in this content analysis of the films.
6
Chapter 2: Review of Literature
For this study, films from the past 25 years were analyzed to determine the presence of agricultural brands within the film content. Agricultural communicators need to be aware of the presence of agricultural brands within popular media outlets because of the large audience in the United States who are not educated or directly related to production agriculture (EPA's Ag Center, 2012). The film industry generates billions of dollars in revenue each year, and with over 39,000 movie theatres in the United States, there is ample opportunity for film viewers throughout the United States and the world to be exposed to the images represented through films (Box Office Mojo, 2013: Motion
Picture Association of America, 2012: Spurlock, 2011).
A review of literature was conducted to provide background information on related topics to this study. The related topics included in this literature review are: cultivation theory, product placement, the film industry, agriculture in America, advertising agriculture, and agricultural perceptions.
Cultivation Theory
Cultivation Theory, defined as medium (film) that shapes the public’s perspective of a social reality, guides this study. “Cultivation refers to the long-term formation of
7 perceptions and beliefs about the world as a result of exposure to the media” (Potter,
1993, p. 564).
Primarily used for television studies, cultivation theory has been used to evaluate the effects of television viewing on people’s perceptions and values (Werner & Tankard,
Jr. , 2001). Cultivation is the establishment of a common worldview, common roles, and common values through repetitive messages (Werner & Tankard, Jr. , 2001). The theory looks for trends in mass media and programming to be reflected onto the views of the receiver of the message. For instance, individuals who watch a large amount of law enforcement television shows believe the crime rate is much higher in the United States than it actually is, therefore the viewers believe the fictional representations given to them from television and movies (Werner & Tankard, Jr. , 2001).
According to Hetsroni and Tukachinsky, higher television viewing rates increase the cultivation effect. This is because with higher consumption of television media, the viewers have an increased amount of information to form opinions and beliefs. Hetsroni and Tukachinsky also state the effect of cultivation theory does not disappear when demographic and consumption variables of other media are controlled (Hetsroni &
Tukachinsky, 2006).
Television became a revolutionary way to spread a message because its ability to circumvent literacy issues with viewers and the abundant quantity of televisions to watch programming from (Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, Signorielli, & Shanahan, Growing Up With
Television: Cultivation Process, 2002). Television provides “a shared national culture,” as well as socialization and information to viewers of entertainment media (Gerbner,
8
Gross, Morgan, Signorielli, & Shanahan, Growing Up With Television: Cultivation
Process, 2002, p. 44). Television programming provides “continual repetition of stories that serve to define the world and legitimize a particular social order” (Gerbner, Gross,
Morgan, Signorielli, & Shanahan, Growing Up With Television: Cultivation Process,
2002, p. 44). Establishing what the norms of television are as a reflection of modern society reinforces the “cultivation of shared conceptions of reality among otherwise diverse publics” (Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, Signorielli, & Shanahan, Growing Up With
Television: Cultivation Process, 2002, p. 44).
Cultivation through media is difficult to avoid in modern society, because in an average home in the United States a television is on for “about seven hours a day”
(Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, Signorielli, & Shanahan, Growing Up With Television:
Cultivation Process, 2002, p. 45). According to a study conducted by the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development, the life expectancy for the average American citizen was 78.7 years in 2011 (Huffington Post, 2013). Given this information, the average American has the potential to be exposed to 201,078.5 hours of television programming during their lifespan, which is roughly 22.95 years of the average lifespan.
Because most entertainment pieces are marketed to a broad spectrum of viewers throughout the United States, patterns emerge in the “settings, casting, social typing, actions, and related outcomes that cuts across most program types and defines the world of television” (Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, & Signorielli, Living with Television: The
Dynamics of the Cultivation Process, 1986, p. 19). Due to the variety of programming scenarios available to a viewer, cultivation can be applied to studies interested in learning 9 more about perceptions of “gender, minority and age-role stereotypes, health, science, the family, educational achievement aspirations, politics, religion, the environment, and numerous other topics (Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, & Signorielli, Living with Television:
The Dynamics of the Cultivation Process, 1986, p. 46).
Product Placement
Looking though the lens of cultivation theory it is easy to see how repetitive product placement can have similar effects. An example of such a success story is
Reese’s Pieces in Stephen Spielberg’s E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial. Spielberg’s E.T. used the candy in a pivotal scene and as a result the profits from the candy increased 65 percent (Bukszpan, 2011). Since the success of Reese’s Pieces in 1982, product placement has become common place in modern film production as both a promotional marketing strategy and as a representation of modern lifestyles (Walton, 2012). Today, films feature multiple brands throughout the progression of the story being told, the first
Sex in the City film featured over 65 brands, and in the latest James Bond installment,
Skyfall, the majority of the film’s $200 million dollar production costs were covered by the multiple product placements from BMW, Coke, Heineken, Omega watches, Sony and more (Vanity Fair, 2008: Radford, 2012).
Ray-Ban is an example of a brand that has thrived from the use of product placement as a primary advertisement strategy. Army Air Corps pilots and General
Douglas MacArthur first popularized Ray-Ban sunglasses during World War II.
However, Ray-Ban was a struggling brand by 1982, selling only 18,000 pairs of sunglasses during that year. In an effort to save the company during its period of
10 declining popularity, Ray-Ban signed a contract with Unique Product Placement for
$50,000 per year to have Ray-Ban products placed in entertainment media beginning in
1982 (Leinster, 1987). The following year (1983), Tom Cruise sported Ray-Ban’s
Wayfarer sunglasses in Risky Business, soaring sales of Ray-Ban sunglasses to 360,000 pairs (Leinster, 1987). In 1984, Ray-Ban products were featured in the Miami Vice television series increasing sales to 720,000 pairs, in 1985 Bruce Willis wore Ray-Bans in the television series Moonlighting increasing sales to 826,000 pairs, and finally in 1987
Tom Cruise wore Ray-Ban aviator sunglasses in the film Top Gun which skyrocketed
Ray-Ban sunglasses sales to 1.5 million pairs (Leinster, 1987).
However, one industry that was negatively impacted because of product placement would be the wine industry, specifically producers of Merlot. In the movie
Sideways, Paul Giamatti’s character refuses to consume Merlot. This action caused “The
Sideways Effect”, in which the sales of Merlot dropped for a period of time after the movie debuted in 2004 (Cuellar, 2009). Another example of a negative product placement was Warner Bros use of a knock-off Louis Vuitton bag in the Hangover II, which resulted in Louis Vuitton suing Warner Bros for causing “consumer confusion” and falsely representing the brand (Milligan, 2012, p. 3). The case was dismissed in 2012, because the judge stated the claims from Louis Vuitton “were ‘not plausible’ or
‘particularly compelling’” (Milligan, 2012, p. 3).
Not all products placed in film are cleverly disguised to seem as though the product is a natural occurrence, but rather it is an ostentatious advertisement sold with the purchase of a movie ticket. In the 2013 adaptation of The Great Gatsby, Moët &
11
Chandon champagne is gaudily featured by having showgirls hold larger-than-life bottles, which not only contain the advertised beverage, but also shower the partygoers with confetti (Grey, 2013). In Happy Gilmore, Adam Sandler’s character advertises for
Subway by going to one of their restaurants, eating a sandwich, and giving the food chain an outstanding review in his monologue (Kroll, 2013).
Some companies receive advertisement from films for free through product placement. AOL did not pay for product placement in the 1998 film You’ve Got Mail, nor did White Castle in the 2004 comedy Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle (Kroll, 2013, p. 5 and 7). Google was recently featured in The Internship (2013), where Google’s campus, driverless car, Google+ and a plethora of other Google related products were featured. Google was involved in the production of the film, but had no investment in the production of the film (Kroll, 2013). Apple is by far the most frequent product placed in film, and Apple is able to achieve this by using free product placement in exchange for goods (Brand Cameo, 2012: Stampler, 2012). PQ Media conducted a study in 2005,
“which found that 64 percent of products placed in films or TV shows are not paid for, but rather arranged through some kind of barter in which the show provides exposure in exchange for products or services” (Goo, 2006, p. 3).
In some cases, product placement in film can give a brand more consumer recognition than any other form of advertisement could provide. Suntory Whisky was the predominant brand featured in Lost in Translation (2003). Previous advertisements used by Suntory Whisky had featured Sean Connery and Keanu Reeve; “however, Masaki
Morimoto, general manager for Suntory’s premium-spirits marketing department, said
12 that the placement gave the product a much higher profile than it ever got from television or print ads” (Bukszpan, 2011, p. 8). Since appearing in Lost in Translation, Suntroy
Whisky has purchased Beam for $13.9 billion (The Associated Press, 2014). Beam is the producer of Jim Beam and Maker’s Mark whiskey (The Associated Press, 2014).
The Film Industry
Thomas Edison is probably best known for the his inventions of the Edison lightbulb and automatic telegraph; however, he was also one of the pioneering forefathers of the modernday film industry (Aquino & Sterbenz, 2014) (Biagi, 2010) (Acheson &
Maule, 1991). Edison, along with Ètienne Jules Marey, Eadweard Muybridge, William
K.L. Dickson, and Auguste and Louise Lumière are know as the inventors of the earliest forms of viedo cameras and projectors (Biagi, 2010). Film began as a series of photographs shown in a slideshow format, which were shown on a device called a kinetoscop. “On April 11, 1894, America’s first kinetoscope parlor opened in New York
City. For 25 cents, people could see 10 different 90-second black-and-white films, including Trapese, Horse Shoeing, Wrestlers, and Roosters” (Biagi, 2010, p. 137).
Agriculture is historically one of the earliest film features in the United States, with the showing of Horse Shoeing and Roosters.
French filmmaker, magician and caricaturist Georges Mèliés changed the course of film history in 1902 when he released A Trip to the Moon, which was the first outerspace cinematic adventure (Biagi, 2010). A Trip to the Moon entertained audinces
13 with imaginary space monsters. A trend which quickly migrated to the United States, where “American moviemakers stole” Mèliés’ ideas (Biagi, 2010, p. 140).
Sound technology in conjuntion with film became possible in 1927. The Warner
Brothers, Sam, Harry, Jack and Albert, produced the first film to have sound, called The
Jazz Singer (Biagi, 2010). By 1933, less than one percent of films shown nationwide were silent films, as they had adopted the technology to incorporate sound in almost all films. In 1937, Walt Disney premeired Snow White, which cost $2.25 million, and was the first feature-length animated film.
Film popularity decreased after 1948 due to the home television becoming widely popular in the United States (Biagi, 2010). “In the 1950s, the number of television sets people owned grew by 400 percent, while the number of people who went to the movies fell by 45 percent” (Biagi, 2010, p. 142). Because of the increased competition in the entertainment field, filmmmakers began to attract viewers by advertising new movie technology in the 1950s, such as widescreen and the beginnings of 3-D movies (Biagi,
2010).
The best year in American film history was 1946, because theatres sold more than four billion tickets (Biagi, 2010). “Today, as more people watch more movies on video and DVD, the number of theatre admissions has dropped to about one billion” (Biagi,
2010, p. 134). In an effort to have a stable income in today’s society, “half of the movies produced every year are made for television and are underwritten by the TV networks”
(Biagi, 2010, p. 136). In fact, movie industry revenue comes from three sources: TV and
14 in-flight programming provides 48 percent, home video provides 38 percent and the box office sales contribute 14 percent of movie industry revenue (Biagi, 2010).
Agriculture in America
The agricultural sector in the United States is big business, in 2007 the market value of products sold from American farms was $297 billion (United States Department of Agriculture: Economic Research Service, 2013). While farm families make up less than two percent of the population in the United States, there are more than 21 million
American workers (15 percent of the total U.S. workforce) who produce, process and market the agricultural products made in the United States (American Farm Bureau
Federation, 2013). In 2010, $115 billion worth of agricultural products were exported around the world form the United States; in fact, the United States has a positive agricultural trade balance because the nation exports more agricultural products than are inported (American Farm Bureau Federation, 2013).
Of the 2.2 million farms in the United States, 97 percent of those farms are operated by individuals, family partnerships or family corporations (American Farm
Bureau Federation, 2013). Of these farms, report show that a white male principal operator operates 1.83 million, while there are 306,209 female principal operators and roughly eight percent of farms are operated by non-white operators (United States
Department of Agriculture, Demographics, 2007). The average age of an American farmer is 58.3 years old (United States Department of Agriculture, 2014).
15
In 2007, there were 687,540 cattle farms, 18,605 cotton farms, 57,318 dairy farms, 25,017 berry farms, 479,467 grain farms, 30,546 swine farms, 145,615 poultry farms and 67,254 sheep farms in the United States according to the Census of Agriculture
(United States Department of Agriculture, Production Fact Sheets, 2007). In the United
States an average farm is 434 acres, according to the latest Agricultural Census conducted in 2012 (United States Department of Agriculture, 2014). The average American farm sold $187,093.00 of agricultural products, with more than 1.1 million farmers holding another occupation other than farming (United States Department of Agriculture, 2014).
In 2012, there were 81,634 farms that sold over $1,000,000, 173,284 farms sold $250,000 to $999,999 of agricultural products. To put the numbers of farms in perspective, if a representative from each of the farms who sold over $1,000,000 of sales were to sit in the
Ohio Stadium, there would be room for 20,695 more people (The Ohio State University,
2014).
