How many of these marketing campaigns do you remember? Let us know in the comments below. For more content like this, click here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-G2_MeIzk0Tw.html
As someone that rolls their eyes that masked killers are always able to catch up to their victims without even trying to run in horror movies, I actually thought the Nike ad was funny
I will never understand why people think the ad is misogynistic. She escapes danger on her own without needing anybody else to save her. That's a *positive* female trait! Did the people who complained ever hear of slasher movies?
@@shf500 It’s because the trope itself is, even if the ad didn’t show it. That said, it’s a funny subversion of it so the only problematic part I see is it airing during a family program like the Olympics
That suicide car ad. I can’t *believe* that got through *how many* MBAs & ad executives? Not *one* person thought “this could be triggering or insensitive?”
I was wondering the same thing.... Like how many PR reps and marketing people does Hyundai have and how many people did that go through to get onto the Air?
The only so called celebrities to have been directly related in some way in two of the most controversial marketing campaigns, The Kardashians. Even though Kim may have apologised on behalf of the company, an apology from someone like her is just a little tough to take seriously for some reason.
Oh, that isn't nearly the worst thing about Balenciaga's choices. Go over the props on their ads with a magnifying glass. One of them, a document in a purse, is considered a win for kiddie pornographers. Considering how much attention is paid to everything in that kind of ad, there's no way it happened on accident.
@Amanda StJohn That’s what really annoyed me! The issue here isn’t that kids were in the adverts as Balenciaga seems to claim. There are plenty of other designers with kids in their campaigns that have no controversy whatsoever. The issue is the bears being in bondage outfits for literally no reason and there being props which are literally entirely about child pornography.
Also going to add, this does not mean I think the other props like wine etc were appropriate either, but this fundamentally should never have been allowed as a campaign in the first place.
@@amandastjohn4735 Maybe you can help me out, bc I seem to be confused. I looked up US v Williams, and the way I'm reading this is that the decision said that prohibiting pandering of child pornography (whether you actually possess child pornography or not) does not infringe on 1A rights. What that means is that people do NOT have the right to pander child pornography, whether they actually possess it or not. So, it upheld that pandering child pornography is illegal. How is that a win for child pornography creators?
What if he used that as a way to get out of debt? Or a way to not be held accountable for any crazy cash interactions? Oh sorry your honor my identity was stolen 14 times
@@grahamdamberger7130 I remember seeing a video where someone took a McDonald's burger and made a time lapse of it over a period of time (maybe a month?) and there was literally no change since it's so full of chemical stuff. The commercial reminded me of it, and honestly, I'd rather have a burger that grows moldy in a month...
I'm surprised they didn't mention the obvious issue with the Budweiser ad also implying (though perhaps not on purpose) that predators can remove 'no' from her vocabulary.
You probably wouldn't be able to do that either, Those who received them also found themselves in legal hot water for trying to send them back, since that's transport of an illegal weapon.
Most won't remember it in fact, most countries never saw it. I suppose you're technically correct, it's impossible to forget something you were never aware of...
Wow! I knew about the Lifelock guy sharing his social security number along with the predictable results, but I had no clue that the company itself was fined as a result of that stunt. Talk about an own goal!
Definitely devolve no one can have a laugh anymore otherwise the pc babies will complain about their precious feelings getting hurt. They should really just grow a thicker skin they are jokes. They are meant to offend.
LMAO at EA Games distributing brass knuckles and being dissed for it, because it's "a dangerous weapon" while you can buy a gun on every corner in the U.S. This uproar would make perfect sense outside the U.S. but not in it.
@@mrpants5462 No need to. If you are not a criminal and have money for a nice glock it isn't that hard. Or did I imagine all those mass shootings by teenagers, running wildly with semi-automatic weapon... Walmart sells guns, for forks sake, a damn department store. 😂
@@mrpants5462 What about it? As I said, the whole situation with EA Games was just ridiculous, since brass knuckles are nothing compared to guns which are easily accessible in the U.S. I just called out hypocrisy and that's all.
