CBS has rejected a Super Bowl ad submitted by ManCrunch.com, a gay dating site that shows two male football fans making out. The network said that the commercial violated its standards and sources suggested it was just a ploy to get publicity. ManCrunch has called the move discriminatory and pointed to controversial commercials that have run in the past.
The network sent the company a fairly vague letter, telling them ““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.” It is not clear what “the creative” references but one can guess.
The network also said that its sales department had difficulty verifying the credit of the site to guarantee payment of the estimated $2.5 million cost to air the ad.
Site spokesperson Elissa Buchter said that they spent more than $100,000 on the ad and has raised $40 million from investors.
PETA previously garnered considerable attention with an ad that was rejected for the Superbowl, here. I agreed with that decision considering the audience. Families want to watch the Superbowl without having to explain sexual content — whether heterosexual or homosexual.
This type of ad is likely to be more harmful and helpful to the gay rights movement, which is already losing ground in state referendums. Indeed, some gay sites are questioning the motives or bona fides of the company.
The ad above is called “Playing for the Same Team” and depicts two male football fans making out. I have to say that the commercial seems pretty low grade for the Superbowl. What do you think? Was this just a publicity stunt or a serious effort at an ad placement?
Sorry to be so off topic, but this’ll get your blood boiling on a Sunday morning. I just saw this at Huffington Post (first two paragraphs):
Justice Official Clears Bush Lawyers in Torture Memo Probe
Newsweek
By Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman
For weeks, the right has heckled Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. for his plans to try the alleged 9/11 conspirators in New York City and his handling of the Christmas bombing plot suspect. Now the left is going to be upset: an upcoming Justice Department report from its ethics-watchdog unit, the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), clears the Bush administration lawyers who authored the “torture” memos of professional-misconduct allegations.
While the probe is sharply critical of the legal reasoning used to justify waterboarding and other “enhanced” interrogation techniques, NEWSWEEK has learned that a senior Justice official who did the final review of the report softened an earlier OPR finding. Previously, the report concluded that two key authors—Jay Bybee, now a federal appellate court judge, and John Yoo, now a law professor—violated their professional obligations as lawyers when they crafted a crucial 2002 memo approving the use of harsh tactics, say two Justice sources who asked for anonymity discussing an internal matter. But the reviewer, career veteran David Margolis, downgraded that assessment to say they showed “poor judgment,” say the sources. (Under department rules, poor judgment does not constitute professional misconduct.) The shift is significant: the original finding would have triggered a referral to state bar associations for potential disciplinary action—which, in Bybee’s case, could have led to an impeachment inquiry.
Oh my, It seems that they should have verified the payment and then dismissed it for that. Or have stated that they had the ad line up all taken care of or run the thing and have some really pissed off people. Or accept reality that some playing Pro Ball are really gay.
But on both sides some are not gonna be happy.
Site spokesperson Elissa Buchter said that they spent more than $100,000 on the ad and has raised $40 million from investors.
The network also said that its sales department had difficulty verifying the credit of the site to guarantee payment of the estimated $2.5 million cost to air the ad.
I was gonna say something smells fishy but it’s two guys in the video. So I think it’s do do.
RC what an embarrassment to the DOJ and this administration. How many times did they tease us with prosecuting torture. Every time they did the presidents poll numbers went up slightly and there was Hope from many that it would move forward. Now we see there is no Change.
Anonymously yours
“Or accept reality that some playing Pro Ball are really gay.”
xxoo
“suggested it was just a ploy to get publicity.”
Isn’t that the definition of advertising?
JT
“Was this just a publicity stunt or a serious effort at an ad placement?”
From what I have read from the gay community, this was in direct response to the Focus on the Family Tebow ad.
“Families want to watch the Superbowl without have to explain sexual content — whether heterosexual or homosexual.”
