The Politics of Super Bowl Advertising

Posted by Enrique on 02.03.2010

A matter of persuasion...



Happy Super Bowl week, dear readers! Super Bowl season has its own MSM clichés, and one of the more tiresome is that more people watch the advertisements than the game. Oh c'mon, that's just silly. When a pollster calls and asks you if you watch the Super bowl for the ads, don't be a dumbass and say "yes." Christ. You're not even going to remember any of them the next day. For fun, when you go into work on Monday, ask your colleagues to name five companies that advertised during the Super Bowl. More than likely, they'll remember a mascot or a gimmick, but they'll have a hard time naming five brands. Try it, it's good for laugh. You're welcome.

One of the advertisers they won't remember is the one paying for a pro-life ad featuring college football star Tim Tebow. You may have heard some lawyers and so-called "women's groups" are whining about CBS agreeing to run a politically charged spot. For our story this week, let's manufacture some outrage over the fact that politics poisons everything. Jesus, can't we just a watch a football game between two teams we don't care about without all the drama?

The story so far…

The sponsor no one will remember Monday is Focus on the Family, which describes itself as "a global non-profit Christian organization with a vision for healing brokenness in families, communities and societies worldwide through Christ." The group's founder is James Dobson, who apparently once said same sex marriage "will destroy the earth." So basically, they're a bunch of religious nutters.

No one has seen the Tebow ad yet, so it would be unfair to criticize it from a position of ignorance. On the other hand, longtime readers may know I never let my own ignorance get in the way of a good argument. Let me be clear – I know nothing about Tim Tebow. I follow professional sports as much as the next guy, but I don't pay attention to college sports at all. (Although I did go to a couple of Marquette games when Dwayne Wade was there, because it was local, etc.) I couldn't tell you anything about the BCS, other than that the government should stay the hell out of it. March Madness means nothing to me – at that time of year I'm following Brewers spring training. But apparently this Tebow follow is like the Dwayne Wade of football, so good for him.

According the Focus of the Family, the theme of the ad will be "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life." And as we all know, there's one group of people that hates family and life – fucking lawyers:

[Incomprehensibly irritating celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred] says that she hopes she never sees the ad on air, but if she does she "hopes that the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission will be watching it and evaluating it for misleading advertising too."

Allred warns, "If this ad airs and fails to disclose that abortions were illegal at the time Ms. Tebow made her "choice", then I intend to file a formal complaint of misleading advertising with those federal commissions."

To be sure, it may not be fair to smear all attorneys by comparing them to a particularly obnoxious, self-serving parasite like Gloria Allred. On the other hand, this is the profession that produced the truculent douchebaggery of John Edwards, so lawyers haven't done anything lately to earn the benefit of doubt.

Personally, I'm militantly pro-choice. I don't even mind the term "pro-abortion." Even so, it's galling to see some scum lawyer threatening to involve the FCC in advertisements by a bunch of Christian busybodies. I'm perfectly comfortable with the fact free speech applies to people whose choices I don't approve of. (Even dorks who write Bible citations in their eye black strips.) If nothing else, the Tebow ad will be novel. I'm bored of seeing ads with Flo the car insurance shill. I mean, I'm sure she's a nice lady and everything, but I couldn't get away from Flo if I tried. She's worse than Peyton Manning. How did goofy Flo become the most ubiquitous advertising icon since the Energizer bunny?


Get out of my life

Another novel ad would have been the one by online dating service Man Crunch (motto: "Putting the man back in romance"). This is one of those cases where the sponsor got a nice publicity bounce from the rejection of its ad. I couldn't have named one gay matchmaking web site before last week (because I'm so TOTALLY heterosexual). Now I can name one. Good for Man Crunch. And it doesn't hurt that the ad is hilarious.



You can't even see actual lip-to-lip contact, and the two actors are clearly not even fake kissing. I bet the late Charlton Heston would have had a laugh at that. Obviously, CBS is under no obligation to take Man Crunch's money, but it would have been a heartwarming gay rights milestone if they had. As far as I know, no one at Man Crunch is threatening to sue CBS for crimes against humanity, but you've got to admit their spokeswoman made a great point about double standards in advertising standards and practices: "If the ad showed a man and woman kissing it would have been accepted. You see ads for erectile dysfunction morning, noon, and night. It's discriminatory that they won't show this."

I'm not blessed with children myself, but I have noticed several television spots for these so-called erectile enhancement products during sporting events. I can't imagine they are any less difficult to explain to minors than the Man Crunch ad. And it's not as if Super Bowl broadcasters have eschewed semi-racy content in the past.


You will always be close to our hearts, Candice

Oh well. It's a shame we probably won't see any groundbreaking Super Bowl ads this year. I suppose we'll just have to watch the game. At least on Monday we'll be able to remember who won.