I used to like Mr T's "Snickers" ad as a child, but now I can see how emasculating it was. The "You're Not You when You're Hungry" ad was funnier, in my opinion.
That started with Betty White and Ave Vegoda in one commercial. They also had Joe Pesce and Robin Williams in a couple others. Those were pretty hilarious.
That figure is disputed just based on the grounds of “correlation does not equal causation” especially as they had been losing money for years at that point mostly due to increased competition
I can name two commercials off the top of my head: 1) Toyota 4 Runner (2011) where a 5 year old speaks that he doesn’t tolerate dorkiness and that his parents should just buy the new 4 Runner. 2) Luvs diaper commercial (same year) where their new style is a disposable diaper that looked like denim jeans.
Kendal Jenner getting paids millions of dollars to do a commercial and its only used once. You know she got that money whole and not as x amount of times the commercial was shown on networks.
No one w the influence she has would ever agree to be paid based on how many times a commercial runs. Anyone in show business w clout gets paid for the job, regardless of the outcome.
Wow. I do remember some of those. I sure wish I had gone to the Red Lobster Crab legs deal, I was here then and I can't believe I missed it, dang it. Plenty Upsies were happening !!
There used to be a diaper commercial for “ overnight “ disposable diapers. Unfortunately, I can’t remember the brand but I believe that it might have been Pampers. They had these butterflies flitting around and a voiceover saying “ catch one, two, three, even four or more!” Supposedly butterflies but the connotation was that you could put that diaper on your baby and not have to change it for about two days. It got pulled.
Easy, it's called "Ethnocentric marketing", essentially, they don't change the way their ads are presented from country to country, regardless of the fact that different countries have different slang, attitudes towards certain demographics, etc. Something that's harmless in one country is considered super offensive in another. This happens a lot with international companies. It isn't the case for all companies, mind you, but several of these examples are because of that.
To be fair to Lego they don't just do Rainbow Capitalism during June. Trust me I see people bitching constantly about spotting pride and ally flags on figures shirts and on vehicles all the time. Plus they did a good course correction when the differently abled community took issue with something. Many years ago, the first wheelchair piece produced was for a grandpa figure in a Duplo set. The community got upset and Lego was quick to issue an apology, not realizing what kind of issue this would be. Not long after the first wheelchair piece was introduced in the Lego City people pack "A Day at the Park" set. There it was just a normal looking man in the wheelchair having fun with everyone else. They didn't even put him front and center on the packaging but rather just meshed him in with everyone else.
Same with Target, they support the community year round and include lgbtqa+ people in their ads and tell people to suck it when they throw fits about it.
Bit weird that an old man in a wheelchair is offensive... Kind've ageist Like I understand people wanting representation, but thats not something they should have apologised for. Simply releasing that new set should have been enough.
@@mrheyfuckoff1 I thought it was a bit over reactionary myself. But I think the explanation was that they thought it only showed that older people at the end of life needed wheelchairs. I'm not a part of that group so I don't really know their POV, so I just prefer to think of how Lego took a simple action to make things right and didn't make a big deal about it.
People will call anything misogynistic these days. How is a horror movie esque killer chasing after a woman considered misogynistic? They're not killing them just because they're a woman and they hate women, they're killing them because they're a killer.
Maybe a lot of people didn't understand the focus of the horror movie ad. I take it as how good those running shoes are that the woman can outrun a vicious killer!
Pretty interesting. Failed Ad Campaigns are nothing new, it would be interesting to some historic failures from the past. I don't mean ads that would be considered offensive today, but rather multi-million-dollar campaigns that totally failed at the time. For example, The Edsel, Ford Motors biggest flop.
My little sister was the same, she would burst into tears and run into her room terrified and my dad couldn’t use the chainsaw to prune in the garden there after 😐 GG Nike…
"Why would you want to invent something else?" My thoughts on so many "new directions" You are getting money, people know who you are, and you have a reputation with the products or services you provide.
The Kendell Jenner "Pepsi Can" ad is a riff on the 1967 news photo of a college student offering a flower to an MP during the March on the Pentagon protest; it, unfortunately, relied upon forgotten history... KDM
Why does a guy need to be your version of "manly"? Let a person be a person. It doesn't cost you anything. If you see somebody not being your version of "manly", the only pain you're feeling is what you give yourself.