The ad itself may have been a bit over the top, but I think it is necessary to break the spell on this idea that homosexual partnership is an awkward topic. It’s not. We need to get used to the fact that it’s a normal part of society and it creates happy loving families. I would not blink an eye if this ad was played alongside one for Ax Body Spray or some such.
Apparently, Mancrunch isn’t a gay owned business or a gay dating site at all http://www.gaydailyhot.com/2010/01/before-you-get-too-upset-about-the-rejected-gay-dating-site-ad.html
Empirecookie it would have been nice if you copied and pasted instead of sending us to a website where men are getting copied and pasted.
For the men here who don’t want to see another mans face being impaled by a jousting rod, don’t go to the link by empirecookie unless you want to get jiggy with it.
OOPS Sorry! I did not notice that. I just read the article.
Thats ok I read the article too but kept getting distracted.
And I’m glad I did. Because as we can see from Phoebe post the gay community is getting punk’d by someone who may not have their best interest at heart.
Ecookie,
We still like you. That was very, very informative and yet early on a Sunday morning….WOW. Not a Women on Women Dating site. Ordinary usage and meaning…
Not too spiritual for a Sunday morning Ecookie.
EmpireCookie,
I am sure Swartsmore Mom may have meant something about the position of the missionary’s.
Thanks, I did need the chuckle.
Off Topic,
Report: Muslim cleric was shot 21 times in Dearborn raid
An autopsy report shows that a Muslim cleric who died in an October shoot-out with federal agents was shot 21 times, then handcuffed, according to a person familiar with the case.
The handcuffing apparently occurred after the shooting and was in line with procedure, the person said.
http://www.freep.com/article/20100130/NEWS02/100130008/1319/Report-Muslim-cleric-shot-21-times-in-FBI-raid
I guess that they didn’t want his hands free when the 70 Virgins came a calling.
So EmpireCookie,
You do know that the link is going to get this site hooked up with some of the kinky sites now. Maybe the professor can start an “Alternative” web site.
People with a Constitutional fetish?
“Oh, Preamble! Do that voodoo that you do so well! And don’t neglect my Bill of Rights! Pay attention to that Separation of Powers doctrine too, you wild thing you!”
“I agreed with that decision considering the audience. Families want to watch the Superbowl without having to explain sexual content — whether heterosexual or homosexual.”
***********
Now those beer and vodka commercials are ok along with that fantasy walk down memory lane with the Tebow cult … that’s cool too. No sex in any of that. Bottom line is that if CBS gets into the business of persuading folks to do more than buy soap, they’d best be aware of the consequences of perceived unfairness. It means less viewers, more pressure on their advertisers, and hassles galore. No one can tell me that there weren’t plenty of less controversial product vendors lined up to hawk their wares on this football feastday.
The other guy seems to saying to himself,should I stay or should I go?
I strongly disagree with JT’s position. The station is acting as a morality censor, arbitrarily deciding what is appropriate for “families” and what is not. As mespo points out, this reveals certain values of the station, and more broadly, society at large. CBS’ motive, of course, is profit. They don’t want anything that clashes with the values of the audience and makes them turn off the TV (as implausible as that may seem for the Super Bowl) — the tried and true beer and boobage CBS has deemed appropriately uncontroversial.
What happens when CBS decides that your lifestyle is too controversial, JT? Would you back the same decision if CBS deemed an ad for your law firm not appropriate for “families” because you appear frequently on “that god damned liberal station” or “speak up for them turrists”?
I found the ad above to be funny. I sure didn’t see anything that I found to be potentially offensive to superbowl viewers. To me, the ad represents two straigt guys that got caught up in the moment. You know, like the time you and your buddy are walking back from the concession stand, with your hands full of beer and nachos, and your team intercepts a ball on the 2 yard line and takes it all the way down the field for a touchdown. I know the first instinct is to drop the nachos (a man never drops his beer) and high-five, but damn-it, those nachos are looking really tasty; so you just kiss. :>)
I know. It sounds like I just came up with an idea for another commercial. Bud Light. Are you here? I want recognition. :>)
I should point out that even though I don’t have a problem with the ad, I must concur with CBS’s right to choose what is aired on their network. The keyword there is “their network”. I think the decision is stupid, and I think it will cause more problems for CBS than anything that would ever come from airing the ad, but I’ve gotta support a right to operate one’s business in the way the owner feels best.
