snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Non-UL Chat > Amusement Bark

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 05 February 2013, 02:29 PM
Beachlife!'s Avatar
Beachlife! Beachlife! is offline
 
Join Date: 22 June 2001
Location: Lansing, MI
Posts: 25,704
Default

I have to agree with Meka, I didn't care for either the Jeep or Dodge commercial which were so similar I thought they were from the same car company at first.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05 February 2013, 02:46 PM
Meka Meka is offline
 
Join Date: 20 December 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 917
Default

Technically speaking, they are - Jeep and Dodge... err, I guess it's Ram for the trucks now... are both Chrysler brands.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05 February 2013, 03:05 PM
Mad Jay's Avatar
Mad Jay Mad Jay is offline
 
Join Date: 19 July 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 13,466
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meka View Post
When the ad in question has nothing to do with the product, and then shoehorns a product placement in at the end, I think I'm allowed to call them on it.
I don't see what Clydesdale horses have to do with beer, either
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05 February 2013, 03:13 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 19,845
Default

The Clydesdale horses are specifically used by Budweiser for advertising. They aren't a seperate entity that has nothing to do with Budweiser that Budweiser just grabbed onto.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05 February 2013, 03:15 PM
Mad Jay's Avatar
Mad Jay Mad Jay is offline
 
Join Date: 19 July 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 13,466
Default

They still have nothing to do with beer. The Clydesdale horses have always been showing things that have nothing to do with beer and then shoehorning a product placement in the end
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05 February 2013, 03:15 PM
gopher's Avatar
gopher gopher is offline
 
Join Date: 06 January 2005
Location: Sunderland, Northumbria, UK
Posts: 2,056
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
The Clydesdale horses are specifically used by Budweiser for advertising. They aren't a seperate entity that has nothing to do with Budweiser that Budweiser just grabbed onto.
Historically and still occasionally today, beer was delivered by horse-drawn drays pulled by Clydesdales.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05 February 2013, 03:17 PM
Mad Jay's Avatar
Mad Jay Mad Jay is offline
 
Join Date: 19 July 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 13,466
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gopher View Post
Historically and still occasionally today, beer was delivered by horse-drawn drays pulled by Clydesdales.
Historically, and still today, farmers have been using Dodge trucks while farming.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05 February 2013, 03:18 PM
Meka Meka is offline
 
Join Date: 20 December 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 917
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Jay
I don't see what Clydesdale horses have to do with beer, either
Except for the fact that they've appeared in Budweiser commercials for years, to the point where the company would sue any other beer manufacturer that tried to use them in a commercial, absolutely nothing.

If the Budweiser commercial had said, "Horses did not choose to work for humans. Horses work long hours without complaint. Horses sleep in unheated barns, suffer quietly, are one catastrophic injury from being put to death, and still do their jobs - Buy Budweiser!" then your comparison would be valid. The Clydesdale commercial made it plain from the beginning that it was for beer, and never tried to be a "Support horses!" ad.

Quote:
The Clydesdale horses have always been showing things that have nothing to do with beer and then shoehorning a product placement in the end
Have you actually seen the commercial in question? The Budweiser logo is prominent throughout. The Ram commercial, if memory serves, showed exactly one truck, with the tailgate down and no logos visible, before the last 2 seconds of the commercial, when it finally reveals that it's for Ram trucks.

Last edited by Meka; 05 February 2013 at 03:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05 February 2013, 03:19 PM
Beachlife!'s Avatar
Beachlife! Beachlife! is offline
 
Join Date: 22 June 2001
Location: Lansing, MI
Posts: 25,704
Jolly Roger

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meka View Post
Technically speaking, they are - Jeep and Dodge... err, I guess it's Ram for the trucks now... are both Chrysler brands.
Good point, I wonder if it was the same advertising company that did both commercials.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05 February 2013, 03:22 PM
Mateus's Avatar
Mateus Mateus is offline
 
Join Date: 07 September 2001
Location: Bridgeport, CT
Posts: 3,768
Canada

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
Apparently girls are incapable of playing football (or doing any of that other stuff?), on any team.
Ironic given that one of Roger Godell's guests at that very Super Bowl was Sam Gordon, 9-year-old Running Back and Wheaties Box honouree.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 05 February 2013, 03:28 PM
Mad Jay's Avatar
Mad Jay Mad Jay is offline
 
Join Date: 19 July 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 13,466
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meka View Post
Except for the fact that they've appeared in Budweiser commercials for years, to the point where the company would sue any other beer manufacturer that tried to use them in a commercial, absolutely nothing.

