Snickers pulls plug on Super Bowl smooch ad

[taks]

to hell there isn't... human nature is to distrust (and fear) that which is different. it is an instinct that allowed early humans to survive. it won't just go away because some rights group thinks it is politically incorrect to feel that way. that the world is primarily heterosexual certainly makes homosexual behavior "different."

 

you are correct, however, that they have every right to object. what i object to is when companies bow to such meaningless pressure. they should take that in the same stride i think GLAAD should take the ad: as humor.

 

taks

[Aram]

Does this mean we can get adverts ban just because they suck?

 

If so, that "I'm thinking of a number, between 450 and 850" guy and J.G. Wentworth would have banned long ago.

[Guard Dog]

Saw this on the news tonight. Some suicide prevention group is boycotting GM over it's Robot Commercial in the Super Bowl. And the CEO at GM actually felt he had to respond to it. I tell you all, this crap is getting out of control.

 

Here is the link to the commercial. It was the second best on IMHO: GM Robot commercial

[Lucius]

American football is known for its rabid homophobia,

 

Uh...since when?

 

I mean, I don't think I've ever seen a player get a yellow flag for uneccessary skipping.

 

Oh I'm sorry, perhaps I should've said male americans in general.

 

I'm not one for political correctness, I'm a Dane after all. However I do get pissed off when people need to express their "disgust", and tell everyone how wrong it is because it says so in that stupid little book of theirs, luckily we don't hear about that here. But if I was in the US and A, I'd want to punch their faces in. <_<

[alanschu]

Saw this on the news tonight. Some suicide prevention group is boycotting GM over it's Robot Commercial in the Super Bowl. And the CEO at GM actually felt he had to respond to it. I tell you all, this crap is getting out of control.

 

Here is the link to the commercial. It was the second best on IMHO: GM Robot commercial

 

 

While I'll admit I laughed at it, I can see how someone may have felt that the end game was a bit too extreme.

 

I think the problem there may be that they personified the robot a bit too much. I was laughing long before the end of the commercial, so I wonder how necessary it was to it. With what they said about quality control afterwards, you could read in that we're so obsessed with quality control, that we commit suicide if there's a mistake.

 

 

It reminded me of the old IKEA Lamp commercial. The punchline of that one though, it that of course the lamp doesn't have feelings.

[blue]

what i object to is when companies bow to such meaningless pressure. they should take that in the same stride i think GLAAD should take the ad: as humor.

 

Ah. Folks feel offended and wish organizations would redress the injustice of humorlessness.

 

I suggest you object loudly enough so they'll do the politically correct thing.

 

Because this is no laughing matter.

[Dark_Raven]

I found the ad to be stupid just like the rest of the Superbowl ads, nothing more. The marketing departments for those company's should be fired for having such lameness.

[Dark Moth]

The commercials seem to get lamer every year now. The last few SB's in general have been real letdowns entertainment-wise.

 

And I stand by what I said earlier, goddernit!

 

This sort of reminds me of Fahrenheit 451. Somewhere somehow, people are going to be offended. The trend nowadays however isn't to counter one idea with another, it's to silence it completely.

Edited February 9, 2007 by Dark Moth

[blue]

Somewhere somehow, people are going to be offended. The trend nowadays however isn't to counter one idea with another, it's to silence it completely.

The company exercised free will. The ad-run is done with no one substantively hurt by the loss. You saw the ad. How is your life poorer now that it's gone?

 

Btw, this sentiment is just dumb:

Anyone offended by that ad has no sense of humor . . .

It's easy to tell someone to lighten up when you've no emotional investment. Real-life experiences sometimes change things, and attitudes mature. In other words, the debate becomes more complicated when it touches holy ground.

 

Where's yours? Jesus? Libertarian ideals? Child rape?

 

Or how about animal cruelty? Neglect is a hilarious topic, don't you agree, Guard Dog?

[Dark Moth]

Somewhere somehow, people are going to be offended. The trend nowadays however isn't to counter one idea with another, it's to silence it completely.

The company exercised free will. The ad-run is done with no one substantively hurt by the loss. You saw the ad. How is your life poorer now that it's gone?

 

Btw, this sentiment is just dumb:

Anyone offended by that ad has no sense of humor . . .

It's easy to tell someone to lighten up when you've no emotional investment. Real-life experiences sometimes change things, and attitudes mature. In other words, the debate becomes more complicated when it touches holy ground.

 

Where's yours? Jesus? Libertarian ideals? Child rape?

 

Or how about animal cruelty? Neglect is a hilarious topic, don't you agree, Guard Dog?