The government can restrict content (a valid intrusion on the First Amendment), but I don’t believe they should be able to force content. I don’t even like the sound of “You shall show this to the people”.
I definately had a giggle while watching the ad. It’s a shame that the decision to not run it during Superbowl was made. I believe that it’s important that more positive exposure be given to homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle. There remain far too many men and women living their lives as a lie out of fear of not being accepted by society.
Duh (or anyone else),
I am not a lawyer, but is there any law enforcing anti-discriminatory practices for advertising? That is, prohibiting the kinds of things that CBS is doing now?
CBS does broadcast on the public airwaves (that is, the spectrum allocated to them, which is publicly owned) so there is a public interest involved.
Duh: that’s actually a pretty funny idea for an ad. I also agree that CBS has the right to be stupid about a pretty harmless ad. It’s more lowkey than most the annual Go Daddy spots (which my id enjoys).
That said, the commercial is definitely offensive to me as it depicts what appears to be a Packer fan and a Vikings fan making out.
That’s disgusting.
On the other hand, Mancrunch has reaped a ton of absolutely free exposure due to the controversy. It gets to keep its 2.5 Million and get its message out.
Seems like CBS is the biggest loser here.
Tim Tebow Super Bowl Ad May Be Based On Falsehood
Posted: 01-29-10 09:25 PM
Focus On The Family, Gloria Allred Tim Tebow, Nfl, Pam Tebow, Super Bowl, Super Bowl XLIV, Tim Tebow, Tim Tebow Ad, Tim Tebow Commercial, Tim Tebow Super Bowl Ad, Tim Tebow Super Bowl Commercial, Sports News
A commercial featuring Tim Tebow and his mother Pam that is likely to air during Super Bowl XLIV may be rife with inaccuracies, according to power lawyer Gloria Allred.
The ad, which is expected to promote an anti-choice message, will be based on the theme “Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life.” The Christian conservative group Focus on the Family has paid for the spot. James Dobson, the group’s founder, has a history of inflammatory statements and once said that gay marriage
will “destroy the earth.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/29/tim-tebow-super-bowl-ad-m_n_442808.html
eniobob,
Thanks for the link. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.
“just a ploy to get publicity”…uh…aren’t all TV ads a ploy to get publicity?
In a recent poll, 69 men were in favor of airing the ads.
Mike Kilpatrick:
Do you know Michael Fitzpatrick or Patrick Fitzmichael? Or maybe Peter Fitznizentite?
“In a recent poll, 69 men were in favor of airing the ads.”
Well, if history will reliably repeat itself, that would mena the FOX News will soon be reporting that 76% are still against it. :>)
http://jonathanturley.org/2009/12/09/one-hundred-and-twenty-percent-of-people-cant-be-wrong-fox-news-shows-people-are-dubious-about-the-accuracy-of-global-warming-science-with-a-poll-showing-120-percent-of-people-are-skeptical/
Duh!
Those “69″ men (per pardon me’s pun) could actually total in the millions–unfortunately.
Pardon Me?
That was cleaver. Very…. ass opposed to 99 per cent of the me or 66 per cent of the women or is it the other way around? Lets get a definitive answer from ECookie….
me = men
Former Federal LEO,
I knew what “pardon me” meant. Unfortunately, you didn’t get the humor associated with the FOX News math.
Former Federal LEO,
I should say, I think I got what “pardon me” meant. I interpreted it as meaning the 69% of men were in favor of airing the ad.
I wish TV networks would ban those ubiquitous ads for drugs that help men with erectile dysfunction–especially the Cialis ads. Can anybody explain the two bathtubs in those commericials? Is there some symbolism I’m missing?
