//** * * */

PETA - Veggie Love (failed superbowl ad) - (2009) :30 (USA)

The reason I am not listing this in the 2009 Super Bowl XLIII commercials topic is because the ad will not run during the bowl, so historically it would be incorrect to label it a superbowl ad. I'm also not labeling it a banned ad since it is simply a rejected ad. They did, according to their press release, try to get this on the Superbowl but NBC said no thanks as it "depicts a level of sexuality exceeding our standards." PETA; as we all know are stuck in adschool 101, where only sex and outrageous sells so they'll use porn stars and compare morbid Greyhound murders to a chicken's life to get your attention. The guy at the party who pukes on the rug gets your attention as well, but it doesn't mean that you'll ever listen to him either. Peta have sent a press release which is quoted inside.

PETA's press release in full;

Women in lingerie caressing broccoli spears, asparagus, and a pumpkin are apparently considered too racy for Super Bowl audiences, according to NBC. The network has benched PETA's new TV ad launch promoting vegetarian foods—a campaign PETA had high hopes of debuting during the big game. Despite initially expressing enthusiasm about the $3 million 30-second spot, which was slated for prime Super Bowl real estate, the network has now announced it will not run the ad because it "depicts a level of sexuality exceeding our standards."

The 30-second ad features models fondling their favorite vegetables to a pounding beat and concludes with the message "Studies Show: Vegetarians Have Better Sex." The scenes, which are amusing and sensual, include a blindfolded woman who erupts with delight after spending a little "quality" time with her asparagus; a woman who performs a seductive dance with a gourd; and another who is so smitten that she makes herself part of a steaming "orgy" of mixed vegetable soup.

PETA wanted the commercial to add balance to the traditional onslaught of Super Bowl commercials for meaty, greasy, and factory-farmed fast food, including those run by KFC. The fast-food giant is a major NBC sponsor—and a target of heavy PETA campaigning as a result of its failure to reform cruel animal welfare practices and slaughter methods. PETA is asking if this relationship could have something to do with NBC's decision to nix the group's ad.

Undulating bodies aside, why do vegetarians make better lovers? For one thing, vegetarians are, on average, fitter and slimmer than meat eaters. Also, heart disease and obesity—both linked to meat consumption—can slow someone down so much that sex can give them a coronary. And the consumption of meat and dairy products is linked to impotence: The cholesterol and saturated fats in meat and other animal products restrict the flow of blood to all the body's vital organs—not just to the heart.

"PETA's veggie ads are locked out while ads for fried chicken and burgers are allowed—even though these foods make Americans fat, sick, and boring in bed," says PETA Senior Vice President Lisa Lange. "Sexy women and the Super Bowl go together like bees and flowers. Whether you're a 250-pound linebacker, a fan, or a 'football widow,' the smartest thing you can do to make sure that you're around for next year's Super Bowl is to go vegetarian."


Adland® is supported by your donations alone. You can help us out by buying us a Ko-Fi coffee.
Anonymous Adgrunt's picture
Files must be less than 1 MB.
Allowed file types: jpg jpeg gif png wav avi mpeg mpg mov rm flv wmv 3gp mp4 m4v.
claymore's picture

From what I can tell, "banned" means "we didn't have the three million dollars."

Dabitch's picture

The only thing that ad sells is 100% beef thermometers. sorry

malkie66's picture

These PETA spots just get worse and worse don't they? "The scenes, which are amusing and sensual" should read "The scenes, which are cheesy and boring".

Allan1's picture

Shouldn't they call their site PETA.ORGY???
Or shouldn't that be PETA.SOLO?

RyanDrumwright's picture

@Claymore I disagree. "Banned" means "I dont have to spend 3 mil to create buzz" Think about it.... How many ads did we watch tonight, that we will NOT talk about? Then think how much people are talking about this ad, that wasn't even placed...

@Dabitch I love this line. I may use it some day, "The guy at the party who pukes on the rug gets your attention as well, but it doesn't mean that you'll ever listen to him either".


Dabitch's picture

We don't throw the word "banned" around here lightly. When we say "banned" we mean that the ASA, The ERK or the ITA or some other countries ad-watchdog actually forbade the ad or campaign from running (again). This usually happens well after a campaign has stopped running, mind you, but a rejected-by-the-network ad is not a banned ad. A banned ad breaks either advertising laws or the gentlemans agreement known as the Consolidated ICC Code of Marketing and Advertising (or in most cases, both) so that a regulatory body can actually ban it. NBC is not such a body, it's a media-channel.

So, when you look at it that way, stamping "banned" on any ad is just another way to say "outrageous/bad taste/risque" in one word and then wait for the flies to be attracted to the honey. It's an age-old trick and how hackers used to spread viruses on gnutella networks. "Banned commercials" turns out to be Nimda-virus loaded crud. ;)

But sure, if I labeled all ads that were slightly off-kilter as banned!, we'd likely attract a lot more traffic and generate more attention. That doesn't make the label correct though.

AnonymousCoward's picture

Oh wow, this got every one going - fascinating input mixed with a good read.