Advertising Agriculture
For agricultural communicators and marketers, print media has been the most popular form of advertising to agricultural consumers. There was an increase of 2.3 percent in the number of print pages used to advertise agricultural products from 2011 to
2012 (Panousis, 2013). During the same time period, all other categories of advertising saw a decrease in advertisements by nine percent, these other categories include eMedia, broadcast, content/data and educational events (Panousis, 2013). For 2013, the trends are showing a decrease in the number of agricultural print advertisements, but an increase in the amount spent on agricultural print advertisements. The top five agricultural print
16 advertisers from 2009 to 2013 were: “Monsanto, Bayer CropScience, Syngenta, Zoetis
Animal Health and Dow AgroSciences” (Panousis, 2013, p. 30).
The American Business Media organization conducted a cross-market study “on how consumers of business information use the various communication channels that are available,” this study included the agricultural sector (Semler, 2013, p. 28). The results from this study concluded that, over all market sectors, print magazines and websites are the primary source of information for consumers, but are closely followed by the use of newsletters, conferences, and mobile technologies (Semler, 2013). This study concluded that integrated marketing through multiple channels is the direction for the future of advertising (Semler, 2013). Film was not analyzed during this study.
Agricultural Perceptions
Will Keith Kellogg, who was a pioneer in the breakfast cereal industry, founded the W.K. Kellogg Foundation in 1930 (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2014). The W.K.
Kellogg Foundation is one of the largest philanthropic foundations in the United States, and strives to create equal opportunities for youth (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2014). The
W.K. Kellogg Foundation has conducted studies on the perceptions of rural America.
W.K. Kellogg Foundation’s first study, Perceptions of Rural America, conducted
242 in-depth interviews of individuals from rural, urban, and suburban areas throughout multiple regions in the country to find out what the perceptions are of individuals who live in rural areas of the United States (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2002). The participants in the study believed agriculture was the dominant industry in the United States, although
17 this perception is not factual (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2002). Participants were rooted in their beliefs that rural America is “dominated by images of the family farm, crops and pastures” (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2002, p. 4). In fact, participants believed the three most common image representations of rural America were: “farms and crops, pastures, and animals” (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2002, p. 4). Country life was perceived as serene, peaceful and slow-paced, and overall a safe, family oriented community environment.
Some participants stated they believed a family farm is the definition of what it means to be American. By this they are meaning farmers personify the idyllic American values, to be “hard working and self sufficient” (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2002, p. 5).
Fifty-three percent of the participants believed that rural residents are the most hardworking individuals in the country (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2002).
However, the study did reveal several dichotomies:
• “Rural life represents traditional American values, but is behind the times;
• Rural life is more relaxed and slower than city life, but is harder and more
grueling;
• Rural life is richer in community life, but epitomized by individuals
struggling independently to make ends meet.
• Rural America offers a particular quality of life including serenity and
aesthetic surroundings, and yet it is plagued by lack of opportunities,
including access to cultural activities” (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2002, p.
1).
18
Perceptions of Rural America: Media Coverage was the second W.K. Kellogg
Foundation study. This study analyzed news articles and reports from The New York
Times, The Washington Post, USA Today, The Chicago Tribune, Newsweek, Time, and
U.S. News and World Report, as well as ABC, NCB, and CBS morning and evening news programming from January to June of 2002 to determine how “urban national media portrays rural America today” (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2002, p. ii). Each relevant article and news story was coded for three frames: an agricultural context, negative representation of rural lifestyles, and a positive representation (W.K. Kellogg Foundation,
2002).
This study determined that popular topics associated with “rural” in news included: land use, crime, politics, unemployment, lifestyle, the environment, health, and education (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2002). Overall, only one out of every six news stories linked “rural” with “agriculture” (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2002, p. 23).
Articles which appeared in The New York Times related “rural” to agriculture” in 32 percent of the stories, while other news sources featured a lower percentage (W.K.
Kellogg Foundation, 2002, p. 23). In all of the news sources “agriculture-related groups and their representatives were quoted only six times, far less than others, such as environmental groups” (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2002, p. 32).
Fictional, symbolic terms were used in multiple stories to create imagery connecting something in real life (a town, setting, building) to a fictional or idyllic setting. Terms used to find these instanced included: “pastoral, peaceful, picturesque, quiet, sleepy, quaint, Currier & Ives and Norman Rockwell” (W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 19
2002, p. 21). Fictional correlations appeared four times as often in print news stories in comparison to news stories that appeared on television programming, and The New York
Times had the heaviest application of theatric terms of all the news outlets (W.K. Kellogg
Foundation, 2002, p. 22).
Mass media has been influencing agriculture in America even before the country was founded in 1776 through newspapers and propaganda; however, the W.K. Kellogg
Foundation highlights some of the more modern influences:
“There can be little doubt that American mass media have played a
significant role in building and decorating these frames. From the late
nineteenth century dime novels that depicted the winning of the Wild
West, to the ‘horse operas’ that dominated the early days of television
entertainment, to the big screen epics of John Wayne and John Huston,
entertainment has idolized the rugged individual battling nature and
human venality in the untamed west. More recent pop culture products
like the television series The Waltons and Little House on the Prairie,
along with cinematic hits like Places in the Heart and The River, have
presented warmer, more personal tales of rural Americans overcoming
adversity and upholding traditional values. Even fluff like Petticoat
Junction, Green Acres, and the Dukes of Hazzard have played a role in our
collective associations with rural America” (W.K. Kellogg Foundation,
2002, p. 1).
20
In “The Stuff You Need Out Here”: A Semiotic Case Study Analysis of an
Agricultural Company’s Advertisements, the 2004-2005 Tractor Supply Company’s
(TSC) print advertisement marketing campaign was analyzed, and was partially based off of the W.K. Kellogg Foundation’s Perceptions of Rural America: Media Coverage study.
Like in the Perceptions of Rural America: Media Coverage, “The Stuff You Need Out
Here” analyzed how the advertisements for TSC were relating to the consumer through stereotypical representations of rural lifestyles. The study analyzed three advertisements from a campaign of 12 advertisements released from the Tractor Supply Company in print media.
The first advertisement analyzed in this study featured a politician giving a speech on an iconic American farm, complete with a red barn, green foliage and three-board fencing in the background. This advertisement tried to sell a “6-tine manure fork”, suggesting the political propaganda the politician is spreading is a form of manure
(Rhoades & Irani, 2008, p. 7). The second advertisement showed a man with a sunburnt farmer’s tan, which is assumed he received from mowing the rolling, lush green landscape in the background. This advertisement is marketing a “deluxe sunshade” for a mower, so consumers can prevent having sunburn from mowing their own rural paradise
(Rhoades & Irani, 2008, p. 9). The final advertisement featured a man sitting in wet swim trunks on a lawn chair in the snow, which TSC was attempting to market the need for a
“deluxe insulated coverall” (Rhoades & Irani, 2008, p. 10). This advertisement played into the perception that people from rural areas have fewer opportunities than those who live in more urban areas, because the man is having a good time watching the snow fall
21 into his cup for a source of entertainment (Rhoades & Irani, 2008). While all of the advertisements from TSC used using humor to market the variety of products they sell in their stores, the advertisements reinforced the findings from the Kellogg studies that rural lifestyles can be linked to agricultural farmsteads, individuals who are generally isolated and a bit backwards, and rural lifestyles provide peaceful and serene landscapes to enjoy
(Rhoades & Irani, 2008).
Specht analyzed 23 films and television programs released between 1950 and
2012. This study compared the content of films and television shows in relation to the findings of the Kellogg Foundation study, Perceptions of Rural America (Specht, 2013).
The 23 entertainment programs studied by Specht included: Lassie, Oklahoma!, East of
Eden, Giant, The Real McCoys, Green Acres, Charlotte’s Web (1973), Places in the
Heart, Country, The River, Witness, Field of Dreams, City Slickers, Babe, A Thousand
Acres, The Horse Whisperer, The Cider House Rules, Signs, The Simple Life, Brokeback
Mountain, Charlotte’s Web (2006), Fantastic Mr. Fox, and Temple Grandlin (Specht,
2013). Specht states that the “American agrarian myth has been shaped in part by entertainment media,” and that until her study no one had “attempted to aggregate and analyze media texts that describe, discuss, or portray American agriculture” (Specht,
2013, p. 4).
The findings from this study demonstrated “a strong correlation between the manner in which entertainment media texts depict agricultural production and the themes identified by respondents of the Kellogg Institute study. One of the most powerful arguments for this phenomenon is the presentation of the rural agrarian context in films
22 and television programs prior to 1990” (Specht, 2013, p. 257). Other than rare exceptions in Giant, The Horse Whisperer, and Brokeback Mountain, all of the entertainment pieces studied played into the Normal Rockwell-like imagery of a rural landscape established as the American perception in the Kellogg Foundation study, with “a nostalgic combination of small farming operations bounded by scenic, hilly terrain, lush forests, and dirt roads”
(Specht, 2013, p. 257).
Inconsistencies exist in the media studied in Specht’s dissertation on the representation of agricultural technology. She points out that agricultural technology sometimes surpasses its presentation on film. This usually occurs when showing scenes from historical films, as the real farm technology of the time period had already progressed and changed from what it typically shown on film (Specht, 2013). Depending upon the film, several of the films studied in Specht’s study portrayed Agriculture fairly accurately, including scenes of conventional livestock operations in Babe, Fantastic Mr.
Fox, and Temple Grandlin, as well as the financial difficulties the agricultural industry faced during the 1980s in Country, The River, and Field of Dreams (Specht, 2013).
Specht concluded, “entertainment media will continue to impact the manner in which society views production agriculture while reflecting real occurrences that impact the industry” (Specht, 2013, p. 264).
Agriculture was one of the initial industries in the United States, and as the industry has had such an intertwined history with how the nation has evolved, it is only logical to expect agriculture to be present in films, which “perhaps more than any other
23 medium, movies mirror the society that creates them” (Biagi, 2010, p. 134). By looking at cultivation theory, product placement, the film industry, agriculture in America, advertising agriculture, and agricultural perceptions generates a well-rounded knowledge of the topics discussed in this study.
24
Chapter 3: Methods
Agricultural brands appear in films when the film is agriculturally based in a portion of its plot or setting. Agricultural companies generally advertise their products to agricultural consumers through print advertisements; therefore paying for product placement in films generally isn’t the direction these companies take to advertise.
Although the appearance of agricultural products is likely by chance, and not paid for, the repeated use of agricultural products in films leave an impression on the viewers of the films, whether the viewers are directly tied to agriculture or not. Cultivation theory states that given repeated use of an idea or image through a media will, over time, influence the perceptions of the viewer to match the representations presented in the media content.
Therefore, this study analyzed a selection of agriculturally based films to determine what agricultural brands are present in the film content.
Study Questions
The purpose of this study is to determine how agricultural brands are featured in films, including their prominence in the film and the frequency of the brand appearance.
The following research questions will be used to guide the study:
1. Which agricultural brands are present in popular films?
2. How often are the agricultural brands shown in popular films?
25
3. How are the agricultural brands positioned in the film (Is the brand name clearly
shown, is it the focus of the frame?)
4. Are there trends between the films the in which the agricultural brands appeared?
5. Are there trends with the actors or actresses who appear in the popular films that
feature an agricultural or rural setting?
Research Design
This applied, quantitative study used content analysis methodology to identify films featuring agricultural product placement. With a lack of studies looking at brand placement of agricultural products in film, a basic study is needed to identify the current state before further effects can be explored.
Content analysis is “making generalizations about the relative frequencies of visual representations of particular classes of people, actions, roles, situations or events involves implicit or explicit classification and quantification of media-circulated content” and “is an empirical (observational) and objective procedure for quantifying recorded
‘audio-visual’ (including verbal) representation using reliable, explicitly defined categories (‘values’ on independent ‘variables’)” (Van Leeuwen & Jewitt, 2001, p. 10 &
13). Therefore, content analysis is a method used to study “media-circulated content,” meaning content analysis can be used for studying content in: radio, television, film, advertisements (video or print commercials), newspapers or magazines (Van Leeuwen &
Jewitt, 2001, p. 13). Because of content analysis’ versatility, the method is very popular and has been used in studies for decades.
26
Film Selection
To find an adequate list of films to study, films from the past 25 years were considered and analyzed first for their agricultural relevance. Each year’s data of the top
100 grossing films were narrowed to films that had an agricultural theme or sequence of scenes (Box Office Mojo, 2013). Perspective films were viewed by the researcher to determine the agricultural representation in the film; some films were removed from the list because while they had a rural setting, the film contained no relevancy to the agricultural industry. Films were narrowed from the researcher’s knowledge of agriculturally based films, as well as assistance from a panel of experts in the agricultural industry and by researching numerous movie synopses. Films fitting the initial requirements for this study included:
• Funny Farm (Hill, Funny Farm, 1988)
• Field of Dreams (Robinson, 1989)
• Arachnophobia (Marshall F. , 1990)
• City Slickers (Underwood, 1991)
• Doc Hollywood (Caton-Jones, 1991)
• The Beverly Hillbillies (Spheeris, 1993)
• Son in Law (Rash, 1993)
• Forrest Gump (Zemeckis, 1994)
• Bridges of Madison County (Eastwood, 1995)
• Twister (de Bont, 1996)
27
• For Richer or Poorer (Spicer, 1997)
• The Waterboy (Coraci, 1998)
• The Horse Whisperer (Redford, 1998)
• The Odd Couple II (Deutch, 1998)
• Babe: Pig in the City (Miller, 1998)
• Runaway Bride (Marshall G. , 1999)
• Varsity Blues (Robbins, 1999)
• October Sky (Johnston, 1999)
• Erin Brockovich (Soderbergh, 2000)
• O’ Brother, Where Art Thou? (Coen & Coen, 2000)
• Chicken Run (Lord & Park, 2000)
• The Rookie (Hancock, 2002)
• Signs (Shyamalan, 2002)
• Sweet Home Alabama (Tennant, 2002)
• Seabiscuit (Ross, 2003)
• Secondhand Lions (McCanlies, 2003)
• Open Range (Costner, 2003)
• Holes (Davis, 2003)
• Cold Mountain (Minghella, 2003)
• The Prince and Me (Coolidge, 2004)
• Home on the Range (Finn & Sanford, 2004)
• The Dukes of Hazzard (Chandarasekher, 2005) 28
• Racing Stripes (Du Chau, 2005)
• Brokeback Mountain (Lee, 2005)
• Superman Returns (Singer, 2006)
• Open Season (Allers, Culton, & Stacchi, 2006)
• Charlotte’s Web (Winick, 2006)
• Cars (Lasseter, 2006)
• Barnyard (Oedekerk, 2006)
• Secretariat (Wallace, 2010)
• The Help (Taylor, 2011).
