It has been said that there's no such thing as bad publicity, although that adage seems as often false (as in the case of Michael Jackson, for instance) as it is true (see Martha Stewart, domestic doyenne and jailbird).

Since the outset of 2005, the media has devoted a fair amount of attention to several events that point to the effectiveness of in-store marketing -- although not exactly in ways that make one want to brag too loudly.

Here's a rundown:

• Research conducted by Rand Health suggests that adolescents who view in-store beer displays are more likely to drink than those who don't. The study found "no evidence that exposure to television beer advertising affects subsequent drinking."

  If the subjects of this study were recent college grads instead of middle schoolers, or if the product in question were fruit juice instead of beer, retail marketing experts would be running it up the flagpole (although even the authors note some limitations). As it stands, that'd be like boasting about your father's Parolee of the Year Award.

• Congress followed the lead of about two-dozen state legislatures last month by introducing a bill that would require all products containing pseudoephedrine to be kept behind pharmacy counters or locked windows. Since Oklahoma passed a similar law in April 2004, cases of illegal methamphetamine production in the state have dropped dramatically.
   
• The Supreme Court of Canada upheld a Saskatchewan law banning all displays and signs for tobacco products in stores serving minors. The court found that the law, passed in 2002 but struck down by a lower appeals court, furthered the intentions of federal laws prohibiting tobacco ads on TV and elsewhere. Other Canadian provinces are expected to follow suit.
   
• With the debate raging over who's to blame for the childhood obesity "epidemic," the Center for Science in the Public Interest last month issued "Guidelines for Responsible Food Marketing to Kids."

  The suggestions include the removal of all "low-nutrition foods" from kid-eye level on shelves and displays and the grouping of "cookies, chips, candy, soda" and other bad stuff "in a few designated areas to allow parents to skip those aisles." (The non-profit CSPI has had some prior influence over kids marketing through its regular dialogue with the National Advertising Review Council.)

We're not cataloging these events to sound any alarms (no one expects beer or snacks merchandising to go the back-room route of naughty videos). But we do want to keep a record of the increased scrutiny in-store marketing is undergoing.

After all, anything that proves how effective it is can't be all bad.

Peter Breen
Managing Director, Content
In-Store Marketing Institute

Do mothers shopping for pain-relief medication want to compare the relative merits of tablets and gel caps, or do they want to find the products best suited for themselves and their children? Unless a marketer understands "the shopping process," he may not be able to adequately address such questions through his packaging and marketing programs.

In a presentation delivered last December at the P-O-P Show/New York, Perception Research Services president Scott Young argues that successful in-store merchandising must begin with insightful shopper observation. In making his case, Young questions the wisdom of several merchandising "mantras," such as "good, better, best" packaging strategies and eye-level merchandising imperatives.

A number of product manufacturers loosened their purse strings in 2004, a trend that has P-O-P producers bullish on positive business growth in 2005. P-O-P Design takes the pulse of the marketplace in its annual state of the industry report.

Elsewhere, faux materials and laminates again top the list of most-requested products in our second-annual review of the Top Decorative Materials featured in the pages of P-O-P Design. Plus, check out a new one-click listing of new and noteworthy in-store marketing aids, and a downloadable version of the 2005 P-O-P Buyers' Guide.