Are live reads so dangerous that they need to be made really obvious, or abolished altogether? That’s the approach being canvassed by the ACMA in its latest options paper on changes to commercial radio disclosure standards. In our article on it this week one radio manager says live reads are important because, “live reads are different from other ads. Which is why live reads are so effective. For heaven’s sake don’t take that away from us…”

Are listeners so dumb that they don’t realise that they are listening to a commercial radio station, and that there might be some people trying to sell them somethign on that station?

Is the nanny state alive and well and ready to protect everyone from the ‘excesses’ or live read advertising, whether they want it or not?

And where is the equity with other media? Newspaper Advertorials are not always explicitly declared. Product placement in TV shows is acknowledged at the end of the show, often in small print 60 minutes after the products were in shot. In our article a manager commented: “If they take that approach, what about product placement on tv? Rather than just listing the product placement companies at the end of the tv show, perhaps there should be a little pop up message or crawler on the bottom of the screen that says there is a placed product in shot each time one appears. That’s the logical extension of this nonsense.”

What do you think? Do consumers need protection from live reads. If so, how will commercial stations recoup the revenue they will lose when this ‘premium product’ is no longer available in their inventory? And should we expect the same treatment for tv shows?

Comment on this and any other topics making radio news this week by adding your thoughts to the box below.