By Dan Brown

Maybe it’s because I’m a naive fool, but I don’t ever remember seeing an instance of flagrant product placement in a comic book.

I’m talking about the classic kind of product placement, the same type you see in movies or on TV where products are written into the plot of the show in return for brand exposure.

(I’ll get to advertising partnerships in comics in a minute. They are a different animal.)

For example, in an old episode of Big Bang Theory Raj gets a new iPhone. We know it’s an iPhone because after he and Howard unwrap the device, Raj has a conversation with Siri, Apple’s digital assistant. Not very subtle.

Product placement like this would in theory be easy to do in comics. The reference could be written into a comic’s script and then the brand’s product would be drawn by the penciller.

We all know Wolverine – being Canadian – loves beer, right? So in a scene in which the deadly mutant walks into a bar, he could order a Budweiser or other brand, and the artist could reproduce the label on the bottle or can in Logan’s hand.

Easy-peasy, providing you can get the creative team on board with the idea.

As straightforward as the process would be, it doesn’t seem to happen much. Maybe I’ve got feeble eyes, but I don’t recall much along those lines taking place in Marvel or DC Comics.

There are opportunities aplenty, it’s true.

Batman’s alter ego, Bruce Wayne, might prefer a certain make of sports car. Ben Grimm could make his preferences known for a specific type of cigar. Photographers love to talk about the equipment they favour, so why would Peter Parker be any different?

The argument in favour of product placement in comics might go something like this: “We live in a world of brands, so superheroes having brand preferences would make them and their milieu seem more realistic. If advertisers want the exposure, publishers could use the extra revenue.”

I’m talking solely about comics here. I know there’s plenty of product placement in motion pictures that feature the same superheroes. That’s a whole other column.

Nor am I talking about the advertising partnerships comic publishers occasionally embark on, which are embarrassing because they’re so blatant.

For example, Marvel characters such as the Hulk and Spidey were loaned out to Hostess in the 1970s to go on adventures in which the villains were all defeated or distracted the same way: By being fed Twinkies. These appeared as clearly marked ads, not part of a comic's storyline.

Likewise, about a decade ago, motorcycle maker Harley Davidson signed a deal with Marvel to feature their fine wares in a series of one-shot issues. This led to odd situations in which the Avengers, instead of using the full range of their powers, including that of flight, would ride Hogs to do battle with evildoers.

I did once read a Hawkeye storyline set in Madripoor in which a specific brand of credit card was name-dropped, but I can’t recall having seen anything like it since. And I can't say for sure it was the result of a deal.

Perhaps the reason for the dearth of product placement in comics is publishers might have to share the fee with creators. Or maybe comic creators who consider themselves "artists" feel they’re above crass product placement.

Or maybe it goes back to the traditional perception of comics being stuff for children, and therefore product placement being viewed as unfairly taking advantage of kids. Of course, both you and I know the average comic reader today is in their 40s or 50s so that argument no longer holds water.

Dan Brown has covered pop culture for more than 32 years as a journalist and also moderates L.A. Mood’s monthly graphic-novel group.