This list was narrowed by the requirement of the film to have a box office rank higher than 70 in the year the film was released (Brand Cameo, 2012) and the film could not be an animated film because the purpose of the study is to identify actual brands rather than fictional brands. Twenty-eight films met the criteria for this portion of the study.
Once the film selection had been narrowed, the films were watched to determine if agricultural product placement was occurring or not. If agricultural product placement was not found, the film was removed from the list. If there was agricultural product placement occurring in the film, the film was coded for the various brands represented in the film, length of duration brand is present on screen, and interaction with characters.
Appendix B provides the coding sheet which all of the films were analyzed with.
Agricultural brands were featured in all of the movies identified as having agricultural representation, both clearly and subtly presented. For example, in Son in
29
Law, Pauley Shore’s character, Crawl, climbs into a Massey Ferguson 8460 Combine, while the farm’s hired hand operates a Ford tractor in the background (Rash, 1993). In
Twister, Pioneer Seed, a well-known seed company, is subtly featured on the farmer’s hat at the end of the movie as he and his family emerge from their tornado shelter to find their farmstead destroyed by a powerful tornado (de Bont, 1996). The following 19 films were identified as having agricultural product placement and agricultural industry representation, and are the final film selection for this study:
• Funny Farm (Hill, Funny Farm, 1988)
• Field of Dreams (Robinson, 1989)
• Arachnophobia (Marshall F. , 1990)
• City Slickers (Underwood, 1991)
• Son in Law (Rash, 1993)
• Forrest Gump (Zemeckis, 1994)
• Bridges of Madison County (Eastwood, 1995)
• Twister (de Bont, 1996)
• The Waterboy (Coraci, 1998)
• Runaway Bride (Marshall G. , 1999)
• Varsity Blues (Robbins, 1999)
• O’ Brother, Where Art Thou? (Coen & Coen, 2000)
• Signs (Shyamalan, 2002)
• Seabiscuit (Ross, 2003)
• The Dukes of Hazzard (Chandarasekher, 2005)
30
• Brokeback Mountain (Lee, 2005)
• Superman Returns (Singer, 2006)
• Charlotte’s Web (Winick, 2006)
• Secretariat (Wallace, 2010)
Films were coded for brand appearance, length of duration of brand appearance and visibility of the brand. Once a brand was identified in the film, the coder would time the length of appearance of the brand over the course of the film, which generally was a series of multiple appearances, and in some cases multiple products from the same brand were used. The coder would also keep track of how the brand was used, for instance:
Was the brand used in a normal way, as it would appear in real life?
Was the brand logo clearly identifiable?
If the brand logo was not visible, was the coder able to determine what the product was and what company produced it?
Films were carefully watched for branded content, and times of brand appearance were checked multiple times by rewinding and reviewing segments of the films with branded material to obtain an accurate count of film time presence. All of the lengths of screen time were counted in seconds, as most of the brands appeared for a very short period of time in each segment.
Trucks and cars were not coded for this study because vehicles are common consumer products, which anyone could purchase and are not necessarily representative of the agricultural industry. Records are kept about vehicle brand appearance in film on sites such as Brand Cameo and the Internet Movie Cars Database, but not specifically
31 agricultural brands, which is why this study was needed to look for agricultural products
(Brand Cameo, 2012) (Internet Movie Cars Database, 2006). Industrial trucks and equipment were coded throughout the films because of the versatility the products to potentially do agricultural work, like hauling agricultural commodities in semi trucks to elevators.
Data Analysis
The data was analyzed by using qualitative measurements through coding and identifying brand recognition.
Once the films were analyzed using content analysis, averages were calculated for average brand screen time and quarter of successfulness for agriculturally based films, as well as percentage of screen time for agricultural brands.
Validity of this study is based on the need for more information on agricultural brand representation in film. The research questions were established by information obtained through the literature review for this study, which includes specific information on agricultural brand marketing, agricultural business in the United States, American perceptions of Agriculture in the United States, the film industry, and product placement.
Annie Specht, Ph.D., conducted her dissertation, called A Social Semiotic Discourse
Analysis Of Film And Television Portrayals Of Agriculture: Implications For American
Cultural Memory, at Texas A&M University on the pastoral fantasy presented in films and television episodes which were agriculturally or rurally based (Specht, 2013).
However, Specht’s dissertation does not cover the appearance of branded material in
32 film, but provides an example for coding agricultural imagery in film. Studying film and branded agricultural products in film is an area agricultural communication needs to elaborate on and explore as film becomes readily available through advancements in technology.
Reliability of this study is replicable by viewing the selected films and conducting thorough content analysis. Three individuals participated in content analysis of the films to establish a reliable reviewing method and to verify the validity of findings. The coders participated in meetings to understand how to correctly analyze the film in a replicable maner, by determining what kinds of brands to look for in the film and how to code the length of duration. The main researcher, and author, of the study watched all of the films to verify all the appearances of the brands. The researcher and individuals who assisted with content analysis of the films had an 84 percent inter-coder reliability rate in finding brands throughout the films analyzed (Riffe, Lacy, & Fico, 1998).
Limitations
There are a few limitations to this study. The way films are made sometimes impact being able to recognize or find brands within the film, as products do not always feature a clear logo, brand name, or distinguishable feature to identify the product with or are not in focus for the viewer to obtain a clear image of the brand or product. The researcher, and the other individuals who helped with content analysis, were all raised on mid-western farms in Ohio. Some of the films were set in other regions of the nation, and it is possible the researcher did not recognize a territorial brand, which is native to the
33 area depicted in the films. Because of the background of the researcher and the individuals who assisted with the film content analysis, there is a bias toward brands and film plots which are reminiscent of their personal experiences; however, without the experiences of the researcher and assistants, not all of the brands would have been identified because of the detailed nature of some of the brands and hidden corporate logos throughout the films.
The researcher worked a summer on the set of a popular superhero film in 2011.
Through the experience of working in a film production setting, the researcher was exposed to film set construction, production office responsibilities, regional and state film commission operations, and film set coordination. Through the experiences the researcher experienced on this particular set, which was in an industrial building located in a rural area of Ohio, helped form the idea for this research project because of the general feeling several people involved in the film commission expressed on being negative toward agriculture and rural settings. This particular film contained no representation of agriculture or agriculture brands, but was merely filmed in a rural area.
This study analyzed 19 films for agricultural branded content. After narrowing the films from the initial list of over 40 films, it was determined that all of the films should rank higher than 70th in each year’s box office data, not be an animated film and have agricultural branded products present in the films. Each of the 19 films was analyzed carefully by the researcher, and two other individuals, all who have an agricultural background.
34
Chapter 4: Results
Since Steven Spielberg’s E.T. appeared in theatres in 1982, product placement in film has become a commonplace marketing tactic (Walton, 2012). Large corporations, such as Ford, Apple, Coca-Cola, Chevrolet, Mercedes and Budweiser, frequently use captive audiences in movie theatres to market their products with the assistance of creative film writers and attractive actors and actresses (Brand Cameo, 2012). Even the agriculture industry finds itself represented on the big screen, but with less than two percent of the population directly involved with agricultural production, the vast majority of viewers do not know what is the correct representation of the agricultural industry
(EPA's Ag Center, 2012). Because agricultural brands have such a small market to advertise to, paying to have their products featured in films is not usually an economically feasible marketing strategy. Rather, the majority of agricultural companies choose to advertise via paid print or web advertisements (Semler, 2013).
Even though agricultural companies are not likely to pay for screen time in films for their main marketing strategies, their products still make their way to the silver screen when the plot of the film is agriculturally based. According to the Motion Picture
Association of America, Inc., cinemas annually attract more people than attendance to theme parks and major United States sports combined (MLB, NBA, NHL and NFL)
35
(Motion Picture Association of America, Inc. , 2011). In 2011, more than two-thirds of the population of the United States and Canada attended a movie at least once, and in
2012 alone the United States film industry grossed more than nine billion dollars (Motion
Picture Association of America, Inc. , 2011) (The Numbers, 2012). Because of the high viewing rate and marketing power of films, it is logical to analyze the agricultural brands present in films to determine what films are marketing as the American pastoral image and which companies are reaping the benefits of free marketing services to millions of consumers.
Findings for Objectives One and Two:
Which agricultural brands are present in popular films?
How often are the agricultural brands shown in popular films?
Agriculture implement producing companies were the most frequently placed brands in the films studied, appearing 23 times throughout the 19 films. Twenty-seven brands in total were placed in the 19 films, with an overall brand count of 46 appearances throughout the films. While John Deere was the most common brand to appear in the films, Farmall/International Harvester and CAT had the second highest number of appearances throughout the films, appearing in three films each (see Table 4.1). John
Deere was on screen for a total 525 seconds throughout 14 of the 19 films, which was the highest length of appearance of any brand. John Deere appeared in: Funny Farm, Field of
Dreams, City Slickers, Son In Law, The Bridges of Madison County, Twister, The
36
Waterboy, Runaway Bride, O’ Brother, Where Art Thou?, Seabiscuit, The Dukes of
Hazzard, Superman Returns, Charlotte’s Web, and Secretariat.
Massey Ferguson had the second highest length of screen time, being on screen for a combined 203 seconds in Twister and Son In Law. Snapper mowers were featured in
Forrest Gump, for a total of 159 seconds, followed in greatest length of appearance by
Komakatsu for 104 seconds in The Dukes of Hazzard.
In contract, the brand with the smallest number of screen time was New Holland, which appeared for one second in Field of Dreams on a hat. Ace Hi Feeds, Carhartt,
Dekalb, and Redwing Shoes each had the second lowest amount of screen time, with each brand being present for three seconds each throughout the films.
Brands: Films: Length of
Appearance:
Ace Hi Feeds Son In Law 3
Total: 3 Seconds
Carhartt The Dukes of Hazzard 3
Total: 3 Seconds
Castrol Motor Oil Field of Dreams 11
Total: 11 Seconds
Table 4.1. Brands are listed with the films the brands appeared in along with the length of appearance in seconds. Continued
37
Table 4.1: Continued CAT Field of Dreams 27
Forrest Gump 5
Charlotte’s Web 8
Total: 40 Seconds
Cub Cadet Field of Dreams 8
Twister 12
Total: 20 Seconds
Dekalb The Bridges of Madison 3
County
Total: 3 Seconds
Department of Agriculture Arachnophobia 5
Total: 5 Seconds
Farmall/International Forrest Gump 7
Harvester
Runaway Bride 4
Signs 13
Total: 24 Seconds
FFA Charlotte’s Web 8
Total: 8 Seconds
Continued
38
Table 4.1: Continued Ford Son In Law 19
Varsity Blues 40
Total: 54 Seconds
John Deere Funny Farm 48
Field of Dreams 26
City Slickers 6
Son In Law 6
The Bridges of Madison 9
County
Twister 65
The Waterboy 223
Runaway Bride 1
O’ Brother, Where Art Thou? 6
Seabiscuit 16
The Dukes of Hazzard 5
Superman Returns 19
Charlotte’s Web 78
Secretariat 17
Total: 525
Seconds
Continued
39
Table 4.1: Continued Justin Boots Son In Law 14
Varsity Blues 40
Total: 54 Seconds
Kent Feed Field of Dreams 26
Total: 26 Seconds
Kenworth Brokeback Mountain 44
Total: 44 Seconds
Komakatsu The Dukes of Hazzard 104
Total: 104
Seconds
Mack The Dukes of Hazzard 6
Total: 6 Seconds
Massey Ferguson Son In Law 158
Twister 45
Total: 203
Seconds
New Holland Field of Dreams 1
Total: 1 Second
Pioneer Twister 15
Total: 15 Seconds
Continued
40
Table 4.1: Continued Quality Seed Field of Dreams 10 Total: 10 Seconds
REAL Seal Field of Dreams 7
Total: 7 Seconds
Red Wing Shoes Varsity Blues 3
Total: 3 Seconds
Snapper Forrest Gump 159
Total: 159
Seconds
Versatile Brokeback Mountain 10
Total: 10 Seconds
Wheel Horse Funny Farm 18
Total: 18 Seconds
White Farm Equipment Brokeback Mountain 16
Total: 16 Seconds
4-H Charlotte’s Web 45
Total: 45 Seconds
Total: 1384
Seconds
41
Objective Three Findings:
How are the brands positioned in the film (Is the brand name clearly shown, is it the focus of the frame?)
The following paragraphs describe a selection of the films and brands, clarifying the use of brands in the films or how the films portrayed the brands. The brand with the greatest number of on screen time, John Deere, films with high interactive brand experience, the highest ranking and largest grossing film studied, Forrest Gump, and
Charlotte’s Web, a widely distributed children’s classic book adapted into film.
