Comments on: Why I’m happy I didn’t get the MSNBC porn ad

By: Anthony

Anthony — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 01:24:53 +0000

All ads are a ploy to get interest in something. Either by a direct response or branding. It’s a bit flimsy trying to take a shot at them by saying the ad is: “nothing more than a ploy for clicks”. I’ve never heard a marketing manager brief their ad agency with “Ok, I want an ad that will not get noticed”. The ad is fine, morally and it’s fine creatively/strategically because it works well with the story they’re promoting. It’s just an awesome show of confidence in the blogosphere by MSNBC’s ad people. Well done those blogs that got selected in this media buy and well done MSNBC.

By: jeff

jeff — Tue, 13 Dec 2005 20:27:17 +0000

according to methodshop.com, the msnbc porn ads are to promote a rita cosby segment about the “big business” of the porn industry not actual porn.

By: Arun Kumar

Arun Kumar — Tue, 13 Dec 2005 19:50:00 +0000

The people who may have complained about the ad are out there crying and bitching about the so called “war on Christmas”. The Janet Jackson Nipple Gate was blown way out of proportion by these same religious nut jobs and right wing groups like the Parents Television Council, Family Research Council.

In July the president of the PTC filed 23,542 complaints to the FCC, the total number of complaints the FCC received was 23,547 for that month. Everyone else in the country: 5 complaints sent, the PTC: 23,542. See what we have to deal with here.

By: jesse

jesse — Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:50:09 +0000

I would echo dave and scrivs- I would say that the photoshopped images of MJ and the sheep ad are just as likely to offend someone as the MSNBC ad

By: Gayla

Gayla — Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:48:29 +0000

I guess it takes quite a bit to offend me – I did want to share a little story about the M.Jackson ad though -

While reading blogherald over the weekend – my husband and one son (soon be 13) came in my office and peeked over my shoulder. All you could see was the lower portion of the MJ ad so both were doing cat calls and whistles. You can’t imagine how tickled I was to lower the screen just a bit more -

Talk about a Priceless family moment!

Thanks Duncun!

By: dave park

dave park — Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:28:43 +0000

I agree with the above poster.
Also, I believe most people would find the Michael Jackson and the Save the Sheep ads you have up right now to be more offensive than MSNBC’s campaign. The MSNBC ad is a silhouette, that Save the Sheep ad has a naked woman.

By: Scrivs

Scrivs — Tue, 13 Dec 2005 14:46:45 +0000

Sorry, I have to bring this one up. How is the Michael Jackson ad on the right not any worse or more disturbing than what MSNBC has posted? I know that because it has MJ’s head that it’s a joke and all, but it’s not like he looks like a guy or anything. Haha, you even have a headline with “free crack pipes” in the ad…

By: Flexo

Flexo — Tue, 13 Dec 2005 14:16:41 +0000

A sillhouette is a far cry from porn imagery. The text contains the word “porn.” That’s as close to porn as the ads get. I thought twice about running the ad, but there’s nothing actually offensive about it. Apparently the ad will change from time to time depending on the programming MSNBC is offering.

As far as mainstreaming, as we all know, we Americans (viewed as a whole) are hypocritical. We want to ban porn but we can’t get enough of it in the media (Paris Hilton, Janet Jackson’s nipple, etc.). “Porn” is just another way to sell more stuff.