If the Budweiser commercial had said, "Horses did not choose to work for humans. Horses work long hours without complaint. Horses sleep in unheated barns, suffer quietly, are one catastrophic injury from being put to death, and still do their jobs - Buy Budweiser!" then your comparison would be valid. The Clydesdale commercial made it plain from the beginning that it was for beer, and never tried to be a "Support horses!" ad.
Your original complaint was that Dodge is exploiting feelings for selling cars. You are moving the goalposts now by saying that they didn't use the company logo during the ad (and btw, the Dodge ad did show the Ram several times during the ad) The way you worded your original complaint was that you didn't like the car ads because they were using emotions to sell you cars, at the same time you said you liked the Clydesdale ad. However, the Clydesdale ad uses the same marketing schtick that the Ram ad uses. Both ads induce an emotion into you in the hopes that you will identify that emotion with the product. Just because Budweiser has been using the schtick for years doesn't mean that they aren't using that schtick now

I agree with you that Dodge underplaying their brand during most of the ad is a good reason not to like the ad.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05 February 2013, 03:48 PM
Meka Meka is offline
 
Join Date: 20 December 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 917
Default

Then my original post was poorly thought out. Had the truck ad been structured similarly to the beer ad, making it plain from the beginning what it was selling and with a message along the lines of, "Dear farmers, we at Dodge (Ram?) Trucks are proud to be your truck of choice..." then I may well have been more receptive to it* (or at least not disliked it nearly as much). As structured, the ad barely mentions its intended product until the very end, and counts on the warm feelings it (hopefully) developed for an at best tangentially related subject to carry over when the company logo finally flashes on the screen. I personally thought that approach backfired, as did most of the people I watched the Super Bowl with.

*Though I am at present in the market for neither a truck nor beer.

Truce?

Last edited by Meka; 05 February 2013 at 03:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05 February 2013, 04:04 PM
Spam & Cookies-mmm's Avatar
Spam & Cookies-mmm Spam & Cookies-mmm is offline
 
Join Date: 09 July 2002
Location: Northwest Florida
Posts: 12,866
Default

See, I thought the worst commercial that I saw during the SB was the one with the lucky chair. It was bizarre, and we were all so distracted with "who's that guy?" that even though we saw it at least two times, we never figured out what the ad was for.

No one believed me that it was Stevie Wonder. I had to google it.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05 February 2013, 04:10 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 19,845
Default

One thing to note is that the Jeep ad also included the USO at the end. If the USO didn't pay for the ad, then that means the commerical could help the USO as well as sell more Jeeps.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05 February 2013, 04:44 PM
Ryda Wong, EBfCo. Ryda Wong, EBfCo. is offline
 
Join Date: 14 December 2005
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 23,786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spam & Cookies-mmm View Post
No one believed me that it was Stevie Wonder. I had to google it.
I kept on thinking it might be the guy who played the Lord of Song in the Once More With Feeling Buffy episode
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 05 February 2013, 05:19 PM
Spamamander's Avatar
Spamamander Spamamander is offline
 
Join Date: 01 January 2006
Location: Central WA
Posts: 4,383
Default

I only picked out that it was Stevie Wonder because of the use of the song "Superstitious". Then it clicked.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 05 February 2013, 07:26 PM
Meka Meka is offline
 
Join Date: 20 December 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 917
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spam & Cookies-mmm View Post
See, I thought the worst commercial that I saw during the SB was the one with the lucky chair. It was bizarre, and we were all so distracted with "who's that guy?" that even though we saw it at least two times, we never figured out what the ad was for.

No one believed me that it was Stevie Wonder. I had to google it.
It took me two viewings to figure out it wasn't their chair to begin with, that they were trying to put a curse on an opposing fan's chair (I think ). And having seen it twice, I still couldn't tell you what they were selling off the top of my head.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 05 February 2013, 07:31 PM
Beachlife!'s Avatar
Beachlife! Beachlife! is offline
 
Join Date: 22 June 2001
Location: Lansing, MI
Posts: 25,704
Default

Bud Light. Apparently the going rate for a good voodoo curse is a six pack.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 05 February 2013, 07:59 PM
Mateus's Avatar
Mateus Mateus is offline
 
Join Date: 07 September 2001
Location: Bridgeport, CT
Posts: 3,768
Canada

I'd gladly tank every single one of my favourite teams' seasons* and pay a six-pack of Bud Light just to have Zoe Saldana sit in my recliner.





*Not that a single one of them are any good as it is.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 05 February 2013, 09:59 PM
JoeBentley's Avatar
JoeBentley JoeBentley is offline
 
Join Date: 23 June 2002
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 21,798
Default

Ya see everyone is up in arms about the first GoDaddy commercial where I was more bugged by the second, mainly because it actually was about 80% clever, well written, and actually fit in with GoDaddy's (which is as much a glorified URL squatting service as a proper webhost) business model... and then fell completely apart in the last 10 seconds or so.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Commercials you actually like Lainie Amusement Bark 864 11 October 2014 01:09 AM
Commercials that shoot themselves in the foot Sue Business Bytes 129 08 July 2013 07:14 PM
Coca-Cola to air commercials addressing obesity snopes The Bad Gastronomer 0 14 January 2013 08:11 PM
TV Commercials That Get a Bit Too Personal snopes Snopes Spotting 8 17 August 2007 06:53 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.