 

This is what we call 'blowing out of proportions'. If you want to be offended by it, go right ahead. I still stand by what I said, so I guess that makes you... But okay, I'll add a third one to the list: highly sensitive. But before you go on a tirade, think about how you would react if you involuntarily kissed a man. Whether or not you rip out your chest hair, I'm sure even you would have at least been slightly uncomfortable. You do not want to be mistaken for something you are not. And no, my life is not any worse for the ad being pulled, I'm just saying how this little maneuver was a symptom of a bigger problem in the U.S. If something offends someone, SILENCE IT!!!! Which is one reason why I suggest anyone interested in this sort of thing reads Fahrenheit 451 and 1984, you'll see where I come from.

Edited February 9, 2007 by Dark Moth

[blue]

This is what we call 'blowing out of proportions'. If you want to be offended by it, go right ahead. I still stand by what I said, so I guess that makes you... But okay, I'll add a third one to the list: highly sensitive. But before you go on a tirade, think about how you would react if you involuntarily kissed a man. Whether or not you rip out your chest hair, I'm sure even you would have at least been slightly uncomfortable. You do not want to be mistaken for something you are not. And no, my life is not any worse for the ad being pulled, I'm just saying how this little maneuver was a symptom of a bigger problem in the U.S. If something offends someone, SILENCE IT!!!! Which is one reason why I suggest anyone interested in this sort of thing reads Fahrenheit 451 and 1984, you'll see where I come from.

I've read those books. I also know what it means to blow something out of proportion. To compare this incident to the works of Orwell or Bradbury is a fine example of that.

 

Personally, I'm not deeply offended by the ad. In some ways I'm amused -- by the Freudian undertones (love that coprophilic metaphor) and the desperation of the over-the-top imagery. I also chuckle at the stupidity of Snickers ad execs who couldn't see this coming. Mostly, though, I'm entertained by the hair-pulling reactionaries who whine about GLAAD's right to self-serious objections and Snicker's voluntary withdrawal of the ad. (Geez, people. Lighten up.)

 

I also understand where GLAAD is coming from, and I don't begrudge anyone's right to publicly debate corporate policy. Nor do I begrudge a company that willingly changed course. That's how capitalism works.

Edited February 9, 2007 by blue

[Dark Moth]

I've read those books. I also know what it means to blow something out of proportion. To compare this incident to the works of Orwell or Bradbury is a fine example of that.

 

Personally, I'm not deeply offended by the ad. In some ways I'm amused -- by the Freudian undertones (love that coprophilic metaphor) and the desperation of the over-the-top imagery. I also chuckle at the stupidity of Snickers ad execs who couldn't see this coming. Mostly, though, I'm entertained by the hair-pulling reactionaries who whine about GLAAD's right to self-serious objections and Snicker's voluntary withdrawal of the ad. (Geez, people. Lighten up.)

 

I also understand where GLAAD is coming from, and I don't begrudge anyone's right to publicly debate corporate policy. Nor do I begrudge a company that willingly changed course. That's how capitalism works.

Good, though I see it hasn't done you a world of good, then. You see, I'm not saying the incident itself alludes to those books, but the overall mindset of America when it comes to these things certainly does. I used this incident to bring up a problem with today's society, nothing more. That however is not blowing it out of proportion. View it however you wish.

 

Oh, you're not deeply offended by it, I see. Either you are, or you are not. Which one is it? Secondly, the stupidity here lies not just with Snickers, but with the people who got riled over this in the first place. I doubt even Snickers would have thought a major association like GLAAD would have been stupid enough to accuse it of things like promoting violence against gays. And yes, they did voluntarily withdraw it, I never said otherwise. I doubt they would have wanted to put up with the hassle of people like those from GLAAD over this thing if it had continued. It's probably best they did. That doesn't justify this incident, though.

Edited February 9, 2007 by Dark Moth

[Sand]

You can't take a step outside without offending someone. That is just how lame everything has become. I wasn't particularly impressed by the commercial either. Now if it had been two stereotypical tough guy Italian mafia buggers with Dean Martin singing in the background, thusly doing the whole Disney rip off of Lady and the Tramp then it might have been funny. I just don't see anything offensive about two guys accidently kissing then because of some neurotic and immature need to show their manliness they bare their chest and tear out hair.

Edited February 9, 2007 by Sand

[Hell Kitty]

The fact is there is nothing funny that does not offend someone.

 

Organisations like GLAAD don't have a problem with this ad because it might offend someone, the problem is the message it sends, that gay is bad and must be fought against, and the possible effects this can have. This ad alone won't cause that, but it is part of the larger problem. If anything the ad makes fun of homophobes, although the additional scene with the football team is straight out homophobia.

 

Kind of makes you appreciate Rednecks. Joke about them all you want and they laugh too.

The difference is in how persecuted a group is, or how persecuted they perceive themselves to be. If rednecks were treated the say way that gays are today, I doubt they'd so happy. Same goes with any group.