John Deere
The Waterboy (Coraci, The Waterboy, 1998), starring Adam Sandler, features a highly disguised John Deere mower, which has been painted red. However, the mower serves as the main method of transportation for Bobby Boucher (Sandler) to get to football practice at the University of Louisiana and South Central Louisiana State
University from his home in the bayou, as well as his honeymoon transportation at the end of the film (Coraci, The Waterboy, 1998). The Waterboy features the highest time of on-screen branded material for any of the films studied, which is 223 seconds of screen time of the John Deere mower, see Figure 4.1 (Coraci, The Waterboy, 1998). Although the mower is painted red, and some individuals would believe the mower could be built by Case IH, Snapper or Wheel Horse (all companies which produce red lawn mowers), the body style of this particular model is produced by John Deere and it does retain the trademark yellow on the mower deck and hub caps.
42
Figure 4.1. Bobby Boucher, portrayed by Adam Sandler, shown in the right foreground, approaches the John Deere mower featured in The Waterboy (Coraci, The Waterboy, 1998: Internet Movie Cars Database, 2006).
Even if the representation of John Deere is ignored from The Waterboy, John
Deere is still has the longest duration of screen appearance of 302 seconds from the films studied, with The Waterboy’s appearance of John Deere included the brand is present on screen for 525 seconds. Although John Deere branding was disguised in The Waterboy, the brand was not camouflaged in any of the other films, which feature the iconic green and yellow machinery and running buck logo (Coraci, The Waterboy, 1998). Whether the
John Deere logo was featured on a hat, as it was in Funny Farm and Charlotte’s Web, or
43 on a piece of machinery like in Field of Dreams, City Slickers, Son In Law, Twister,
Runaway Bride, O’ Brother, Where Art Thou?, Seabiscuit, The Dukes of Hazzard,
Superman Returns, and Secretariat, the brand received attention from millions of viewers and was easily recognizable as a part of the John Deere product line up (Hill, Funny
Farm, 1988) (Winick, Charlotte’s Web, 2006) (Robinson, Field of Deams, 1989)
(Underwood, City Slickers, 1991) (Rash, Son In Law, 1993) (de Bont, Twister, 1996)
(Marshall G., Runaway Bride, 1999) (Coen & Coen, O’ Brother, Where Art Thou?, 2000)
(Ross, Seabiscuit, 2003) (Chandarasekher, The Dukes of Hazzard, 2005) (Singer,
Superman Returns, 2006). Ray Kinsella, portrayed by Kevin Costner, uses his John Deere
2640 tractor to plow under a portion of his corn crop to build his baseball field in Field of
Dreams (Robinson, Field of Dreams, 1989). This John Deere product clearly displays the brand, as well as the model number for the audiences to digest for 26 seconds of screen time, see Figure 4.2.
44
Figure 4.2. Ray Kinsella and his daughter, Karin, ride on the John Deere 2640 during the film Field of Dreams (Robinson, Field of Dreams,1989: Internet Movie Cars Database, 2012).
High Interactive Brand Experience
Son In Law has the second longest running time of branded material during the film. However, unlike in The Waterboy, the screen time of 200 seconds is divided between five brands in Son In Law (Coraci, The Waterboy, 1998) (Rash, Son In Law,
1993). Ace Hi Feeds, Ford, John Deere, Justin Boots, and Massey Ferguson share the spotlight in Son In Law throughout the Morgan Family’s attempts to educate Crawl
(portrayed by Pauley Shore), their daughter’s city slicker fiancée, on how to farm (Rash,
Son In Law, 1993). After an afternoon shoveling manure into a John Deere manure spreader, Crawl climbs into the family’s Massey Ferguson 8460 combine to the tune of
John Denver’s Thank God I’m a Country Boy and proceeds to write his moniker in
45 cursive throughout the (ragweed infested) corn field, all while the hired hand, Theo, operates a Ford tractor in the background while wearing his favorite Massey Ferguson ball cap (See Figure 4.3)(Rash, Son In Law, 1993). The John Deere manure spreader appeared for six seconds, Ford tractor for 19 seconds, Massey Ferguson for 158 seconds,
Ace Hi Feeds for three seconds and Justin Boots appeared for 14 seconds throughout Son
In Law’s memorable scenes (Rash, Son In Law, 1993).
Figure 4.3. Crawl operates the Massey Ferguson 8460 with ease while learning to become a farmer in Son In Law (Rash, Son In Law, 1993: Internet Movie Cars Database, 2014).
46
Bill and Jo Harding, portrayed by Helen Hunt and Bill Paxton, send film viewers flying across the Great Plains, near Wakita, Kansas, in search of the most dangerous tornadoes in Twister (de Bont, Twister, 1996). The team of experienced storm chasers speed through sleepy rural towns and take shortcuts through corn fields as they chase the tornadoes in hopes to deploy “Dorothy”, a computer system designed to monitor how tornadoes form and what occurs while the storm is destroying everything in its path (de
Bont, Twister, 1996).
This film is unlike all of the other films studied, because it used agricultural brands to frighten the audience, as well as understand the sheer force Mother Nature can inflict on material goods. Toward the end of the film, the Hardings pass by an implement dealership, which is selling primarily Massey Ferguson and Cub Cadet Equipment, along with a few John Deere tractors. Seconds later, several Massey Ferguson combines slam into the road, having been picked up from the dealership and thrown from a tornado, from which the hero and heroine narrowly miss being crushed to death. In the last scene, the most powerful tornado in the film has just wrecked havoc on a farm, by annihilating a large barn, fencing, corn crop, and well house. As soon as the storm cleared, the farming family emerged from their storm cellar. The family is physically unscathed from the disaster, but as the father looks around in disbelief at the destruction of his farm, he is wearing his Pioneer Seed ball cap for the viewers of film, see Figure 4.4.
47
Figure 4.4. The farmer and his family emerge from the storm cellar at the end of Twister. Notice the farmer's hat, which features the Pioneer Seed logo (de Bont, Twister, 1996).
Forrest Gump
The highest ranking and grossing film studied was Forrest Gump, which brought in $329,694,499.00 and was the number one movie of 1994. Forrest Gump starts out in
Forrest’s hometown of “Greenbow, Alabama, in Greenbow County,” according to Forrest
Gump’s narration (Zemeckis, Forrest Gump, 1994). Forrest, portrayed by Michael
Conner Humphries and Tom Hanks, has a rough start in life by requiring braces on his 48 legs and having a lower than average IQ. Mrs. Gump, portrayed by Sally Field, walks with Forrest from the town, passing by a Farmall tractor on the road in front of their home within the first seven minutes of the film. Forrest overcomes the need for the braces on his legs, and is able to live a full life by going to college, joining the army and serving in Vietnam, starting the Bubba Gump Shrimp Company, and many other great achievements (Zemeckis, Forrest Gump, 1994). However, his one true passion in life is his friendship with Jenny, the girl he befriended on the first day of school. After making money with his shrimp business, Forrest returns to Greenbow, Alabama, where he mows the local football field and his yard with his Snapper lawn mower for free.
Charlotte’s Web
Charlotte’s Web is the most widely recognized agrarian story studied through the series of films in this study. The film released in 2006 was based off E.B. White’s
Charlotte’s Web, originally published in 1952, which became “one of the most beloved children’s books,” according to A.O. Scott, of the New York Times (Scott, 2006). The film follows the life of Wilbur, the pig, and Charlotte A. Cavatica, the spider who spins elaborate webs with words in order to save Wilbur from the butcher’s block (Winick,
Charlotte’s Web, 2006) (Scott, 2006). The animals reside on the Zuckerman farm and become local celebrities because of Wilbur’s fame.
49
Figure 4.5. Fern, portrayed by Dakota Fanning and wearing a 4-H shirt, holds Wilbur while admiring Charlotte's newest web in Charlotte's Web (Winick, Charlotte’s Web, 2006).
Charlotte’s Web extensively promotes youth organizations, such as the 4-H and
FFA, by showing an informative lecture during class to encourage students to join their local 4-H club and exhibit a project at the local county fair (Winick, Charlotte’s Web,
2006). Fern, portrayed by Dakota Fanning, even wears a shirt with the 4-H emblem while working with Wilbur on the farm (Winick, Charlotte’s Web, 2006) (See Figure 4.5).
50
Objective Four Results:
Are there trends between the films in which the agricultural brands appeared in?
Of the films analyzed in this study, agricultural brands appeared in more films categorized as dramas in comparison to other film genres (Box Office Mojo, 2013) (See
Table 4.2). Of the 19 films, 11 were categorized as dramas, followed by comedy in ten films, and romance in six films. The majority of the films were rated PG-13 (12 films were rated PG-13 out of 19), four films were rated PG, two R, and one G rated film was studied (Box Office Mojo, 2013).
Film: Rating: Genre:
Funny Farm PG Comedy, Drama
Field of Dreams PG Drama. Family, Fantasy
Arachnophobia PG-13 Comedy, Sci-Fi, Thriller
City Slickers PG-13 Comedy, Western
Son In Law PG-13 Comedy, Drama, Romance
Forrest Gump PG-13 Drama, Romance
The Bridges of Madison County PG-13 Drama, Romance
Twister PG-13 Action, Adventure, Drama
The Waterboy PG-13 Comedy, Sport
Table 4.2. Table 4.2 lists the films in chronological order providing the rating and genre of each film studied in the study. Continued 51
Table 4.2: Continued Runaway Bride PG Comedy, Romance
Varsity Blues R Comedy, Drama, Romance
O’ Brother, Where Art Thou? PG-13 Comedy, Crime
Signs PG-13 Drama, Sci-Fi, Thriller
Seabiscuit PG-13 Drama, History, Sport
Brokeback Mountain R Drama, Romance
The Dukes of Hazzard PG-13 Action, Adventure, Comedy
Superman Returns PG-13 Action, Adventure, Fantasy
Charlotte’s Web G Comedy, Family, Fantasy
Secretariat PG Drama, Family, History
The films studied were produced from a combination of six different studios:
Buena Vista Pictures produced six films, followed by Warner Bros. producing five films,
Paramount Studios produced four films, Universal Pictures produced two films, and
Columbia Pictures and Focus Entertainment each produced one film containing agricultural brands (Box Office Mojo, 2013) (See Table 4.3). Superman Returns was shown in the greatest number of theatres, in comparison to other films studied. Clark
Kent’s latest reprisal as Superman appeared in 2006 in 4,065 theatres throughout the
United States (Box Office Mojo, 2013). O’ Brother, Where Art Thou? was shown in the 52 fewest number of theatres, for a total of 847 theatres. While all of the films ranked higher than 70th in each of the respective box office year rankings, none of the films ranked higher than Forrest Gump, which was the highest-ranking film at number one for 1994.
Twister was the second highest film of 1996. Secretariat ranked 58th in 2010 and O’
Brother, Where Art Thou? ranked 56th in 2000, and were the lowest ranking films studied.
Year: Film: National Producing Studio: Theatres
Rank: shown
in:
1988 Funny Farm 40 Warner Bros. 1557
1989 Field of Dreams 19 Universal Pictures 1100
1990 Arachnophobia 22 Buena Vista 2005
Pictures
1991 City Slickers 5 Columbia Pictures 2171
1993 Son In Law 44 Buena Vista 1406
Pictures
1994 Forrest Gump 1 Paramount Studios 2365
Table 4.3. Films studied are listed chronologically and each film's box office rank, production company and number of theatres shown in are included. Continued
53
Table 4.3: Continued 1995 The Bridges of Madison County 21 Warner Bros. 1986
1996 Twister 2 Warner Bros. 2808
1998 The Waterboy 5 Buena Vista Pictures 2782
1999 Runaway Bride 9 Paramount Studios 3240
1999 Varsity Blues 44 Paramount Studios 2364
2000 O’ Brother, Where Art Thou? 56 Buena Vista Pictures 847
2002 Signs 6 Buena Vista Pictures 3453
2003 Seabiscuit 17 Universal Pictures 2573
2005 Brokeback Mountain 22 Focus 2089
The total combined gross income from the films studied was $2,213,087,100.00
(Box Office Mojo, 2013) (See Table 4.4.). The films were shown in a total of 46,170 theatres across the country and had a combined running time of 2,185 hours (Box Office
Mojo, 2013) (See Table 4.3 and Table 4.4.). Six films premiered in the second quarter of the year (April, May and June), five films premiered in the first quarter (January,
February and March), both the third (July, August and September) and fourth (October,
November and December) quarters had four films premier (Box Office Mojo, 2013) (See
Table 4.4.). Films that premiered in the second quarter rank higher in the box office, on average, in comparison to films in the other three quarters.
54
Film: Gross Income: Debut Date: Running Time:
Funny Farm $25,537,221 June 3 101 Minutes
Field of Dreams $64,431,625 April 21 107 Minutes
Arachnophobia $53,208,180 July 20 103 Minutes
City Slickers $124,033,791 June 7 113 Minutes
Son In Law $36,448,400 July 2 95 Minutes
Forrest Gump $329,694,499 July 6 142 Minutes
The Bridges of Madison County $71,516,617 June 2 135 Minutes
Twister $241,721,524 May 10 113 Minutes
The Waterboy $161,491,646 November 6 90 Minutes
Runaway Bride $152,257,509 July 30 116 Minutes
Varsity Blues $52,894,169 January 15 106 Minutes
O’ Brother, Where Art Thou? $45,512,588 December 22 106 Minutes
Signs $227,966,634 February 6 106 Minutes
Seabiscuit $120,277,854 February 5 140 Minutes
Brokeback Mountain $83,043,761 April 20 134 Minutes
The Dukes of Hazzard $80,270,227 October 30 104 Minutes
Superman Returns $200,081,192 November 2 154 Minutes
Charlotte’s Web $82,985,708 March 22 97 Minutes
Secretariat $59,713,955 February 10 123 Minutes
Table 4.4. Films are listed with earnings generated, box office opening date, and running time. 55
Objective Five Results:
Are there trends with the actors or actresses who appear in the films?
