January 23, 2011

Why would a mainstream news outlet do a story based on the assertion by a private company that its Super Bowl ad got rejected?

The network refuses to comment on claims it has rejected an ad, so all you've got is a company with an immense self-interest in lying about it. You know, I'm not even going to link to the news website I'm talking about, because the answer to the question in the post title is that the news site is whoring for traffic. The private company would like to promote its product without forking out the millions needed to buy air time on the Super Bowl, and the news site would like to be the go-to place for ad, which isn't clever enough to go viral without the boost of the banned-from-the-Super-Bowl claim. Moreover, the product is shoddy and not worth talking about. Don't be a sucker.

28 comments:

MikeR said...

Link?

AllenS said...

Don't be a sucker.

Thank you for making up my mind for me.

Mr. D said...

But other than that, it's all good.

Quayle said...

mainstream news is now about reporting on the prediction about the reporting.

Actual news? Please. They're proud to say that in their sphere they don't sully themselves with such things.

Florida said...

You should at least name the news outlet in question.

bagoh20 said...

OK Althouse, how much did they pay you for that?

PaulV said...

It was from an organization that killed dogs and dumped them into trash dumpsters just before Ron Mexico was caught dog fighting;
The alias of the NFL quarterback was used to protect the guilty.

WV: fiathwat-obscene mocking of Eagle QB

MrBuddwing said...

This wouldn't be the FOX story about the website that claims (supposedly as a joke) that the Christian Messiah is contemptuous of the current chief executive of the USA, would it?

Word verification: thydrt.

ironrailsironweights said...

Late one recent night I saw a commercial on a cable channel for this vacuum device that promises to improve a man's sexual performance. It was easy to laugh at such a ridiculous thing, except when the spokesman claimed that Medicare and private insurance companies will pay for the device. What a waste of money!

Peter

johannalapp said...

Or was this the ad protesting against AshleyJefferson.com, the horrible awful web site that facilitates adulterous fornication with hot chicks without getting caught?

Because I thought the conservative message of that ad (do NOT visit DolleyMadison.com, where sinning is made easy and uncomplicated) seemed like great advice and a real consumer protection.

Crimso said...

Perhaps it was the ad for Doritos and Pepsi (poking fun at Catholics, who are notorious for not murdering people that poke fun at them) that Faux Noise covered this morning.

Beldar said...

Prof. A, even your "don't be a sucker" taunt will drive some people (suckers) to do the research to find it.

But you knew that, right? ;)

edutcher said...

Crimso said...

Perhaps it was the ad for Doritos and Pepsi (poking fun at Catholics, who are notorious for not murdering people that poke fun at them) that Faux Noise covered this morning.

In comparison to the Moslems, I presume?

Crimso said...

I don't comment here a lot, edutcher, but I hope you have seen enough to know I'm sarcastically using "Faux Noise." And you're not being presumptuous.

I somehow doubt we'll see the usual suspects on the left that love the term "know-nothing" use it correctly for once in reference to this ad. (For the record, I was raised Catholic, but consider myself an agnostic).

AllenS said...

ironrailsironweights said...
Late one recent night I saw a commercial on a cable channel for this vacuum device that promises to improve a man's sexual performance.

Do you have a link for that?

edutcher said...

Crimso said...

I don't comment here a lot, edutcher, but I hope you have seen enough to know I'm sarcastically using "Faux Noise." And you're not being presumptuous.

I somehow doubt we'll see the usual suspects on the left that love the term "know-nothing" use it correctly for once in reference to this ad. (For the record, I was raised Catholic, but consider myself an agnostic).


No sweat.

I am not the best Catholic in the world, by any means, but I can be a little trigger-happy when I hear someone take what looks like a shot at the Church.

bagoh20 said...

ironrailsironweights: "What a waste of money!

What if they sell a little toupee accessory for it?

I think that device works. It cures the man's sexual problem by completely eliminating the need for his wife's cooperation.

Crimso said...

"I am not the best Catholic in the world, by any means, but I can be a little trigger-happy when I hear someone take what looks like a shot at the Church."

I actually remember it fondly, and have discovered that the church I went to as a child (late 60's/early 70's) doesn't seem to exist anymore. When I've felt the need to at least appear religious (a feeling which never lasts), I've tried Catholic, but they all seem now to be just imitations of the many Protestant services I've been to. Not nearly as ritualistic as it was, and what should a religion fundamentally be in worship but ritualistic?

ironrailsironweights said...

When I've felt the need to at least appear religious (a feeling which never lasts), I've tried Catholic, but they all seem now to be just imitations of the many Protestant services I've been to. Not nearly as ritualistic as it was, and what should a religion fundamentally be in worship but ritualistic?

Some people in your situation have found what they're looking for in Eastern Orthodox churches.

Peter

peter hoh said...

The Pepsi/Doritos commercial doesn't seem to fit the loose description offered by Althouse in this post.

peter hoh said...

Hey other Peter, did you see the music video I recommended for you the other day?

peter hoh said...

Ah, I'm pretty sure I know the ad of which Althouse speaks.

Private company is the clue. Neither PETA nor the satirical website are appropriately described as private companies.

This company has a history of offering to purchase naming rights to venues who, predictably, reject their offer.

Freeman Hunt said...

I have no idea what ad, product, or company is being referenced in this post.

So I guess I'm just supposed to take the blogger's word for it...

Unlikely.

(Even when the blogger is, as in this case, my favorite blogger.)

peter hoh said...

Freeman, send me an email and I'll fill you in.

Freeman Hunt said...

Got it. Thanks, Peter!

AST said...

The term "media whores" is no longer just a metaphor.

abeer ahmed said...

For the latest news visit us on cnn.com
http://whois.domaintasks.com/cnn.com

一笑千年 said...

The earliest designs were preotwuq simple affairs, often mere "Roger Vivier " of leather to protect the feet from rocks, debris, and cold. Since vivier shoes use more leather than sandals, their use was more common in cold climates. By the Middle Ages, turn-vivier shoes had been developed with toggled flaps or drawstrings to tighten the leather around the foot for a better fit. As Europe gained in wealth and power, fancy roger vivier heels became status symbols. Toes became long and pointed, often to ridiculous proportions. Artisans created unique footwear for rich patrons, and new styles developed. Eventually the modern roger vivier flats , with a sewn-on sole, was devised. Since the 17th century, most leather roger vivier pumps have used a sewn-on sole. This remains the standard for finer-quality dress vivier shoes today. Until around 1800, vivier shoes were made without differentiation for the left or right foot. Such roger vivier sale are now referred to as "straights".[citation needed] Only gradually did the modern foot-specific vivier shoes become standard.Since the mid-20th Century, advances in rubber, plastics, synthetic cloth, and industrial adhesives have allowed manufacturers to create roger vivier chaussures that stray considerably from traditional crafting techniques.