 

By the way Kitty, most heterosexual men are just a tiny bit homomphobic. Anyone who says they are not is a liar.

 

How ridiculously arrogant of you to claim to know what's in the hearts and minds of all men everywhere! And you've even conveniently countered any arguments men might make by accusing them of being liars.

 

And just what does it mean to be "a tiny bit homophobic"? If, for example, a woman goes her whole life without ever thinking or saying or doing anything sexist, but them one day makes a joke about men, is she then to be forever labeled "a tiny bit sexist"? Every person is capable of being homophobic/sexist/racist, but it's stupid to label people based on what they might do or say or think or feel. If a man lives his whole life without ever consciously doing/saying/thinking/feeling anything homophobic then it makes no sense to claim he is "a tiny bit homophobic", and to apply the label to him simply removes any meaning from the word.

 

Claiming that everyone is a tiny bit homophobic/sexist/racist is just a poor attempt to downplay the problem that is homophobia/sexism/racism and ignore the issue. The comment the we "might just as well laugh about it" is really the icing on the cake. It's easy for people not affected by the issue to claim it's just something to laugh about, but to those living in a society that can be hostile towards them it's no laughing matter.

 

Instead of making a thread about this issue and claiming that "one of the biggest problems in the world today is too many people with a total lack of a sense of humor", why didn't you just laugh about the fact that some people can be so humourless and then think nothing more about the issue? Of course I won't hold it against you and claim it's wrong you feel the way you do.

 

Humans are cautious of that which is different to them, but fear and hatred is something that comes later, based on our own interactions with particular groups, or the influence of our guardians, peers and society in general.

[blue]

Oh, you're not deeply offended by it, I see. Either you are, or you are not. Which one is it?

Mildly.

 

I'm not gay, so I don't feel ridiculed. However, I'm surrounded by gay friends & relatives, and I realize some people have reactions more complex than mine -- which, as I said, is a coupling of detached amusement and very slight annoyance. So for them I take mild offense. I'm protective to a fault.

 

I recognize that the ad is a simplistic entertainment, and at worst it perpetuates stereotypes and hatreds. I don't see that anything good comes from it. On the other hand, I'd never demand censorship.

 

But you really don't care, do you. You only asked because you were trying to score debate points. Fine. Here, as a reward you can have a bite of my Snicker's.

 

 

You can't take a step outside without offending someone.

True. Just witness the righteous indignation that spawned this thread.

Edited February 9, 2007 by blue

[Purgatorio]

The fact is there is nothing funny that does not offend someone.

 

Organisations like GLAAD don't have a problem with this ad because it might offend someone, the problem is the message it sends, that gay is bad and must be fought against, and the possible effects this can have. This ad alone won't cause that, but it is part of the larger problem. If anything the ad makes fun of homophobes, although the additional scene with the football team is straight out homophobia.

 

Kind of makes you appreciate Rednecks. Joke about them all you want and they laugh too.

The difference is in how persecuted a group is, or how persecuted they perceive themselves to be. If rednecks were treated the say way that gays are today, I doubt they'd so happy. Same goes with any group.

 

By the way Kitty, most heterosexual men are just a tiny bit homomphobic. Anyone who says they are not is a liar.

 

How ridiculously arrogant of you to claim to know what's in the hearts and minds of all men everywhere! And you've even conveniently countered any arguments men might make by accusing them of being liars.

 

And just what does it mean to be "a tiny bit homophobic"? If, for example, a woman goes her whole life without ever thinking or saying or doing anything sexist, but them one day makes a joke about men, is she then to be forever labeled "a tiny bit sexist"? Every person is capable of being homophobic/sexist/racist, but it's stupid to label people based on what they might do or say or think or feel. If a man lives his whole life without ever consciously doing/saying/thinking/feeling anything homophobic then it makes no sense to claim he is "a tiny bit homophobic", and to apply the label to him simply removes any meaning from the word.

 

Claiming that everyone is a tiny bit homophobic/sexist/racist is just a poor attempt to downplay the problem that is homophobia/sexism/racism and ignore the issue. The comment the we "might just as well laugh about it" is really the icing on the cake. It's easy for people not affected by the issue to claim it's just something to laugh about, but to those living in a society that can be hostile towards them it's no laughing matter.

 

Instead of making a thread about this issue and claiming that "one of the biggest problems in the world today is too many people with a total lack of a sense of humor", why didn't you just laugh about the fact that some people can be so humourless and then think nothing more about the issue? Of course I won't hold it against you and claim it's wrong you feel the way you do.

 

Humans are cautious of that which is different to them, but fear and hatred is something that comes later, based on our own interactions with particular groups, or the influence of our guardians, peers and society in general.

I just thought this post needed repeating.