Actors and actresses capture the audience’s attention during the film, and usually leave lasting impressions after the film has ended. Trends of actors and actresses who frequently portray characters in rural films appeared in the films analyzed for this study
(Brand Cameo, 2012).
Of these films, four actors were in multiple films on the list. They varied from main roles to supportive roles, but were essential in the creation of making the audience feel like they were part of a functional rural community, experiencing an agrarian lifestyle. See Table 4.5. Royce D. Applegate, Kathy Bates, John Goodman and Julia
Roberts were each featured in two of the films analyzed which contained agricultural branded material. Royce D. Applegate and Julia Roberts appeared in other films which were analyzed for brand content, but were eliminated from the study because of a lack of branded material present in the films. Therefore, when considering films with rural settings, Applegate and Roberts have a greater number of appearances in films in comparison to other actors in Table 4.5. In the particular films in this study, the six repetitive actors did not interact directly with an agricultural brand.
56
Actor: Films:
Applegate, Royce D. O’ Brother, Where Art Thou?
Seabiscuit
Bates, Kathy The Waterboy
Charlotte’s Web
Goodman, John Arachnophobia
O’ Brother, Where Art Thou?
Roberts, Julia Runaway Bride
Charlotte’s Web
Table 4.5. Actors who were in multiple films studied are listed with the films they appeared in.
Although the agriculturally based brands do not take up the majority of screen time in films, they still are an important part of making the scenes in the films believable and representative of an agrarian lifestyle. The use of the branded agricultural products in the films studied for this research project, portrayed agriculture in a realistic setting.
Overall, the brands were used for their intended purposes and accurately represented the agriculture industry in the United States. There use would correctly inform the viewers of the films of what life is like on an American farm or a rural countryside.
In total, agricultural brands were on screen for a combined 1,384 seconds, or
23.07 minutes. This means agricultural brands were present for 1.06 percent of the 57 combined films running time. However, despite such a low percentage, the brands presented in the films were visible to viewers. There is an even greater presence of agricultural representation in the films because of the appearance of unbranded items, such as animals, crops and pastoral settings.
58
Chapter 5: Conclusions
Less than two percent of the United States population is directly involved with production agriculture, and therefore the majority of the general public is not directly related to the production of agricultural products or typically understands how an
American farm functions (EPA's Ag Center, 2012). While the majority of the population does not know firsthand what the agricultural industry requires to operate on a daily basis, they are exposed through numerous forms of mass media on the happenings in rural America. Although most media formats, such as television and film, use pastoral scenes to sell a fictional story line, rather than providing factual information for the public to learn from. Therefore, this study used content analysis to determine what brands are present in films featuring agricultural scenes from the past 25 years. Films from this broad period of time would allow the films to be readily available for the general public to view. Each of the films ranked higher than 70th in its opening year box office records and was a live action film, rather than an animated film (Box Office Mojo, 2013).
Nineteen films met the requirements for the study and contained agricultural brands.
The objectives of this study were as follows:
1. Which agricultural brands are present in popular films?
2. How often are the agricultural brands shown in popular films?
59
3. How are the agricultural brands positioned in the film (Is the brand name clearly
shown, is it the focus of the frame?)
4. Are there trends between the films in which the agricultural brands appeared?
5. Are there trends with the actors or actresses who appear in the popular films that
feature an agricultural or rural setting?
Agricultural brands were not the focus of the story plots of the films studied; the brands had a large impact on creating the imagery of an operational agricultural industry, and thus influenced the viewer of the films to believe the scenes they were watching.
Some brands were utilized, or worn, by characters, while others were adding to the ambiance in the background, but each was important to form the take home message for the viewer. Despite having a supportive role in each of the films, 27 brands were featured throughout the films. The brands present were: Ace Hi Feeds, Carhartt, Castrol Motor
Oil, CAT, Cub Cadet, Dekalb, Department of Agriculture, Farmall/International
Harvester, FFA, Ford, John Deere, Justin Boots, Kent Feed, Kenworth, Komakatsu,
Mack, Massey Ferguson, New Holland, Pioneer, Quality Seed, REAL Seal, Red Wing
Shoes, Snapper, Versatile, Wheel Horse, White Farm Equipment, and 4-H.
Each of the present brands helped create the imagery associated with an American farm or functional rural community. Whether it was the main characters driving a John
Deere tractor or a supporting character wearing a 4-H shirt, each of the brands left an impression of the agricultural industry upon the viewers of the films.
60
Although agriculturalists frequently debate the battle of red vs. green
(Farmall/International Harvester vs. John Deere), when it comes to product placement in films John Deere reigns supreme over all other brands in length of screen time and number of appearances in the films analyzed during this study. From all the films that contained branded material in a rural setting, John Deere products were featured in 13 films for a combined duration of 516 seconds (8.6 minutes).
In total, agricultural branded material was present for 23.07 minutes throughout the 19 films. This is approximately 1.06 percent of the combined running time of each of the films, which is a small portion of the screen time. However, when the films are being shown in the theaters, the film has the undivided attention of the audience because of movie theatre etiquette, meaning it is not appropriate to talk or use electronic communication devices during the film. The movie theatre is one of the rare locations in today’s society where most individuals adhere to this uncommon courtesy of disconnecting from the digital world and unplugging for a few hours to enjoy nothing but entertainment, without the distractions of life and instantaneous communication.
While 1.06 percent of the combined running time is a low portion of the film, the presence of the brands on screen is important because of the millions of impressions being obtained through watching the films. In comparison to agricultural brands that are not placed in films or other mass media outlets, like television, agricultural brands that are placed in films have a lager public awareness, even if it is subconscious, because of the visibility obtained through film. Funny Farm’s movie poster and DVD and VHS packaging cover features Chevy Chase riding his Wheel Horse lawn mower, this kind of
61
advertising would not have been achieved without the use of agricultural product
placement in film.
Figure 5.1. Funny Farm poster shows Chevy Chase and Yellow Dog riding on a Wheel Horse lawn mower, which is featured for 18 seconds in the film (Hill, Funny Farm, 1988).
Films have historically had a large audience. Films attract over a billion people
annually to the theatres and even more people watch films at home (Biagi, 2010). 62
Advertisers are increasingly turning to market products through product placement in films or television because of DVR technology, which allows consumers to remove commercials from recorded programs, therefore entirely skipping millions of dollars of advertisements (Spurlock, 2011). By placing products in the content of films or television programs, consumers cannot skip the advertisement because it is integrated into the story line of the entertainment piece. For this reason, agricultural communicators must study films to understand the representation of agricultural brands, agricultural practices and the agricultural industry through the lenses of Hollywood.
Positioning of the brands in the film is an important part of product placement.
New Holland appeared for 1 second in Field of Dreams on a hat worn by a supporting, unnamed character – which was very easy to miss in a feature length film. In comparison,
Ray Kinsella, portrayed by Kevin Costner, in Field of Dreams used a John Deere tractor to plow his field of corn down to make the baseball field. This product placement of the
John Deere tractor focuses the entire screen on to the tractor for several seconds.
Francesca Johnson, portrayed by Meryl Streep, drives a John Deere tractor and tends to her family’s corn in The Bridges of Madison County, while Robert Kincaid, portrayed by
Clint Eastwood, drives by a Dekalb sign on his way to examine the famous Madison
County Bridges. The placement of the brands does impact the effectiveness of the brands marketing power. New Holland and Dekalb did not have the same effectiveness that John
Deere did in Field of Dreams and The Bridges of Madison County.
Like the findings in Specht’s study of film and television portrayals of agriculture and Rhoades and Irani’s study of TSC advertisements, the films analyzed in this study
63 reflect the findings from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation’s Perception of Rural America results. The 19 films analyzed in this research study show a variation of the agrarian perceptions defined by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation studies. These films depict rolling hills, lush foliage, Norman Rockwell imagery (especially in Funny Farm where the
Farmers pay the local community to imitate covers of The Saturday Evening Post which feature Rockwell’s depictions of idyllic rural life), red barns, conservative values, demonstrate hard work ethics, and reinforce perceptions that some rural folk are backwards and lack sophistication (Like Forrest Gump from Forrest Gump, Bobby
Boucher from The Waterboy, and the Duke cousins from The Dukes of Hazzard).
Generally the farmers depicted in the films would wear boots, bib overalls with a flannel shirt and some kind of hat, generally a baseball cap or cowboy hat, which would match the stereotypical farmer perception. In keeping with the stereotypical representation of the characters in the films, representations of viewer expectations appeared on film covers as well, specifically on Son In Law’s cover imitating Grant Wood’s painting called
“American Gothic” (Rash, 1993) (Basinger, 2005). The use of agricultural brands and the settings shown in the films is an extension of the agricultural perceptions of common film consumers without agricultural knowledge.
64
Figure 5.2 and 5.1. Grant Wood's "American Gothic" painting and Son In Law's promotional poster share a striking resemblance in order to match viewer
perceptions of rural American lifestyles, and include humor in the film's advertising (Basinger, 2005: Rash, 1993).
Using popular actors and public figures to show off agricultural products in films through product placement is a method to connect the brand to the consumer. While the majority of the population of the United States has no need for the largest horsepower tractor made by John Deere or a Caterpillar D-4 bulldozer, most are able to relate to material items produced by the companies, such as t-shirts, hats, children’s toys and even some small garden equipment.
65
Figure 5.4. John Deere produced a 1/16 model toy tractor of the 2640 tractor driven by Kevin Costner in Field of Dreams (Robinson, Field of Dreams, 1989) (Ebay, 2014).
By witnessing a prominent actor utilizing a product in a film may result in a consumer to purchase a branded item if the brand is portrayed positively. Individuals who are looking to purchase a lawn mower and have recently seen Forrest Gump, Funny
Farm or Twister, may evaluate the differences between Wheel Horse, Snapper, and Cub
Cadet lawn mowers because of the brands presence on the screen. Visual images can be recalled quickly by consumers when making purchasing decisions of branded items.
66
Recommendations for Practitioners
Agricultural communicators should familiarize themselves with the content of agricultural and rural based films. By understanding and knowing what representations consumers are seeing in the theater, agricultural communicators can establish better advertising and public relation campaigns to work with or against the imagery. Film and television are interwoven to influence the audience’s opinions through cultivation, and over time, information presented through entertainment pieces becomes synonymous with factual information in the minds of the viewers (Potter, 1993). Not all information presented in films is entirely factual or represents modern day agricultural practices; therefore agricultural communicators should stay up to date on film content, representation of agriculture and agricultural brand appearance in films. This study is an important example for public relations and marketing courses in agricultural communication to see how product placement is effective for promoting agricultural brands.
Brands which appear in films should try to capitalize on their appearances because of the large quantity of viewers who see films. While it is not known what brands paid for product placement or not in the films studied, the brands should all have tried to increase sales through the advertisements made through the films. As product placement becomes increasingly popular in the future, agricultural companies will need to evaluate the potential return on investment available by marketing to viewers of film and television.
67
Recommendations for Future Research
Further studies on films featuring agricultural settings, plots, and brands are needed for agricultural communications to be effective in marketing brands to common and agricultural consumers. Films should be studied from a greater number of years to determine the variety of agricultural brands utilized in film production and any trends over a greater period of time. Films ranking lower than 70th in box office years should also be studied, because those films also had large audiences. When analyzing a greater quantity of films, actors and actresses trends should be studied and considered for their marketing power with consumers who would want to see them in an agricultural or rural based film, and how well they market agricultural products within the story line of the film.
Segments of the films analyzed in this study should be shown to audiences to determine the brand recall and consumer perception of agricultural brands from both agriculturalists and common consumers. Obtaining information from consumers after viewing films and following their purchasing habits of agricultural products is a logical extension of product placement research.
Although agricultural brands have a small role in the market of product placement in all films; in the agricultural sector, the appearance of agricultural products and brands on the silver screen makes a statement of international advertisement and endorsement for the brands and their products (if the products are portrayed in a positive light). By appearing in films, agricultural brands and the agricultural industry achieve visibility from millions of viewers and impact the image of American agriculture for 98 percent of
68 the nation’s population who are not involved with agricultural production on a farm in the
United States. By understanding what and how consumers of rural based films interpret the brands and images of the agrarian lifestyles in the United States through film will only help agricultural communicators communicate with the public in the future.
69
References
Acheson, K., & Maule, C. (1991). Shadows Behind the Scenes: Political Exchange and
the Film Industry. Mellennium - Journal of International Studies , 20 (2), 287-
307.
AGCO Corporation. (2014). AGCO Corporation Homepage. Retrieved February 26,
2014, from AGCO Corporation: http://www.agcocorp.com/default.aspx
Allers, R., Culton, J., & Stacchi, A. (Directors). (2006). Open Season [Motion Picture].
Los Angeles.
American Farm Bureau Federation. (n.d.). Fast Facts About Agriculture. Retrieved
November 23, 2013, from American Farm Bureau, The Voice of Agriculture, Fast
Facts About Agriculture: www.fb.org/index.php?fuseaction=newsroom.fastfacts
Aquino, J., & Sterbenz, C. (2014, February 11). 15 Inventions From Thomas Edison That
Changed The World. Retrieved February 22, 2014, from Business Insider:
www.businessinsider.com/thomas-edisons-inventions-2014-2?op=1
Basinger, J. (2005, July 10). 'American Gothic': A Man, a Woman and a Pitchfork.
