Banned Super Bowl XLIV Commercials

superbowl commercialsThe Super Bowl is a day away and while the excitement of the game for sports fans is ever so present, the commercials garner the most attention. Drew Brees or Peyton Manning will be going to Disneyland after the game (Brees he has a stop at Mardi Gras first) but the brand who receives the best spot nod is top dog, if even only for a few days.

The Super Bowl has become a place for advertisers to showcase their best stuff to probably one of the biggest television audiences of the year. Television advertising has taken a bit of a hit with funds being used in social media marketing, DVR’s, internet TV and the inability to really reach your set target market without being noise to others that are not your target. But the Super Bowl is different … What other televised event has people getting together with friends, families and other sports fans/friends for 3+ hours and watch the TV so intently?  The talk of the game rolls into an outburst (ohhhh or uuhhhh) for the commercial that just ran and then the comments as to why they liked it or not.  This is an advertisers dream.  Groups and groups of people not leaving the tube to use the restroom until the halftime show (hence a flushing/water/sewer problem in large cities) so they can watch the commercials. Will they buy? This matters but what matters more is the free media coverage that they get for the days after the game.

With all the greatness surrounding the Super Bowl and the commercials,there is always the ads that do not make it.  Booo! CBS has banned spots that they deem not appropriate for game viewers.  For some, this is a blessing as the spots are getting more “eyes” time NOW which is taking the focus away from the spots during the game (with the possibility of comparisons) than they would have if they ran during the game.  Here are the top 4 ads that were banned.

1. Doritos

A man running over a woman for a bag of Doritos is seen as too violent and thus banned.  Domestic violence is very serious and never should be taken lightly but that is not what this ad is really about. While I understand that CBS has to be sure that ads are represent everyone in a positive manner and found this to be too violent, I thought it was funny.

2. GoDaddy

GoDaddy seems to be having a rough time with getting CBS to approve an ad.  5 ads this year were banned. This one does show a woman in the lingerie but it also has the flamboyant Lola who is a lingerie mogul.  Not sure even if the scantly clad dressed woman was out that this would have made it.  Lola may be too happy for CBS.

3. KGB

KGB is a service where you ask a question via text and get an answer. Paid service.  The head in ass is funny.  CBS obviously does not agree with me as found this to be offensive.

4. ManCrunch.com

Too much happiness and gayness in this one for CBS for sure. In a statement to Mancrunch, CBS wrote: “CBS Standards and Practices has reviewed your proposed Super Bowl ad and concluded that the creative is not within the Network’s Broadcast Standards for Super Bowl Sunday.” (quote via AgencySpy)

I expect some debate over the banning of this ad will go on as a pro-life spot was approved.  Albeit, it was about Tim Tebow who is a football player (tie-in??).  Nonetheless, I have to agree with John Ciarallo that the exposure that this ad is receiving from being banned is more than they would have received if it ran during the game.

Thoughts. Do you agree that these should have been banned?

photo credit: taberandrew

  • GoDaddy seems to always get at least one racy ad on the air every year. They must be experts at this point on getting as close as possible to the proverbial line without crossing it.

  • Go Daddy: This one, according to reports, they are shocked about. I was kinda too. Even the local news showed the spot (ok I am in Vegas but …). I think the combo of the gal in the lingerie (which doesn't Victoria's Secret have a fashion show in prime time???) and the flamboyant x-football player were too much for the network. The man crunch being banned was a clear indicator that they are not interested in supporting the gay community in any way.

    Look forward to your likes and dislikes on your post. I expect to do the same.

    thanks for dropping in my friend.

  • I absolutely agree these ads should have been banned.

    Children, who are exposed to enough vulgarities on TV, and idiot-people in general, are highly impressionable during the Superbowl of TV Ads. I don't want to hear an adult – and much less someone's rotten little kid – walking around telling someone they've got their head up their ass.

    The moron hitting and then BACKING OVER THE WOMAN he hit with his car AGAIN to get some crap junk food is not funny; it's barbaric. It supports this monstrous attitude of “screw everyone else, it's just about what I want” that pervades society today.

    The Lola lingerie ad, to Me, is funny – but I am perhaps, a bit biased! However, it promotes stereotypes of gay-male designers and “half-nekkid women” to people who are not exposed to the truth about these sexual and fetish subcultures.

    I would be equally annoyed by the ManCrunch ad if it were heterosexual or 2 gorgeous women groping all over each other. With all of the dangerous, anti-gay, hate-crimes that are constant, ManCrunch should have better sense than to portray homosexuality with the shock value that the “haters” thrive on to promote their murderous agendas.

    How about a little bit of dignity for a change? To be generally offensive and vulgar is not funny. It's lazy to appeal to the lowest, “common” (as in trite) denominator. True creativity seeks to inspire the best from its audience.

    The news continues to show that there are far too many stupid and irresponsible people out here mimicking dangerous behaviors. To hide obvious demonstrations of irresponsible behaviors behind “a sense of humor” is the coward's way of pretending not to have the sole intention of being exploitative.

    For once, I find value in CBS for finally having a sense of responsible programming.

  • Jan Kasal

    Suzanne,
    As I spend 0 time on You Tube, I appreciate your little excerpt. Otherwise, I would not see the clips.
    First, the game is the only show I tivo for the commercials only as oppose to skip them.
    Second, I have to admit I am glad the above clips were not accepted. They left me completely indifferent. They are so lame! I hope I'll see more provoking ones later today.
    Jan

  • Jan Kasal

    “For once, I find value in CBS for finally having a sense of responsible programming.”

    O man, I wish your closing statement holds up and you don't need to revisit your view.

  • I have to agree on the doritos rolling back over to get the bag. The head in ass I did not get it at first and even after watching it a few times and finally got it, I do not feel it is good for kids as if my kid ever said that I would not be happy. I understand the concept at this point but they could have done this so much better. The simplicity of this that men never ask for anything is ridiculous.

    The man crunch will get exposure. It was already on the local news in Vegas. If this spreads there will be people coming out against the banning of this and not the pro-life spot.

    Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts. Always welcomed!

  • Google apparently has its spot running which I have seen and it is GOOD! I hope that there are some really good spots. The advertisers feel that they have to target the masses with these spots so I think that creativity suffers.

    I am curious to see what we get this year as we know Doritos will be announcing their winner of the contest which those spots were ok, nothing that I was overjoyous about.

    Thanks for dropping in again. I appreciate that.