By STEPHANIE CLIFFORD

In the season finale of the television crime show “CSI: NY’’ in May, the program’s characters gathered around videoconferencing screens to share information about a shooting. “She wants everybody on a TelePresence call, says an investigator, Lindsay Monroe.O.K., we have a full house, network’s secure, you’re good to go, Stella.
The unlikely supporting player in the episode was Cisco Systems, which wanted to show off its TelePresence videoconferencing system. Cisco’s on-air cameo may seem puzzling to viewers more familiar with product placements for soft drinks or cars, but the placement resulted from careful deal-making by the company’s entertainment agency, Davie Brown Entertainment, with the CBS television network and the show.
This is the kind of product placement woven into the plot of a popular show that is of growing concern to the United States government and to consumer groups. Product placements are “a huge, out-of-control issue, said Robert Weissman, the managing director of Commercial Alert, a nonprofit group that aims to limit commercial marketing. He said that the involvement of advertisers in the shaping of scripts and plots represented “fundamental encroachments on the independence of the programming.
Recently, the Federal Communications Commission opened an inquiry into whether there ought to be frank disclosure of such deals. Among the suggestions are that the networks be required to display onscreen notices whenever a paid-for placement is seen on television.
“We’re not saying they can’t do it - we’re just saying they have to let the audience know what they’re doing, said Jonathan S. Adelstein, an F.C.C. commissioner.
“CSI: NY is only one of Cisco’s many TV and movie credits: the company keeps a long list on its Web site of where its products have appeared, from Fox’s “24 and NBC’s “Heroes to films like “I Am Legend.
Mr. Adelstein argues that more disclosure is necessary. He suggested considering that the brand names appear in a minimum font size, and for a minimum length of time, at the beginning or end of a show. For now, it is not clear whether the F.C.C. will take action; it is soliciting comments for the next few months, and may or may not issue a ruling after that.
But to Hollywood and the advertising world, the F.C.C.’s concerns appear archaic and intrusive. The type of popup warnings that the F.C.C. is considering would “completely disrupt the entertainment experience, said Tom Meyer, the president of Davie Brown, a leading brand management agency in Los Angeles. “If their ultimate goal is, can they do something that kills integration, advertisers’ ability to integrate into a show, that would do it.” Some viewers, too, say the F.C.C.’s concerns are a little too much. Realistically, does anyone wonder why Simon Cowell has a huge Coke cup in front of him on every “American Idol?“I think that most people in the United States know that there’s some financial arrangement there,” said Ambar Rao, a professor of marketing at Washington University in St. Louis. He said that he did not oppose disclosure at the beginning or end of a show, but “people watch a show for entertainment, and if they’re constantly being reminded that somebody has paid for this product or that product, it just takes away from the experience.”
With agencies like Davie Brown becoming more sophisticated and demanding about how their clients’ products are depicted, the issue has grown murkier. These days consumer brands not only appear on shows, but are also elaborately woven into the plot, with advertisers having a lot of influence. Their agencies approve scripts, suggest plots that hinge on the product, attend the episode shoots, and review the rough cuts of episodes.
“We almost consider ourselves to be the junior writers on the show,” Mr. Meyer said.
Television writers are not happy about this development - the Writers Guild of America West sent a letter to the F.C.C. urging that an on-screen announcement disclose a placement at the moment it occurs - but the networks and producers are thrilled with the extra income they get from product placement.
A one-episode integration on a moderately popular show costs at least $100,000 but rarely goes over $500,000, Mr. Meyer said. Then there is the cost of buying commercials, which the network usually requires.
“Everyone has an opinion now on whether or not we’re deceiving the public,” Mr. Meyer said. But “these shows have always been funded by advertising, and if advertising is changing, it has to be understood that the mechanics of how we deliver advertising must change, or advertisers will walk away.”