Retrieved March 13, 2014, from The New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/10/books/review/10BASSING.html?pagewante
d=all&_r=0
Biagi, S. (2010). Media/Impact: an introduction to mass media. Sacramento, CA:
Wadsworth Cenage Learning. 70
Box Office Mojo. (2013). Yearly Domestic Grosses. Retrieved November 20, 2013, from
Box Office Mojo: www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?yr=2013&p=.htm
Brand Cameo. (2012). Product Placement of all time. Retrieved October 20, 2012, from
Brand Channel:
http://www.brandchannel.com/brandcameo_brands.asp?all_year=all_year#brand_
list
Briggs & Stratton Power Products Group, LLC. (2014). Snapper Homepage. Retrieved
February 26, 2014, from Snapper: http://www.snapper.com/us/en
Buhler Versatile Inc. (2014). Versatile About Us. Retrieved February 26, 2014, from
Versatile Agricultural Products: http://www.versatile-ag.ca/NA/EN/info/info-
about/about.php
Bukszpan, B. (2011). 10 Sucesses in Producct placement, Special for CNBC.com.
Retrieved October 2012, from http://www.cnbc.com/id/43266198/10_Big
Successes_in_Product_Placement?slide=1
Carhartt. (2014). Carhartt - History. Retrieved February 23, 2014, from Carhartt:
www.carhartt.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/HistoryView?langld=-
1&storeid=10051&catalogid=10101
Castrol. (2012). 2012 - Castrol logo - Castrol - Driving Tomorrow. Retrieved February
23, 2014, from Castrol: http://drivingtomorrow.castrol.com/2012-castrol-logo/
Castrol. (2014). Driving Tomorrow. Retrieved February 23, 2014, from Castrol:
http://drivingtomorrow.castrol.com/1899-castrols-story-begins-with-a-humble-
axlebox-lubricant/
71
Caterpillar. (2014). Caterpillar History. Retrieved February 23, 2014, from Caterpillar:
http://www.cateripllar.com/en/company/history.html#2000s
Caterpillar Inc. (2004, April). Story of Caterpillar. Retrieved February 23, 2014, from
CAT: http://pdf.cat.com/cda/files/89616/9/StoryofCaterpillar042004.pdf
Caton-Jones, M. (Director). (1991). Doc Hollywood [Motion Picture]. USA.
Chandarasekher, J. (Director). (2005). The Dukes of Hazzard [Motion Picture]. Burbank,
California.
Coen, J., & Coen, E. (Directors). (2000). O Brother, Where Art Thou? [Motion Picture].
Burbank, CA.
Conradt, S. (2012, December 11). The stories behind 10 famous product placements.
Retrieved March 1, 2014, from The Week:
http://ww.theweek.com/article/index/237595/thr-stories-behind-10-famous-
product-placements
Coolidge, M. (Director). (2004). The Prince and Me [Motion Picture]. Santa Monica,
CA.
Coraci, F. (Director). (1998). The Waterboy [Motion Picture]. USA.
Costner, K. (Director). (2003). Open Range [Motion Picture]. Burbank, CA.
Cromartie, J., & Bucholtz, S. (2008). Defining the "rural" in rural America. Amber
Waves: The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America
, 6 (3), 28-35.
Cub Cadet. (2014). Cub Cadet Homepage. Retrieved February 23, 2014, from Cub
Cadet: http://www.cubcadet.com/equipment/cubcadet
72
Cuellar, S. (2009, January). The 'Sideways' Effect: A Test for changes in the demand for
Merlot and Pinot Nior wines. Wines & Vines .
Davis, A. (Director). (2003). Holes [Motion Picture]. Burbank, CA. de Bont, J. (Director). (1996). Twister [Motion Picture]. USA.
DEKALB. (2012). DEKALB 100 Year Anniversary. Retrieved February 23, 2014, from
DEKALB : http://www.dekalb100yearsook.com
Deutch, H. (Director). (1998). The Odd Couple II [Motion Picture]. Los Angeles, CA.
Du Chau, F. (Director). (2005). Racing Stripes [Motion Picture]. Los Angeles, CA.
DuPont Pioneer. (2014). DuPont Pioneer Our Heritage. Retrieved February 25, 2014,
from Pioneer: http://www.pioneer.com/home/site/about/business/who-we-are/our-
heritage/
Eastwood, C. (Director). (1995). Bridges of Madison County [Motion Picture]. USA.
Ebay. (2014). JOhn Deere 2640 Field of Dreams Collector Edition Tractor. Retrieved
March 13, 2014, from Ebay: http://www.ebay.com/itm/JOHN-DEERE-2640-
FIELD-OF-DREAMS-COLLECTOR-EDITION-TRACTOR-NIB-
/181348599143
Ebert, R. (1994, July 6). Forrest Gump. Retrieved February 16, 2014, from
rogerebert.com: www.rogerebert.com/reviews/forrest-gump-1994
EPA's Ag Center. (2012). Ag 101: Demographics. Retrieved October 24, 2012, from
http://www.epa.gov/oecaagct/ag101/demographics.html
Finn, W., & Sanford, J. (Directors). (2004). Home on the Range [Motion Picture].
Burbank, CA.
73
Fishman, C. (2006, January/February). The Man Who Said No to Wal-Mart. Fast
Company .
Frappier, R. (2012). 'Bobd 23' To Break Record for Product Placement Sponsorship.
Retrieved February 27, 2014, from Screen Rant: http://screenrant.com/james-
bond-product-placement-robf-113418
Ganzel, B. (2007). Ford Tractors. Retrieved February 25, 2014, from Wessels Living
History Farm:
http://www.livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe50s/machines_06.html
Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorielli, N. (1986). Living with Television:
The Dynamics of the Cultivation Process. In J. Bryant, & D. Zillman (Eds.),
Persepectives on Media Effects (pp. 17-40). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., Signorielli, N., & Shanahan, J. (2002). Growing Up
With Television: Cultivation Process. In J. Bryant, & D. Zillman (Eds.), Media
Effects: Advances in Theory and Research (pp. 43-68). Mahwah, New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Goo, S. K. (2006, April 15). Apple Gets a Big Slice Of Product-Placement Pie. Retrieved
November 22, 2013, from The Washington Post: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2006/04/14/AR2006041401670_pf.html
Grey, J. (2013, May 19). The 15 Most Shameless Movie Product Placements Of All Time.
Retrieved November 22, 2013, from Business Insider:
www.businessinsider.com/15-worst-movie-product-placements-2013-5?op=1
74
Hancock, J. L. (Director). (2002). The Rookie [Motion Picture]. Burbank, CA.
Hetsroni, A., & Tukachinsky, R. (2006). Television-World Estimates, Real World
Estimates, and Television Viewing: A Scheme for Cultivation. Journal of
Communication , 56 (1), 133-156.
Hill, G. R. (Director). (1988). Funny Farm [Motion Picture]. Burbank, CA.
Huffington Post. (2013, November 21). U.S. Life Expectancy Ranks 26th In The World,
OECD Report Shows. Retrieved March 12, 2014, from HUFFPOST HEALTH:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/21/us-life-expectancy-
oecd_n_4317367.html
Internet Movie Cars Database. (2006, October). John Deere 200-Series in The Waterboy.
Retrieved February 16, 2014, from Internet Movie Cars Database:
www.imcdb.org/vehicle_58025-John-Deere-200-Series.html
Internet Movie Cars Database. (2012, October). John Deere 2640 in Field of Dreams.
Retrieved February 16, 2014, from Internet Movie Cars Database:
www.imcdb.org/vehicle_270185-John-Deere-2640.html
Internet Movie Cars Database. (2014). Massey Ferguson 8460 in Son in Law. Retrieved
February 16, 2014, from Internet Movie Cars Database:
www.imcdb.org/vehicle_662514-Massey-Ferguson-8460.html
JD Equipment Inc. (2012, May). Supporting Agriculture and OSU for 30 years.
AgriNaturalist , 118 (Spring), p. 15.
John Deere. (2014). History of the John Deere Trademark. Retrieved February 25, 2014,
from John Deere:
75
http://www.deere.com/wps/dcom/en_US/corporate/our_company/about_us/histor
y/trademarks/trademarks.page?
John Deere. (2014). John Deere Leader Biography. Retrieved February 25, 2014, from
John Deere:
http://www.deere.com/wps/dcom/en_US/corporate/our_company/about_us/histor
y/past_leaders/john_deere_founder_biography.page?
John Deere. (2014). John Deere Timeline. Retrieved February 25, 2014, from John
Deere:
http://www.deere.com/wps/dcom/en_US/corporate/our_company/about_us/histor
y/timeline/timeline.page?
Johnson, R. (2009, September 28). Screen Shots: Product Placement aren't just for big
companies anymore. The Wall Street Journal .
Johnston, J. (Director). (1999). October Sky [Motion Picture].
Jones, B. (2011, July 28). Britain bans airbrushed Julia Roberts make-up ad. Retrieved
March 1, 2014, from CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/07/28/airbrushed.advertisements.ban/
Justin Boots. (2014). Justin Boots Heritage. Retrieved February 25, 2014, from Justin
Boots: http://www.justinboots.com/en/heritage.html
Kent Nutrition Group. (2014). Kent Feeds History. Retrieved February 25, 2014, from
Kent Feeds: http://kentfeeds.com/about-us/kent-history/
Kenworth Trucks. (2014). Kenworth About Us. Retrieved February 25, 2014, from
Kenworth Trucks: http://www.kenworth.com/about-us.aspx#
76
Koenig Equipment, Inc. (2012, June 4). The Story Of The Case Corporation And
International Harvester Tractor Sales. Retrieved February 23, 2014, from Koenig
Equipment, Inc.: http://ww.koeingequipment.com/blog/the-story-of-the-case-
corporation-and-international-harvester-tractor-sales
Komatsu America Corporation. (2014). Komatsu America Corp. - History. Retrieved
February 25, 2014, from Komatsu America:
http://www.komatsuamerica.com/history
Kroll, K. (2013). The Most Egregious Product Placements in Movie & TV History.
Retrieved November 22, 2013, from Rolling Stone:
www.rollingstong.com/movies/pictures/the-mostegregious-product-placements-
in-movie-tv-history-20130604
Lasseter, J. (Director). (2006). Cars [Motion Picture]. Burbank, CA.
Lee, A. (Director). (2005). Brokeback Mountain [Motion Picture]. New York, NY.
Leinster, C. (1987, September 28). A Tale of Mice and Lens. Retrieved November 22,
2013, from CNNMoney.com:
money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1987/09/28/69577/index.htm
Lord, P., & Park, N. (Directors). (2000). Chicken Run [Motion Picture]. Glendale, CA.
Mack Trucks, Inc. . (2014). Mack History. Retrieved February 25, 2014, from Mack
Trucks, Inc.: http://www.macktrucks.com/default.aspx?pageid=253
Manchester Feeds, Inc. (2010). Manchester Feeds, Inc. . Retrieved February 23, 2014,
from Manchester Feeds, Inc. Homepage: www.manchesterfeeds.com
Marshall, F. (Director). (1990). Arachnophobia [Motion Picture]. USA.
77
Marshall, G. (Director). (1999). Runaway Bride [Motion Picture]. Los Angeles, CA.
Massey Ferguson. (2012). Massey Ferguson History. Retrieved February 25, 2014, from
Massey Ferguson: http://www.masseyferguson.us/about_us/mf-history/
McCanlies, T. (Director). (2003). Secondhand Lions [Motion Picture]. Los Angeles, CA.
Miller, G. (Director). (1998). Babe: Pig in the City [Motion Picture]. Sydney, Australia.
Milligan, L. (2012, July 18). Fashion Hangover. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from
VOGUE: www.vogue.co.uk/news/2012/01/03/louis-vuitton-sues-warner-bros-
over-the-hangover-2
Minghella, A. (Director). (2003). Cold Mountain [Motion Picture]. Santa Monica, CA.
Monsanto. (2014). Monsanto DEKALB. Retrieved February 23, 2014, from Monsanto:
http://www.monsanto.com/products/pages/dekalb.aspx
Monsanto. (2014). Monsanto Logo & Brand Download. Retrieved February 23, 2014,
from Monsanto: http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/logo-
download.aspx
Morrison, M. (2013, June 3). Superman Reboot 'Man of Steel' Snares $160M in
Promotions: Summer Blockbuster Boasts More Than 100 Global Marketing
Partners. Retrieved February 27, 2014, from Advertising Age:
http://www.adage.com/article/news/superman-reboot-man-of-steel-snares-160m-
promotions/241822/
Motion Picture Association of America. (2012). Theatrical Market Statistics. Retrieved
November 20, 2013, from www.mpaa.org/resources/3037b7a4-58a2-4109-8012-
58fca3abdf1b.pdf
78
Motion Picture Association of America, Inc. . (2011). Theatrical Market Statistics.
Retrieved February 27, 2013, from Motion Picture Associations of America, Inc. :
www.mpaa.org/resources/5bec4ac9-a95e-443b-987b-bff6fb5455a9.pdf
National 4-H History Preservation Program. (2014). 4-H Emblem. Retrieved February 26,
2014, from National 4-H History Preservation Program: http://www.4-
hhistorypreservation.com/History/Clover/
National Agricultural Library. (2014, Feburary 12). USDA History. Retrieved Feburary
23, 2014, from National Agricultural Library: http://www.nal.usda.gov/history-
art-and-biography/usda-history
National Association of State Departments of Agriculture. (2014). State Directory.
