Thog's Science Masterclass #17 (I think)
Jun. 26th, 2009 08:15 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
realthogThanks to blogger Elizabeth Gettelman on the Mother Jones magazine's site for this:
Burger King, Carl's Jr. Remind Us: Burgers = Sex, Duh
Two sexy burger ad revelations today. First, the burger-as-blow-job Burger King ad burst onto the scene, second, The Hills' Audrina Partridge becomes the latest scantily clad lady to make love to, I mean, to lustily eat a Carl's Jr. burger. [. . .]
The fine-print on this choice Burger King ad:
"Fill your desire for something long, juicy and flame-grilled with the NEW BK SUPER SEVEN INCHER. Yearn for more after you taste the mind-blowing burger that comes with a single beef patty, topped with American cheese, crispy onions and the A1 Thick and Hearty Steak Sauce." [. . .]
In all seriousness, the BK ad is disgusting, but perhaps a bigger deal than degrading ads is that these burgers are really, really bad for us, and for the planet. [. . .] BK doesn't yet list the 7-incher's nutritional profile yet but its Double Whopper with cheese has 1,010 calories and 24 grams of saturated fat, 66 grams total [. . .]
And since Burger King is going racy and explicit in targeting sex-crazed burger eaters, maybe they could unstraddle that fence they're riding with their homepage web promotion touting their commitment to kids, healthy meals, and active lifestyles. "Hey parents!" it exclaims. Hey parents is right.
Just in case you want to know, here's the pic BK are using to help extol the virtues of their succulent 7-incher:
I suppose this could be seen as a way of reducing teenage pregnancies -- you know, because teen girls will think twice if they believe they might find themselves in bed with one of Burger King's products -- but it's hard otherwise to see the campaign as anything more than obnoxiously crass. And, of course, it's promoting perhaps the most extraordinarily unhealthy and environmentally irresponsible diet one might imagine.
Topical Etiquette Hint: If you wish to send letters of protest to your local elected officials, this mightn't be le moment juste to choose John Ensign or Mark Sanford as addressee.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 12:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 02:57 am (UTC)It's like they had a competition at the ad agency to see who could be the most offensive, and this was the winner.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 02:22 am (UTC)Freud's ghost is saying, "I told you so."
no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 02:59 am (UTC)The odd thing is that BK relies for so much its business on families with young kids.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 03:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 08:57 pm (UTC)Freud's ghost is saying, "I told you so."
That'd have been one of the Big Bad Wolf Freuds, would it?
no subject
Date: 2009-06-29 03:10 am (UTC)I agree the ads are offensive. This kind of advertising happens every so often, advertisers testing the waters of sensibility. Back in the eighties there was a Green Giant TV commercial that aired only a few times, but I was one of the lucky viewers to see it before it got pulled:
Little Sprout is running down the garden path as fast as he can on his short little legs while bullet-sized rain drops are falling all around him. He passes Mrs. B canning corn in an open field and shouts as he runs past her, "Not a good day for packing corn, Mrs. B!" In the back ground we see the Green Giant ho ho-ing away, hands on his hips. Then he grabs up Little Sprout. The implications are subtle but nonetheless clear.
The commercial was pulled.
Then there was the depilatory product from Down Under, called "Nads", which was advertised for years on TV.
These recent ads you've posted are tasteless and artless. They'll get pulled. The thing is, they should never have made it to market in the first place.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-29 03:25 am (UTC)"The implications are subtle but nonetheless clear."
They are?
no subject
Date: 2009-06-29 03:43 am (UTC)To Americans the implications were clear. Surely you've heard the expression "packing (fill in the blank)" in this country. I don't know the slang for buggery in England, but the aforementioned expression is commonly used in the States.
Which is why the commercial was pulled.
On the other hand, the Burger King ad is egregiously offensive. But I see this kind of stuff all the time where I live. I'm sick of it too.
I'm sick of a lot of stuff . . .
no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 02:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 02:55 am (UTC)"You know, that fucking BK ad just enrages me."
Same here. It's like a parody of corporate insouciance. Difficult for me to boycott their stuff because I basically never eat it anyway, but . . .
no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 03:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 08:53 pm (UTC)I'm sure the same would apply, but it's a daughter Nathan's raising, not a son.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 09:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-28 04:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-28 01:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 04:00 pm (UTC)"Crass" is the word all right.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 08:56 pm (UTC)"Crass" is the word all right.
One of them, anyway.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 05:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 08:55 pm (UTC)And yet the FCC can go nuts over Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction".
no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 09:31 pm (UTC)She also pointed out that the young woman in the advert is white, while the sandwich is brown, which plays to another trope in the American cultural milieu.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 09:45 pm (UTC)"She also pointed out that the young woman in the advert is white, while the sandwich is brown, which plays to another trope in the American cultural milieu."
Oh yes -- quite right. I confess I hadn't thought of that aspect. I mean, I've only been here a decade, so . . .