Super Bowl Ads
by Josh Levine
Will.I.Am My Generation Super Bowl Flo TV
Rebel client Flo TV had an ad in the Super Bowl. Three actually. The one you see here has will.i.am remaking The Who’s “My Generation” while iconic moments from TV’s history flash on the screen. The message: buy Flo TV’s portable TV device and you won’t miss the memorable moments in the future.
While I’m not much of a believer in Super Bowl ads, or TV ads, or TV, I’m always fascinated by the affect all the pressure has on the creative output we see. When stakes are at their highest, creatives tend to do some of their best — and worst — work. Some standouts…
Bud always tries to dominate, whether by trotting out the clydesdales or captivating us with its own Bud Bowl. This year it seemed like the strategy was to pelt us with a bunch of random crap. Feels like Michelob Ultra stole the show with its lone Lance Armstrong ad. Although someone at my party asked, if you’ve just burned 10,000 calories, do you really have to drink Michelob Ultra? My guess is Lance has earned his Chimay, or at least a Shiner.
On the other hand, the Boost Mobile Super Bowl Shuffle was a complete waste of money. For those of you who don’t remember (which I’m sure is most of you), the Bears made the Super Bowl Shuffle popular for about 10 seconds back in the ’80s. Boost’s target is mainly Gen Y, who probably wasn’t watching the Super Bowl and definitely doesn’t care.
As a lifelong 49ers fan, I can’t believe Skechers used Joe Montana to hawk its Shape Ups, MBT ripoff. I’d say Joe should be ashamed, but this is the guy who spent all of his celebrity clout in the 90s pitching the similarly uncool LA Gear.
Perhaps the worst creative fumble in my opinion was the two marketers who appear to have been sucked in by the “no pants” phenomenon. You may be familiar with the No Pants Subway Ride. These guys certainly are — the creatives behind Dockers and Career Builder both took the same concept of making all the actors take their pants off. The worst part: the ads ran back-to-back (pun intended). Dockers, whose ad ran second must really be chaffed (sorry).
You can watch all the ads at USA Today.
What did you think? Which were your favorite ads? Biggest letdowns? Got any great ideas for how these companies might have put their money to better use? Share them with us here.
Sarah
My favorite ad was the Letterman/ Leno / Oprah one just because A) I didn’t see it coming B) It was short and focused.
So many of the other ads seemed to lack a focus. Who was the target? What was the message?
The Coke ads were a mess, the Bud ads their worst I’d seen in years, and as you mentioned – the Superbowl Shuffle…a TOTAL disaster.
Although I agree with you – who really cares anymore?
Feb 08, 2010 @ 10:43 am
Josh Levine
Yeah, the Oprah ad was funny.
And you’re totally right, the Super Bowl epitomizes what’s wrong with advertising: Way too much emphasis on creative, not nearly enough on strategy or understanding consumers.
Feb 08, 2010 @ 11:22 am
Steve Callahan
I agree with your take on Super Bowl ads. One ad that strategically met it’s audience was the Google ad. Love ‘em or hate ‘em “Google’ is part of our lives and they wrapped consumer value into a simple emotional narrative thread.
i think FloTV missed the mark on the sports ad by going down the private escape path as opposed to sharing the excitement path. They are getting there and I liked the will.i.am spot.
Feb 08, 2010 @ 11:54 am
Josh Levine
Thanks Steve. The Google ad was great, although for a moment I thought it was a Wikipedia ad, since a few of the answers were coming from there.
Feb 08, 2010 @ 11:58 am
Cynthia Murnane
I also thought that Tim Tebow’s Focus on the Family Super Bowl Ad was a really interesting study on how media works in today’s world. I personally did not follow the conversation leading up to it, but I know it was a huge point of controversy. Yet, the ad itself was very unassuming, has been described as a sort of “e-harmony” ad and in it’s simple way, even one of the wittier ads shown. The controversy surrounding it just helped the advertiser to maximize their return.
Overall I felt the total portfolio of commercials were lacking and missed most marks. Wonder whether ad testing was down, or whether client input was up? Something went amiss.
Feb 08, 2010 @ 1:26 pm
Johanna
I love Google and loved their ad… what was completely lacking was an interactive use of social media. The Grammys sort of did it in a live telecast: submitting pics to the Peas performance (though the telecast didn’t show that screen too much) and voting for the Bon Jovi song (are B.Jovi fans the right age for social media).
Side note on the grammys, tho not SMO, why didn’t our 3D glasses from Avatar work on the MJ tribute?
Feb 08, 2010 @ 1:28 pm
Josh Levine
Thanks Cynthia, I didn’t get the Tebow ad, but the surrounding conversation definitely helped create some buzz — probably more than the spot itself.
Feb 08, 2010 @ 1:38 pm
Josh Levine
It’s funny, maybe advertisers consider the Super Bowl their last bastion of “pure” advertising space where they still get a significant audience and don’t have to resort to social tactics they don’t really believe in anyway. Even Vizio, who showed its new interactive TV, didn’t do anything interactive.
I don’t know the answer to your Grammy question, since I didn’t watch the Grammys, Avatar, or the MJ tribute. Last time I had a pair of 3-D glasses on was at Captain EO in the ’80s.
Feb 08, 2010 @ 1:42 pm