Video: The forbidden Motrin ad
posted at 4:29 pm on November 17, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Even more scandalous than the forbidden Mr. T “Snickers” ad: Johnson & Johnson snarked mildly about carrying babies in pouches being some sort of fashion statement, thereby igniting an uprising on Twitter among parents, followed by the inevitable groveling apology and withdrawal of the ad. Below you’ll find the offending ad followed by a sampling of Tweets tapped out on keyboards amid heavy breathing into paper bags. Manufactured new media outrage 1, corporate America 0.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Heh! Wish I’d read this earlyer! I do the exact same thing, I find avoidance helps a lot!
4shoes on November 17, 2008 at 10:42 PM
It’s not just a river in Egypt…
;-)
Y-not on November 17, 2008 at 11:34 PM
The ad is funny. Most ads are boring, soulless, and generally just make me feel either irritated or numb.
If you’re a mom that’s actually offended by this… know that I’m offended by your offense.
Does that make things equal?… because if the standard of offense is entirely arbitrary then it should.
Let it go.
Karmashock on November 18, 2008 at 12:29 AM
Sounds like these women need Midol, not Motrin.
Oh yeah, I went there.
Mark Jaquith on November 18, 2008 at 1:56 AM
These women thought Obama was completely innocent of any sexism during the election, but they were offended by a Motrin commercial? STFU.
I always thought the Native American baby sling was considerate in cities where strollers are a pain on the sidewalk, while crossing the street and when running to catch a taxi, train or bus. It just seemed convenient and fun for a baby.
chunderroad on November 18, 2008 at 2:37 AM
I’m as pro-life, pro-child, & conservative as anyone, & I don’t have a problem with the ad.
Some people love to be offended?
ccc on November 18, 2008 at 6:15 AM
Well, we’ve heard from the guys, can we now hear from a mom. I resent the idea of baby carriers being a fashion statement. It’s outrageous. I didn’t carry my baby in carriers and car carriers to make a “fashion statement.” I did it because I loved my children and wanted to take care of them. I don’t blame women for resenting that commercial. It wasn’t funny. It just showed the same kind of obtuse blind spot men have for babies, that has men say they are “babysitting” their own children. You ever hear a mom say she’s “babysitting” her own children? Men!
samurai7 on November 18, 2008 at 7:57 AM
What the moms in the second video found offensive about the ad was that it said moms who carried their babies in baby carriers didn’t do it because they thought it was best for their babies but because their babies were fashion statements. The ad questioned the moms’ motives for babycarrying. It’s the latest fashion, I look like a real mom etc. Instead of ignoring the ad, they let Motrin have it.
As a mom to three kids, I wasn’t offended by the ad, but the ad failed to do what it was supposed to do: sell Motrin. I wonder why an ad agency hired to sell Motrin to babycarrying moms would make an that made babycarrying moms look shallow and superficial. You don’t insult your audience and then say “buy our product.”
Now in the interest of full disclosure, I’m a mom blogger in addition to being a political blogger, and I know several of the moms in the outrage video. The original Tweeter is a mom entrepreneur and a successful one at that. She was smart to create this outrage campaign against Motrin because it got her a lot of positive attention from her target audience, which is moms, and that’s more than Motrin accomplished.
Kim Priestap on November 18, 2008 at 8:44 AM
Sorry. 2nd paragraph, line 3: “make an ad that made…”
Kim Priestap on November 18, 2008 at 8:46 AM
An ad doesn’t really sell anything, it’s intended to drive the product name into your head. So, the next time you run/walk/skip/jog to the pain killer aisle you think, “Hmmm, what brand? Oh yeah, I’ve heard of Motrin.” Bad news is good news, perhaps, in this case. That’s the problem with public outrage over some product ads.
Hard to find this one offensive, though, even if it says the sling is merely a fashion statement. They aren’t allowed to criticize it and play with the idea I take it?
thequeball on November 18, 2008 at 9:32 AM
Motrin Moms? Sorry, I buy generic. However, I did wear my firstborn for a while. She was a clingy baby. I’m not out for Motrin blood, but it does seem the ad is a bit rude. They used terms with negative connotations: “in fashion,” “supposedly,” and “makes me look like an official mom”. Any student in high school Language Arts can tell you that those were bad words choices. This ad portrays baby wearing as a fashion statement akin to stilettos or ankle tattoos. That’s poor marketing when you’re selling to hormone-revved moms who love their children and take motherhood quite seriously. A bit too seriously sometimes, but it’s still a flop of an ad campaign.
Mrs. Happy Housewife on November 18, 2008 at 9:44 AM
Wearing a Bjorn/sling is a LOT less wearing than carrying a baby in arms. I don’t “wear” my kids, but when they’ve been grouchy, a carrier is a GREAT relief.
Prufrock on November 18, 2008 at 10:26 AM
Haha. Laundry detergent companies should get in on the theme. The biggest problem with any baby sling is that there is no such thing as a leak proof diaper! Imagine the howls of outrage over that commercial.
bitsy on November 18, 2008 at 11:18 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2