Retrieved Feburary 23, 2014, from National Association of State Departments of
Agriculture: http://www.nasda.org/9383/States.aspx
National FFA Organization. (2014). FFA History. Retrieved February 23, 2014, from
National FFA Organization:
http://www.ffa.org/about/whoweare/Pages/History.aspx
National Milk Producers Federation. (2014). REAL Seal Homepage. Retrieved February
25, 2014, from REAL Seal: http://www.realseal.com
New Holland. (N.D.). About New Holland. Retrieved February 25, 2014, from New
Holland: http://www.agriculture.newholland.com/us/en/About-New-
Holland/About-New-Holland/Pages/WorldMap2.aspx
Oedekerk, S. (Director). (2006). Barnyard [Motion Picture]. Los Angeles, CA.
79
Panousis, J. (2013, July/August). Trends in Agricultural Advertising. Agri Marketing , p.
30.
Potter, W. (1993). Cultivation Theory and Research: A Conceptual Critique. Human
Communication Research , 19 (4), 564-601.
Singer, B. (Director). (2006). Superman Returns [Motion Picture]. Burbank, CA.
Soderbergh, S. (Director). (2000). Erin Brockovich [Motion Picture]. USA.
Specht, A. (2013). A Social Semiotic Discourse Analysis of Film and Television
Portrayals of Agriculture: Implications for American Cultural Memory. Texas
A&M University, Aricultural Leadership, Education, and Communications.
College Station, Texas: Texas A&M University.
Spheeris, P. (Director). (1993). The Beverly Hillbillies [Motion Picture]. USA.
Spicer, B. (Director). (1997). For Richer or Poorer [Motion Picture]. Universal City, CA.
Spurlock, M. (Director). (2011). POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever
Sold [Motion Picture]. USA.
Stampler, L. (2012, August 7). 12 Excellent Examples Of How Apple Product Placements
Rule Hollywood. Retrieved November 22, 2013, from Business Insider:
www.businessinsider.com/apple-product-placements-in-tv-and-movies-2012-
8?op=1
Star Milling Company. (2014). Star Milling Company. Retrieved February 23, 2014,
from Star Milling Company: www.starmilling.com/index.php
Taylor, T. (Director). (2011). The Help [Motion Picture]. USA.
80
Tennant, A. (Director). (2002). Sweet Home Alabama [Motion Picture]. USA.
The Associated Press. (2014, February 22). Dow Stumbles, but the S.&P. 500 and
Nasdaq Continue Their Climb. The New York Times .
The Numbers. (2012). Domestic Theatrical Market Summary for 2012. Retrieved
November 25, 2012, from http://the-numbers.com/market/2012/summary
The Ohio State University Extension. (2012). Ohio 4-H Youth Development History of 4-
H. Retrieved February 26, 2014, from The Ohio State University:
http://www.ohio4h.org/about-us/history-4-h
The Ohio State University. (2014). Facilities: Ohio Stadium. Retrieved March 13, 2014,
from Ohio State Buckeyes Official Athletic Site :
http://www.ohiostatebuckeyes.com/facilities/ohio-stadium.html
Tractor Data. (2014). Cub Cadet lawn and garden tractors sorted my model. Retrieved
February 23, 2014, from Tractor Data: http://www.tractordata.com/lawn-
tractors/tractor-brands/cubcadet/cubcadet-lawn-tractors.html
Tractor Data. (2014). Ford tractors sorted by model and . Retrieved February 25, 2014,
from Tractor Data: http://www.tractordata.com/farm-tractor/tractor-
brands/ford/ford-tractors.html
Tractor Data. (2014). International Harvester tractors sorted by model. Retrieved
February 23, 2014, from Tractor Data: http://www.tractordata.com/farm-
tractors/tractor-brands/ih/ih-tractors.html
81
Tractor Data. (2012). Snapper lawn tractors by model. Retrieved February 26, 2014,
from Tractor Data: http://www.tractordata.com/lawn-tractors/tractor-
brands/snapper/snapper-lawn-tractors.html
Tractor Data. (2013). Wheel Horse lawn tractors by model. Retrieved February 26, 2014,
from Tractor Data: htp://tractordata.com/lawn-tractors/tractor-
brands/wheelhorse/wheelhorse-lawn-tractors.html
Tractor Data. (2013). White tractors by model. Retrieved February 26, 2014, from
Tractor Data: http://www.tractordata.com/farm-tractors/tractor-
brands/white/white-tractors.html
Underwood, R. (Director). (1991). City Slickers [Motion Picture]. USA.
United States Department of Agriculture. (2014). 2012 Census of Agriculture:
Preliminary Report U.S. and State Data.
United States Department of Agriculture. (2007). Census of Agriculture: Demographics.
United States Department of Agriculture. (2007). Census of Agriculture: Production Fact
Sheets.
United States Department of Agriculture: Economic Research Service. (2013, August
27). Farm Income and Wealth Statistics. Retrieved November 23, 2013, from
USDA ERS - Farm Income and Wealth Statistics: Net Cash Income:
www.ers.usda.goc/data-products/farm-income-and-wealth-statistics/net-cash-
income.aspx#.UpDDlhbA5UQ
Van Leeuwen, T., & Jewitt, C. (2001). The Handbook of Visual Analysis. London:
SAGE.
82
Vanity Fair. (2008, May 30). Sex and the City: A Product Placement Roundup. Retrieved
November 22, 2013, from Vanity Fair:
www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2008/05/sex-and-the-cit
W.K. Kellogg Foundation. (2002). Perceptions of Rural America. Battle Creek, MI:
W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
W.K. Kellogg Foundation. (2002). Perceptions of Rural America: Media Coverage.
Battle Creek, MI: W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
W.K. Kellogg Foundation. (2014). Who We Are. Retrieved March 11, 2014, from W.K.
Kellogg Foundation: www.wkkf.org/who-we-are/overview
Wallace, R. (Director). (2010). Secretariat [Motion Picture]. USA.
Walton, A. (2012). The Evolution of Product Placement in Film. THe Elon Journal of
Undergraduate Research in Communications , 1 (1), 70-85.
Werner, S. J., & Tankard, Jr. , J. W. (2001). Communication Theories: Origins, Methods,
and Uses in the Mass Media (5th ed.). New York, NY: Addison Wesley
Longman, Inc.
Wheel Horse Collectors Club, Inc. . (2014). Wheel Horse Collectors Club, Inc.
Hompeage. Retrieved February 26, 2014, from Wheel Horse Collectors Club,
Inc.: http://www.wheelhorsecc.com
Winick, G. (Director). (2006). Charlotte's Web [Motion Picture]. Los Angeles, CA.
Wisconsin Historical Society. (2014). Farmall Tractors. Retrieved February 23, 2014,
from Wisconsin Historical Society:
http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/whi/feature/mccormick/farmall
83
Zemeckis, R. (Director). (1994). Forrest Gump [Motion Picture]. USA.
84
Appendix A: Agricultural Brands
Twenty-eight brands were found throughout the films in this study. This portion of the literature review provides background information about each of the brands that were identified throughout the films.
Ace Hi Feeds
Ace Hi Feeds is a subsidary brand from the Star Milling Company, from Perris,
California (Star Milling Company, 2014). The “Star Milling Company manufactures nutritious, high-quality animal feed that is sold through feed stores in the western United
States. Products are sold under the brands names Ace Hi, Integrity, Kelley’s, Star Brand,
Ultimate Show Feed, and Ultra Balance” (Star Milling Company, 2014). Star Milling
Company is a three generation owned and operated milling company. According to the
Star Milling Company website, Ace Hi Feeds consists of a line of feeds designed for horses, poultry, dogs, birds, small animals and livestock (Star Milling Company, 2014).
85
Figure 6.1. Ace Hi Feed logo (Manchester Feeds, Inc., 2010).
Carhartt
Carhartt was founded in 1889, by Hamilton Carhartt, as a clothing retailer that specialized in apparel for railroad workers (Carhartt, 2014). The company began with four sewing machines and five employees in 1889, and by the early 1900s the company had grown to emcopmase 17 plants and three mills throughout the United States, Canada and Europe (Carhartt, 2014). The company “remains a family owned operation committed to the mission of providing Best-in-Class apparel for the active worker”
(Carhartt, 2014). The Carhartt line of products has grown from being designed for only railroad workers to clothing lines for men, women and children, as well as a line of footwear and flame-resistant products (Carhartt, 2014).
86
Figure 6.2.The modern logo for the Carhartt company (Carhartt, 2014).
Castrol
In 1899, Charles Wakefield “founded CC Wakefield & Co Ltd” (Castrol, 2014).
The company began by producing a lubricant for the axlebox of steam locomotives.
“Wakefield & Co scientists found that adding a measure of castor oil to their lubricants helped to keep the oil runny enough to work from cold at start-up and thick enough to keep working at very high temperatures. They called the new product ‘Castrol’” (Castrol,
2014). By 1909, the company had become Castrol and started producing the first motor oil (Castrol, 2014).
Figure 6.3. Although the Castrol logo has changed since 1909, this is the 2012 version of the company's logo (Castrol, 2012). 87
Caterpillar
Caterpillar Inc., began with the merger of the Holt Manufacturing Company and the C.L. Best Tractor Company in 1925 (Caterpillar Inc., 2004). The first tractor produced from this merger appeared in 1931, and by 1940 the product line included:
“moto graders, blade graders, elevating graders, terraces and electric generator sets”
(Caterpillar Inc., 2004). In 2004, the company sold “more than 300 products in 200 countries” and employed 69,000 employees worldwide (Caterpillar Inc., 2004).
Caterpllar is a brand that has products being used worldwide for a multitude of construction and escavating projects. From 2008 to 2011, “over 400 new Caterpllar machines” helped construct a 2,400-kilometer railway in Saudi Arabia and in 2001
Caterpillar products helped with a new research base on Antartica (Caterpillar, 2014).
The brand CAT is a sub brand of Caterpillar Inc.
Figure 6.4. Caterpillar Inc. logo (Caterpillar, 2014).
88
Cub Cadet
Cub Cadet began as International Harvester’s entrance into the small tractor market in the early 1960s (Tractor Data, 2014). During International Harvester’s ownership of the brand, the tractors were produced in Kentucky; however, in 1981, Cub
Cadet was sold to MTD “as the subsidiary Cub Cadet Corporation (CCC)” (Tractor Data,
2014). Cub Cadets were then built in Tennessee. Today the Cub Cadet brand produces: lawn and garden tractors, zero-turn riding mowers, walk behind mowers, handheld and cleanup devices, snow throwers and utility vehicles, according to the company’s website
(Cub Cadet, 2014).
Figure 6.5. The Cub Cadet logo is correlated with the company colors: yellow, white and black (Cub Cadet, 2014).
DEKALB
On January 20, 1912, the DeKalb County Soil Improvement Association was formed as a farmer cooperative. The Cooperative was “ dedicated to making farming better, to find a way to improve yield results for all those whose livelihood depended
89
upon the land” (DEKALB, 2012). Today, DEKALB is owned by the Monsanto
Corporation. The DEKALB brand sells seeds for “corn, alfalfa, grain sorghum, and
spring and winter canola” (Monsanto, 2014). The DEKALB logo has remained virtually
the same thought the past 100 years, being represented by a winged ear of corn.
Figure 6.6. The DEKALB logo (Monsanto, 2014).
Department of Agriculture
President Abraham Lincoln signed into law the Agricultural Act to establish a
Department of Agriculture in May of 1862 (National Agricultural Library, 2014). Today
each state has its own Department of Agriculture, which provides support and services to
agriculturalists on a state level (National Association of State Departments of
90
Agriculture, 2014). The United States Department of Agriculture’s logo features rolling hills with the USDA initials above.
Figure 6.7. The USDA logo (National Agricultural Library, 2014).
Farmall and International Harvester
Farmall is a product line within International Harvester (Wisconsin Historical
Society, 2014). Introduced in 1924, Farmalls were known as “the tricycle style row-crop tractor,” and had the capabilities to plow and cultivate (Tractor Data, 2014). International
Harvester formed from the merger of the McCormick Harvesting Machine Company and the Deering Harvester Company in 1902 (Tractor Data, 2014). In 1985, International
91
Harvester merged with the J. I. Case Company to form the brand of Case IH, which still operates today (Tractor Data, 2014). All of the tractors under the names of Farmall,
International Harvester and Case IH are painted a signature red color.
Figure 6.8. Farmall logo featured on many tractors (Wisconsin Historical Society, 2014).
Figure 6.9. International Harvester logo, prior to the merger with Case in 1985 (Koenig Equipment, Inc., 2012).
92
FFA
FFA is a youth organization, which was founded in 1928 as the Future Farmers of
America (National FFA Organization, 2014). According to the National FFA
Organizations’ webpage, the organization is “committed to the individual student, providing a path to achievement in premier leadership, personal growth and career success through agricultural education” (National FFA Organization, 2014). In 1929, the
FFA adopted the official colors of “national blue and corn gold” (National FFA
Organization, 2014). A few notable members of the FFA include: former President
Jimmy Carter, Willie Nelson and Taylor Swift (National FFA Organization, 2014).
Figure 6.10. The FFA emblem (National FFA Organization, 2014).
93
Ford
Ford began producing tractors in 1917, with the first model being a Fordson F
(Tractor Data, 2014). After a series of mergers, Fordson became Ford and worked in conjunction with Harry Ferguson (who later left Ford and merged with Massey-Harris to form Massey-Ferguson) (Ganzel, 2007). In 1985, Ford purchased New-Holland; however, the Ford-New Holland company was sold to FIAT in 1991 (Tractor Data,
2014). The agreement caused FIAT to stop using the Ford name on tractors in 2000
(Tractor Data, 2014).
