What you didn't see

Sex and the superbowl (and all of network television for that matter) have a history so complex, so on-again-off-again it puts the byzantine plots of daytime soaps to shame. In recent history we most prominently remember the Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction of 4 years past (yeah, it’s been that long). In 9/16ths of a second and one tittie later the American adscape changed irrevocably.

Outraged by the events of nipplegate, our government stepped up it’s restrictions and controls of content, especially during the big game. American network television has always been comparativly sanitized– even neutered– when viewed in the light of european TV.

I drag all this out so we have some context to talk about PETA. Specifically to talk about the following ad. An ad you did not see during Sunday's game, because NBC refused to air it. It's this refusal, and the resulting coverage that's so fascinating. (NOTE: unless you work in the most white-bread of offices, this is probably safe for work):

'Veggie Love': PETA's Banned Super Bowl Ad

Welcome back. I know you all want to go out and fuck the ever loving shit out of a pumpkin right now, but please, restrain your passions till the end of the post (then have at it, that squash is asking for it). So lets not concern ourselves with the actual quality of the ad. All told I think it’s probably a 4.5 (of 10). The production quality is pretty good for a not for profit. The typography is a bit... Er... Well the typography sucks real hard. But that’s not the point.

So what’s the point? Well the point is were here talking about an ad we weren’t supposed to see. PETA sure didn’t plunk down 3 mil on the barrelhead like everyone else who got beamed to us during the game and yet they got just as much Monday morning watercooler lip service as the clydesdales and the ball jokes. The Gorgon sisters of view even gave it a chat up:


All press being good press is old news, and banned books always sell well, but you have to wonder what PETA was thinking. If they were smart enough to realize that by going just a little bit over the line they would be able to get the wine at the cost of the cork good for them. But the group has a history of shock advertising that’s... What’s the best way to put it... A bit more adversarial. For example (maybe safe for work):


Too Hot for TV: PETA's Banned Ads

Aggressive ads like this have been PETA’s stock in trade for a while now; It leads me to think they lucked out on this media coup. Truth be told I imagine a PETA board room meeting was probably had to discuss how to tune down the companies attitude to make their ads more suitable for network, the result is the commercial we see above.

I also imagine a PETA board room smelling like flax seed/burdock root farts and unfinished liberal arts/women's studies degrees, but that’s just me.