Sydney - The fun of watching a James Bond film lies partially in spotting what the advertising industry calls product placement.

The brands on show be they of cars, watches, hotels or even locations have paid for the privilege of their association with the hunky celluloid spy and his world of glamour and sophistication.

Yet, it seems a bit of a cheat - cinemagoers, after all, have paid for their seats and have to sit through commercials even before the film begins - but Hollywood argues that the parade of products helps pay for the whiz-bang special effects.

What shows more cunning - and raises graver ethical problems - is the growing practice of advertising masquerading as something else. It's becoming common for advertisers to try and deceive viewers into thinking that what's on the screen is not product placement.

Take the case of Australian clothing label Witchery, which paid its advertising agency to set up a website purporting to be the work of a lovelorn young woman desperate to get in contact with the handsome young man she met fleetingly in a Sydney cafe. The only key to his identity was a wonderfully-tailored Witchery jacket which came in different colours and was a steal at whatever price it was.

A newspaper was fooled into running the damsel-in-distress story. Thousands of internet users were duped into thinking the help-me-find appeal was genuine.

The clip was taken down, and Witchery and its advertising agency duly lied about their responsibility for it.

"It's counterproductive because it can damage the brand," said Sue Cato, the principal of Sydney-based public relations company Cato Counsel.

She said consumers would feel cheated. More seriously, the campaign would undermine confidence in the medium. The confidence trick would work only so long as people still had confidence.

It was the same story with a tourism promotion campaign for Queensland and its Great Barrier Reef . Rather than producing a commercial, Tourism Queensland advertised around the world for a caretaker for a paradise island. The job was ridiculously easy and the pay was ridiculously high.

The islandreefjob website had a million hits and at least 6,000 jobseekers posted the required 60-second video application.

Among the first video clips posted was from a woman so determined to get the job that she went under the needle to have a Great Barrier Reef tattoo. It was a fake. The woman worked for Tourism Queensland's advertising agency and the tattoo was only a transfer.

Rather than a straightforward denial, Tourism Queensland chief executive admitted to an error of judgement.

"The simple answer is that we messed up," Hayes said. "We did two example videos of what an application could look like but we didn't put the words 'example' or 'sample' on those videos and as a result we have caused some confusion."

Hayes would argue that his was only a small transgression, that deception was involved but only on a minor scale. Consumers would overcome their confusion and forgive those who confused them.

Tim Burrowes, an advertising guru who runs the Sydney-based website mumbrella, sees it differently.

"If the video is a fake, does that mean the holiday is fake as well?" he asked. "Consumers start asking themselves how far they can trust brands that treat them in this way." (dpa)