Elaine M.,
I haven’t paid enough attention to them to say that I have noticed the one with two bathtubs. I’m just happy to not have a little one asking questions about the ads.
Elaine.M:
I am going to try and take a swing at that question,that may be for when the ad says if this situation continues for over (4) hours to call your doctor?
The second tub may be filled with ice water until the doctor arrives.:-))
Elaine M.,
Maybe this is as good as it gets:
“I think it is to convey the impression that Cialis is ripe for a slow, romantic build-up to sex and not as much about rushing to the goal. Take your time, relax, have a wonderful evening just “being” with your partner.
It’s that 36-hour effectiveness thing.
Reminds me of the joke that Robert Duvall told Sean Penn in Colors.
“There were two bulls on the hill, looking over the pasture of cows. The younger bull, said ‘Let’s run down this hill and **** (Rhymes with Duck) one of these cows.’ The older bull turned to the younger one and said, ‘No, let’s walk down this hill and **** (Rhymes with Duck) them all.’”
http://scienceblogs.com/effectmeasure/2009/01/cialis_whats_with_the_bath_tub.php
The second bull apparently being the older & wiser of the 2
One day I went to visit my cousin in the country who has a pig farm. We walked down to the pen and my cousin jumped the fence, dropped his pants and started having his way with one dem dare pigs.
He looks over at me and said, watt ya wayten on? go on and get ya one.
Well it took my a few minutes and I jumped the fence and got me one.
After a few minutes my cousin could tell sumpin was wrong and said, watts wrong cus? I said, man I don’t know bout dis.
He said hold on a minute, let me come over there and see if I can figure it out fur ya.
He walked over to the front of the pig I had and said, It’s no wunder u cain’t do nuttin witt it, u dun picked da ugliest one.
just my luck I guess.
That’s gross bdaman. I don’t like the way conservative men think.
Bdaman:
that is a problem with pigs. Sheep are better looking and if you use Velcro gloves much easier to hold on to or so I have been told by Texans and West Virginians.
People from Louisiana seem to like goats and use hip boots or so Capn’ Johnny told me.
Conservatives promote animal abuse along with prisoner abuse.
Where do you think prisoner abuse started.
CBS is being like a psycho ex.
Dating Psychos is a place to post what you know about your ex psychos
Click Here to Add and Check Out the Psychos
Pat
empirecookie; The next time you’re tempted to post a link to a page that features good looking, naked young men doing anything, ANYTHING, just consider that you might need some guidance regarding the appropriateness of your posting. I’ll help you though, just SEND ME THE LINK FIRST and I’ll scope out the page/site and make a recommendation back to you. Your posting may not be as timely but it will be WELL RESEARCHED
I thought the commercial was funny. Maybe the network and/or the NFL doesn’t want to get people thinking about social subtext; better the fans should just sit back and watch a lot of roided out guys that slap each other on the fanny for completing a play, or have they stopped that fanny slapping thing?
From article: “I agreed with that decision (PETA) considering the audience. Families want to watch the Superbowl without having to explain sexual content — whether heterosexual or homosexual.”
Now folks watching the game will only have to explain abortion/ Roe v Wade/privacy rights to the young ones.
CBS or/and the NFL has an agenda IMO.
LottaK,
That was funny….
All I can say is it looks like they shot a hundred K commercial on a webcam.
The music track was prety funny, making fun of the archetypal beer commercials
Can they bring in James O’Keefe for some post-production?
There is actually 1 problem with the ad, had I not read the article posted along with it here i would have no idea what
” Mancrunch ” is.
lottakatz:
Will do!
Good Morning Ecookie.
Duh, eniobob, & AY–
Thanks for responding to my question.
**********
Canadian Eh–
There’s no doubt the second bull was older and wiser than his frisky friend.
You are most welcome.
raymond.woo@energizer.com,raymond.woo@energizer.com;index.html;default.html;so good!