Figure 6.11. Ford Tractor logo, featured on tractor models from the 1950s (Ganzel, 2007).
94
John Deere
John Deere was a blacksmith and an inventor, originally from Vermont, who created the first plow in 1837 (John Deere, 2014). By 1848, Deere had moved his business to Moline, Illinois, and had built over 1,600 plows by 1850 (John Deere, 2014).
In 1895, the John Deere company published the first issue of The Furrow, which is now
“published in 14 languages for farmers and ranchers in 115 countries, and is the most widely circulated farm magazine in the world” (John Deere, 2014). John Deere entered the tractor sector in 1918, by purchasing the maker of “Waterloo Boy tractors” and sold
“5,634 tractors in the first year” of production (John Deere, 2014).
Figure 6.12. The John Deere logo, which was last updated in 2000, features a leaping deer. Previous logos used a landing deer (John Deere, 2014).
95
Justin Boots
H.J. Justin founded Justin Boots in 1879, when he began making boots out of his home in Nocona, Texas (Justin Boots, 2014). When Justin’s three sons joined the family business in 1908, the company was renamed H.J. Justin and Sons (Justin Boots, 2014).
“In 1910, Justin boots were sold in 26 states, Canada, Mexico, and Cuba for $11 a pair”
(Justin Boots, 2014). Justin Boots has purchased several other boot companies over the years, including: Nocona Boot Company, Chippewa Shoe Company and Tony Lama
Boots (Justin Boots, 2014). In 2000, Justin Boots was purchased by Warren Buffett’s
Berkshire Hathaway, and now produces a line of boots for men, women and children
(Justin Boots, 2014).
Figure 6.13. Justin Boots logo, as shown on their website (Justin Boots, 2014).
96
Kent Feeds
Kent Feeds was established in 1927 by Gage Kent in Indianola, Iowa (Kent
Nutrition Group, 2014). The brand made its claim to fame by becoming the “Feed
Without A Filler” (Kent Nutrition Group, 2014). Initially, the company specialized in beef feed, but has grown to include feed rations for “swine, beef, dairy, poultry, specialty and pet products” (Kent Nutrition Group, 2014). Kent Feeds operates nine feed plants in
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Missouri, and Nebraska (Kent Nutrition Group, 2014).
Figure 6.14. Kent Feeds remains a family owned company after 87 years of operation (Kent Nutrition Group, 2014).
Kenworth
Kenworth was established in 1923, and named after the “two principal stockholders, Harry Kent and Edgar Worthington” (Kenworth Trucks, 2014). The truck producing company has distinguished itself because of the opportunities for consumers to customize their vehicle (Kenworth Trucks, 2014). Kenworth has produced: fire trucks, 97 military wreckers, and components for the B-17 and B-29 aircrafts (Kenworth Trucks,
2014). The company operates factories in Washington, Ohio, Canada and Mexico
(Kenworth Trucks, 2014).
Figure 6.15. Kenworth trucks are designed for optimum driver comfort and efficiency (Kenworth Trucks, 2014).
Komakatsu
Komakatsu was formed in 1921 after separating from a mining company, called
Takeuchi Mining Co. (Komatsu America Corporation, 2014). Komatsu is a company that originates from Japan, and the name translates in English to “little pine tree” (Komatsu
America Corporation, 2014). The company began marketing its products in the United
States in the 1960s, but the official North American operations were established in 1970
98
(Komatsu America Corporation, 2014). Komatsu employs nearly 2,000 in the United
States, and are the “second-largest, fully-integrated manufacturer and supplier of construction equipment in North America” (Komatsu America Corporation, 2014).
Figure 6.16. The Komatsu logo was previously a "little pine tree," but was changed in the late 1990s to the current logo (Komatsu America Corporation, 2014).
Mack Trucks
Mack Trucks was established by John “Jack” Mack and his brother Augustus
Mack, in 1893 when they purchased the Fallesen & Berry carriage and wagon company in Brooklyn, New York (Mack Trucks, Inc. , 2014). In 1894, William Mack joined his brothers and began making wagons; as well as experimenting with steam and electric cars, in their business they called the Mack Brothers Company (Mack Trucks, Inc. ,
2014). In 1900, the brothers produced their first vehicle: “a 40-horsepower, 20-passenger bus” (Mack Trucks, Inc. , 2014). The bus was used as a sightseeing bus in Brooklyn’s
Prospect Park and was later converted into a truck; in total the vehicle drove over a
99 million miles, setting precedence for future Mack Trucks (Mack Trucks, Inc. , 2014). The
Mack Brothers Company was sold in 1911 to the International Motor Truck Corporation.
In 1922, International Motor Truck Corporation adopted the Bulldog as the corporate symbol and also changed its name to Mack Trucks, Incorporated (Mack Trucks, Inc. ,
2014).
Figure 6.17. In 1932, the first bulldog adorned the hood of a Mack truck (Mack Trucks, Inc. , 2014).
Massey Ferguson
The Massey Ferguson company has been in existence for 167 years. Daniel
Massey started his farm implement business in 1847 and Alanson Harris established his foundry in 1857, the two companies merged in 1891 to form Massey Harris (Massey
Ferguson, 2012). The Massey Harris company produced the first “commercially successful self-propelled combine in 1938” (Massey Ferguson, 2012). In 1953, Massey
100
Harris merged with Harry Ferguson’s Harry Ferguson Limited of England, after Ferguson had parted from Ford (Massey Ferguson, 2012). The company name was originally hyphenated, but the hyphen was later dropped. Today, the company is owned by the
AGCO Corporation (Massey Ferguson, 2012).
Figure 6.18. The current Massey Ferguson logo (Massey Ferguson, 2012).
New Holland
The New Holland Machinery Company was established in New Holland,
Pennsylvania, in 1895 (New Holland, N.D.). Today, New Holland manufactures “a full line of tractors; hay and forage equipment; and harvesting, crop production and materials handling equipment” (New Holland, N.D.). The company has more than 3,000 dealers in
101
160 countries, and six of its production facilities are located in North America (New
Holland, N.D.).
Figure 6.19. The New Holland logo, as shown on the corporate website (New Holland, N.D.).
Pioneer
Pioneer began as the Hi-Bred Corn Company, started by Henry A. Wallace in
1926 (DuPont Pioneer, 2014). The company changed its name to the Pioneer Hi-Bred
Corn Company in 1936, and by 1949 Pioneer’s seed sales reached the “million-unit mark” (DuPont Pioneer, 2014). The company began to be publicly traded in 1973, the same year it established soybean seed operations. By 1981, Pioneer led the market for seed corn in North America and followed with soybeans in 1991 (DuPont Pioneer, 2014).
Pioneer was listed on the New York Stock Exchange in 1995, and was purchased by
DuPont in 1999 (DuPont Pioneer, 2014).
102
Figure 6.20. Pioneer Seed is part of the DuPont Corporation (DuPont Pioneer, 2014).
Quality Seed
Quality Seeds, Ltd. is a Canadian based seed company. This company produces a wide variety of seeds as well as erosion control solutions and corn testing (Quality Seeds
Inc., 2014). They produce the following varieties:
• Forage: Atlantic Forage mixes, Grasses, Legumes, Hay Mixtures, Pasture
Mixtures, and Organic Seeds.
• Turf: Bluegrass, Ryegrass, Fine Fescues, Tall Fescue and Bentgrass (Quality
Seeds Inc., 2014).
Figure 6.21. Quality Seeds Ltd. provides a wide variety of seeds and plant services (Quality Seeds Inc., 2014).
103
REAL Seal
The REAL Seal was created “four decades ago,” in 1976; by the Californian dairy industry to ensure consumers they were purchasing an authentic dairy product (National
Milk Producers Federation, 2014). This labeling ensures consumers they are receiving a product which was “made with milk from cows on U.S. dairy farms”, and meets “strict manufacturing requirements” (National Milk Producers Federation, 2014). The REAL
Seal also means “the product contains no casein, casinate, vegetable oil, non-domestic dairy protein or ingredient, or any cheese substitute or cheese analog” (National Milk
Producers Federation, 2014).
Figure 6.22. In the 1980s there were large marketing campaigns for the REAL Seal, boosting awareness of additives in dairy products (National Milk Producers Federation, 2014).
104
Red Wing Shoes
Red Wing Shoes began in Red Wing, Minnesota, when Charles Beckman and fourteen other investors opened business in 1905 (Red Wing Shoes, 2014). They wanted to produce shoes that were durable for individuals who were involved in the “mining, logging and farming” industries (Red Wing Shoes, 2014). Red Wing Shoes also operates
Irish Setter, a hunting and fishing footwear line, and Vasque, a hiking and trail running footwear line (Red Wing Shoes, 2014). The first winged logo for Red Wing Shoes was created in 1928; however, the current logo was created in 2007 (See Figure 2.24.) (Red
Wing Shoes, 2014).
Figure 6.23. The Red Wing Shoe company produces work shoes for both men and women (Red Wing Shoes, 2014).
105
Snapper
Snapper began in 1894 as a lumber company, called Southern Saw Works, in
Georgia (Tractor Data, 2012). The company purchased Snappin’ Turtle lawn mowers and began producing Snapper mowers in 1951. In 2002, Simplicity purchased Snapper, and with this purchase Simplicity redirected the high-end lawn equipment’s future by stopping sales of the brand in all Wal-Mart stores (Fishman, 2006). Today, Snapper is owned by Briggs & Stratton, builds all of its 145 products in McDonough, Georgia, and sells directly to 10,000 independent dealerships (Tractor Data, 2012) (Fishman, 2006).
Figure 6.24. Snapper products are all painted "Snapper red" and the company makes push, riding and zero turn mowers, as well as snow blowers and other outdoor equipment (Briggs & Stratton Power Products Group, LLC, 2014).
106
Versatile
Versatile was founded in 1966, and sold to Cornat Industries Inc. in 1977 (Buhler
Versatile Inc., 2014). In 1987 the company was sold to Ford New Holland, and was renamed New Holland in 1993 (Buhler Versatile Inc., 2014). Buhler Industries Inc. purchased the company in 2000 and sold it in 2007 to Combine Factory Rostselmash Ltd.
(Buhler Versatile Inc., 2014). The Versatile name returned in October of 2008, and the brand is the “only Canadian manufacturer of agricultural tractors” (Buhler Versatile Inc.,
2014). The company operates a factory in Winnipeg, Manitoba, and produces tractors, application equipment, combines, precision seeding, and tillage equipment (Buhler
Versatile Inc., 2014).
Figure 6.25. This version of the Versatile logo was released in 2008 (Buhler Versatile Inc., 2014).
107
Wheel Horse
Wheel Horse was founded by Elmer Pond, in 1946 (Tractor Data, 2013). The company grew to produce “a full line of lawn and garden tractors, in addition to riding lawn mowers” (Tractor Data, 2013). In 1986, Wheel Horse was purchased by Toro, another lawn and garden equipment manufacturer (Tractor Data, 2013). Toro continued to build lawn tractors under the Wheel Horse brand name until 2007 (Tractor Data,
2013).
Figure 6.26. The Wheel Horse logo, as shown on the Wheel Horse Collectors Club website (Wheel Horse Collectors Club, Inc. , 2014).
White Farm Equipment
The White Farm Equipment Company was established in 1969 (Tractor Data,
2013). Before becoming the White Farm Equipment Company, it was previously called the White Motor Company and had purchased Oliver and Cockshutt in 1960, as well as 108
Minneapolis-Moline in 1963 (Tractor Data, 2013). White Farm Equipment was purchased in 1991 by AGCO, and continued to produce AGCO-White tractors until 2001
(Tractor Data, 2013). AGCO still produces a White planter, but also owns Challenger,
FENDT, Massey Ferguson and VALTRA Brands (AGCO Corporation, 2014).
Figure 6.27. The White Farm Equipment Company's logo before being purchased by AGCO in 1991 (Tractor Data, 2013).
4-H
Albert Graham held the first Boy’s and Girl’s Agricultural Club meeting on
January 15, 1902 in Clark County, Ohio (The Ohio State University Extension, 2012).
The Boy’s and Girl’s Agricultural Club became officially became known as 4-H in 1916
(The Ohio State University Extension, 2012). The 4-H program is now present in all 50 states in the United States and is active in more than eight countries in the world (The
Ohio State University Extension, 2012). Membership is open to all youth aged five through 19, and membership does not require participants to have an agricultural
109 background (The Ohio State University Extension, 2012). The 4-H logo features a white
“H” on each leaf of the clover to represent Head, Heart, Hands and Health, and was approved in 1939 (National 4-H History Preservation Program, 2014).
Figure 6.28. The 4-H emblem is a representation of the youth organization's brand (National 4-H History Preservation Program, 2014).
110
Appendix B: Film Evaluation Form
Movie Title:
Reviewer:
Agricultural Brands:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Agricultural Scenery (not branded material):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
111
Agricultural brands are brands that are representative of the agricultural industry, such as Pioneer, Purina, Carhartt, John Deere, etc. Look closely in the films as sometimes the brands are not the main focus of the scene. Write down the length of time the brand is present on screen, the number of times it appears, and the time in the movie the brand appears so it is easy to find again. If it is possible to tell, state the era of the brand (Is it an antique tractor or a new one?). Also state where on the screen the brand appears (Is it front and center? Is it in the background? Is it being used by the main character?).
Agricultural scenery is anything which is not a branded product, but is representative of the agriculture industry. An example of this would be aerial crop spraying, crops, silos, grain bins and animals.
112