Well, how about that? The paradox of advertising is alive and well after all.
You know how we TV viewers have been subjected to commercials where not-so-wonderful role models, such as Britney Spears encourage your children to choose Pepsi…
and yet…despite being paid who-knows-how-many-millions-of-$$$$$, adorable (not to mention whore-iffic, ignorant, and downright scary) little Britney doesn’t actually drink Pepsi at all. In fact, she’s incessantly busted consuming Coke. No, not “that coke”…although…I’m pretty sure that yes, “that coke”, but for the sake of this article, I’m talking about Coca-Cola—the arch enemy of Pepsi.
Last week there was a great article in BrandWeek last week that suggests celebrities and consumers (those truly amazing fat people who lose 125 lbs. while eating burgers and pizza) who make incredible-sounding claims in advertisements may actually get called to the carpet the Federal Trade Commission if it appears that they are full of…you know what.
Currently, the Federal Trade Commission rules broadly state (read: weakly suggest) that endorsements must reflect the “honest opinions” of the endorser and may not be in any way deceptive (read: celebrities and other remarkably successful endorsers are allowed to shill anything in a commercial and still be afforded the right to change their mind the instant the camera stops rolling. Hey, it’s a free country right?).
In the BrandWeek article, David Palmer, group director/event marketing, strategic alliances and entertainment at Team One in El Segundo, Calif.—where he handles the Lexus account—said he had not heard of the review and doesn’t think it’s causing a stir in Hollywood.
Really? Won’t cause a stir to you car company creatives, huh? What if restrictions are placed on the ridiculous ways you guys market regular cars as if they’re F-1 race cars? You know, the “Camry” racing through empty streets of downtown Los Angeles… wearing sunglasses… in the driving rain… at night… with loop de loops… cornering off the tops of buildings… and of course, in small print at the bottom of the screen in recessive type it says “Closed course. Professional driver. Do not try this crazy stuff in our crappy 4-door sedan because it’s really only built to corner at a maximum speed of 55 mph in all honesty. Sorry.” Yeah, thanks for nothin’. Guess I’ll just hit the sack at 9:30pm, wake up and go back to being a bank teller tomorrow morning.
In fact, why do I have to sit through commercials for some SUVs bombing through deep snow in the high Sierras and the fine print at the bottom actually says “do not try this”? Why do you advertise a work truck that drives into the bowels of an open pit mine with a boxload of iron ore…if it requires a closed course and professional driver? Say waaaaaaa?
At least you can actually read the “Closed course. Professional driver” message on those car ads. BrandWeek found that the Nutri-System ads showing off your favorite former football players who have shed tons of fat says at the bottom of the screen “Results not typical,” but make it so ambiguous that it’s literally impossible for viewers to figure out what “typical” would actually be. Text in two ads viewed by Brandweek was displayed on the screen for about a second—and was thus unreadable.”
LIARS!!!
So now, we get to the irony of all this. One of the most popular spirits brands available is Patron Tequila. Patron is being slammed by the spirits industry’s governing body (The Distilled Spirits Council of the U.S.) for using sex to fuel its surging sales.
But as this Ad Age article points out, Patron, which saw its sales double last year, was the report’s most-cited advertiser, drawing complaints for a “whopping” three different ads.
At the heart of the matter is Patron’s “Simply Perfect” ad campaign where, in one of the ads, a couple lay in bed. Over the man’s head, a caption read: “The perfect girl.” Over the woman’s: “The perfect one-night stand.”
“After careful deliberation … the depiction of a man and a woman in bed with an open bottle of tequila at the foot of the bed, and clothes and undergarments strewn on the floor in front of the bed linked the consumption of alcohol to sexual prowess,” the decision read.
Ummm…yeah. That’s a good point. It does suggest sexual prowess…the same way that any and every episode of Desperate Housewives does… Sex & the City (now in syndication), Rules of Engagement, Cosmpolitan magazine’s “Cosmo Tells All” section, Maxim Magazine, that new commercial for Heineken (Don’t Ya Wish Your Girlfriend was Hot Like Me?…Dontcha?)…it just goes on and on. Who doesn’t acknowledge that sex sells in our society?
I say we should thank the good people at Patron for actually calling a spade a spade. In fact, they’re even liberating women by putting the female in the power position in the ad. Still opposed? Well, you should know that these ads cannot be shown at 4:00pm during re-runs of The Wonder Years. There are specific guidelines at the time of day and programming that spirits ads can be shown. So don’t fret that while you’re watching an episode of LOST with your young spawn and Sawyer and that girl are having sex in a cage on the mysterious island, you won’t have to see an ad for Patron that artistically alludes to “sexual prowess”… then while you and the spawn are enjoying some other family entertainment and an ad for Cialis comes on and you have to explain what it means when an erection lasts more than 4 days, at least you won’t have to see the artistically shot Patron ads.
Sadly, Patron acquiesced and immediately withdrew the ad even though it is not a member of this spirits council.
But then again, I guess the complainants would rather eliminate some of the actual truth in advertising, especially any of it that is risqué and happily continue believing that Tiger Woods actually drives a Buick. Puhleeze.
Well folks, that’s my story…and I’m stickin’ to it.
8 Comments
April 5, 2007 at 8:19 pm
Hmm, I’d figure that as part of getting millions of dollars to advertise a product that the contract would include some period of time in which the celebrity has to in fact publicly endorse it on their own time.
May 5, 2007 at 4:15 pm
1. In what way does referring to a woman as “whore-iffic” further your argument or your point?
2. The Patron ad is in no way “liberating women.” That is most certainly not a position of power. The ad, which targets men, implies that women are manipulative and that women who drink alcohol are sexually promiscuous.
May 7, 2007 at 9:37 am
1. as a descriptive anecdote for a pop cultural “role model” and her ostensible lack of comprehension of the lucrative contract she signed to represent a brand targeted mostly at kids, britney spears acts “whore-iffically” when she shows her vagina to the world on purpose. there’s a contradiction to the way she acts and the image of the brand.
2. the patron ad certainly liberates women in a jocular sense tone. the traditional role is for men to be proud of the one-night stand and in this reversal, the woman is the one-nighter while the man is falling in love. this is how humor works. you have to read between the lines sometimes Shakes because the world is full of metaphors and symbols. and by the way, how do you think the ad targets men anyway? have you seen any of the Simply Perfect campaign’s other ads? they’re all targeted at women. you can probably find them on youtube.
June 13, 2007 at 11:01 am
Meek, great job. You still doing this? – R
June 14, 2007 at 10:11 am
i am…but, i’ve been so swamped with work and a partial home renovation that it’s had to sit a while on me.
i was on a roll and then had a business trip to san francisco for a couple weeks, followed by a half-week in las vegas for some vacation and followed by another trip to new york for work.
my routine was disrupted and since i’ve been so busy since then i’ve had a hard time getting my research and opinions composed.
i shall take your needling as inspiration to get back on the horse.
~m.
June 15, 2007 at 11:58 pm
wheres the updates?!!?!? i’m going crazy here!
July 31, 2007 at 3:27 pm
Sex sells…tequila? Well, with everything tequila has done for sex over the last many decades, it’s the least that sex can do.
Somehow, the Britney Spears lede combined with the Patron spot has my head swimming. I think tequila and coke (either version) is a guaranteed cerebral hemmorrhage – yet I’ve got enough brain cells left to agree that Patron caved unnecessarily to pressure from the sexually-political-correctness front.
Glad I found your blog, dude – I’ll be back.
November 19, 2007 at 2:44 pm
I think it’s only a matter of time before Britney runs over a photographer and kills ‘em. What happened to that sweet old Britney we used to know and love?