 

What's odd is, if this add was in Australia the Australian Families Association would want it pulled off air because it promotes something that doesn't fit into how our society should be.... Only that which doesn't fit would be the two blokes 'kissing'. The way groups like GLAAD (being an Australian I have no knowledge of GLAAD ) react hurt their own cause by alienating other groups that have the same goals, also they cause people to equate human rights groups with nutjobs and or fanatics.

[Lucius]

The fact is there is nothing funny that does not offend someone.

 

Organisations like GLAAD don't have a problem with this ad because it might offend someone, the problem is the message it sends, that gay is bad and must be fought against, and the possible effects this can have. This ad alone won't cause that, but it is part of the larger problem. If anything the ad makes fun of homophobes, although the additional scene with the football team is straight out homophobia.

 

Kind of makes you appreciate Rednecks. Joke about them all you want and they laugh too.

The difference is in how persecuted a group is, or how persecuted they perceive themselves to be. If rednecks were treated the say way that gays are today, I doubt they'd so happy. Same goes with any group.

 

By the way Kitty, most heterosexual men are just a tiny bit homomphobic. Anyone who says they are not is a liar.

 

How ridiculously arrogant of you to claim to know what's in the hearts and minds of all men everywhere! And you've even conveniently countered any arguments men might make by accusing them of being liars.

 

And just what does it mean to be "a tiny bit homophobic"? If, for example, a woman goes her whole life without ever thinking or saying or doing anything sexist, but them one day makes a joke about men, is she then to be forever labeled "a tiny bit sexist"? Every person is capable of being homophobic/sexist/racist, but it's stupid to label people based on what they might do or say or think or feel. If a man lives his whole life without ever consciously doing/saying/thinking/feeling anything homophobic then it makes no sense to claim he is "a tiny bit homophobic", and to apply the label to him simply removes any meaning from the word.

 

Claiming that everyone is a tiny bit homophobic/sexist/racist is just a poor attempt to downplay the problem that is homophobia/sexism/racism and ignore the issue. The comment the we "might just as well laugh about it" is really the icing on the cake. It's easy for people not affected by the issue to claim it's just something to laugh about, but to those living in a society that can be hostile towards them it's no laughing matter.

 

Instead of making a thread about this issue and claiming that "one of the biggest problems in the world today is too many people with a total lack of a sense of humor", why didn't you just laugh about the fact that some people can be so humourless and then think nothing more about the issue? Of course I won't hold it against you and claim it's wrong you feel the way you do.

 

Humans are cautious of that which is different to them, but fear and hatred is something that comes later, based on our own interactions with particular groups, or the influence of our guardians, peers and society in general.

I just thought this post needed repeating.

 

What's odd is, if this add was in Australia the Australian Families Association would want it pulled off air because it promotes something that doesn't fit into how our society should be.... Only that which doesn't fit would be the two blokes 'kissing'. The way groups like GLAAD (being an Australian I have no knowledge of GLAAD ) react hurt their own cause by alienating other groups that have the same goals, also they cause people to equate human rights groups with nutjobs and or fanatics.

 

It really is a good post, yeah. :D

[Guard Dog]

To Hell Kitty and Blue: points well taken.

[Walsingham]

It's the nature of PR to be oversensitive about a handful of nutloops. [Mafia] Fogeddaboudit [/Mafia]

[Volourn]

"Snicker's voluntary withdrawal of the ad."

 

Voluntary my butt. The ad never would have pulled if the whining hadn't started.

 

The commerical was funny. not the funniest ever; but amusing. Only those who are looking for a problem would find it offensive, imo.

 

I doubt most gay people would think about the commercial for more than 2 seconds. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if many of them laughed.

 

Why do people cry over crap like this? This is just as bad as the b00bie showing at another Super Bowl.

 

Lame.

[blue]

Voluntary my butt. The ad never would have pulled if the whining hadn't started.

Companies ignore complaints and boycotts all the time. Sometimes they reverse course. It

Edited February 9, 2007 by blue

[blue]

"I doubt most gay people would think about the commercial for more than 2 seconds. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if many of them laughed.

Btw, you're right; some laughed. A few prominent gay groups even suggested that GLAAD was over-reacting. (I tend to agree. There are bigger battles worth fighting.) Others felt different, so they expressed their concerns. There's no uniform reaction or agenda in the gay community.

[Guard Dog]

One of the points I was going to make (and never got around to) was that whining about things like this does little but exasperate and turn off people who might otherwise be sympathetic to the cause of the group doing the whining.

[Lucius]

I don't assume you'd be one of those anyway

[blue]

One of the points I was going to make (and never got around to) was that whining about things like this does little but exasperate and turn off people who might otherwise be sympathetic to the cause of the group doing the whining.

Generally, I agree that can happen, and maybe in this case that