Out of all these EXTREMELY inappropriate commercial campaigns and all of these are terrible, the absolute worst one was the Handui commercial whose claim that you couldn't commit suicide via carbon dioxide with this car. The Kendall Jenner one is so on point with that superficial family. They probably don't know what the fuss was about.
The 2022 Jumbo WK controversy commercial. The Netherlands' supermarkt Jumbo made a video commercial during the WK 2022. This video starts with positive with dressing in orange, singing and dancing. But in one scene there is the construction of the WK stadium. As people were told, many worker immigrates were injured and died while building the WK stadium
The Gillette one was kind of sad, really. Their commercial was good, it was basically "be kind to each other and don't be a creep", but men couldn't deal with that without shitting their pants and crying.
@@mattalan6618 How is there anything sad about that? I feel the same. I don't care about advertising. If I want something, it's because I know it's good/useful, not bc of an ad.
You have an over inflated sense of self, then. Advertising isn't just working on your conscious thoughts. It appeals to your subconscious biases and unconscious decision making. No one is above influence.
@Kayla Donn Richardson That's not what I was saying here. The latter of which you mentioned is true for many people; however, you don't know me personally, so you can't say any of that about me specifically without knowing me.
honorable mentions: maple story popsicle ice drop but the banned including china, malaysia, vietnam, brunei, indonesia, and japan. lucky me! pancit canton variants banned across the europe and africa.
Just an added note, the only 'Marketing Fail' I agreed with you on was the Balenciaga ad. That is horrifying, disgraceful, and disgusting. Whoever approved that ad should be put on a pedophile predator list.
2008: I thought that ad was hilarious. Wokeness ruins everything 2010: wow, thats awful 2014: It's called cops doing there job. 2015: it takes 2 to tango 2017: Anything with a Kardashian/Jenner is never a good thing. They bring nothing good on society 2020: an honest commercial. i liked it 2021: way to pander to minorities 2022: this is disgusting. The people in charge should be thrown in jail for this.
2008: The soccer one with the guy pretending to be injured was hillarious, but the one about the man walking could be read as homophobic because of how he was portrayed, ironically the gatekeeping portraits masculinity as something so fragile and it ads to the humour. 2015: No means no, it takes two to dance tango but they need to consent to do so, dancing horizontal tango with an uncousious drunken person for "not taking a no" is rape. 2021: The gays didn't asked for it, rainbow marketing works for some brand who actually support queer people since the begining and have contributed to causes over the years, but then everyone jumped the bandweagon being hypocritical about their superficial support only during one month, no one asked for it. I agree on everything else, specially the Balenciaga pedo shit, they knew what they were doing, portraiying kids in sexual manners with bdsm gear, showing a law that permits child p. depictions and the book showing the name of an artist who also has child abuse artwork is all referencing the same thing, unsurprisingly the creators of the campaign have sexual charges against them in their past meaning they were obviously just trying to normalize their perversions and the company was a-ok with it all the while they hired them with criminal record and all so it means that at it's core the whole company is rotten.
It's hilarious how people will see a company do something blatantly obvious like the pepsi thing then rightfully call it out for mindless virtue signaling pandering. But they ignore it the rest of the time. Basically it has to be so dumb and blatant for people to call it out. But then when companies do the same exact thing but less cringe worthy people seal clap and praise it. Companies do not care about you or whatever silly social issue you care about. They care about making money. If hating on black people became mainstream and was pushed by the media you'd suddenly start seeing a bunch of anti-black commercials from these same companies.
Ad agencies or companies not led by sociopaths don't make these kinds of mistakes. Here in Britain, we have our share of ads obviously decided and dictated by THE BOSS and they usually cause the company to collapse within a year or two. The Consignia one isn't the only one (buying all-new fleet of thousands of vehicles, rather than slowly introduce the name as new ones and offices were changed over?), there have been other companies that actually tried to set up competing phone boxes when mobile phones began and died a quick and ignominious death.
