Showing posts with label sports marketing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sports marketing. Show all posts

Monday, June 9, 2014

Paddy Power are being assholes for a cause now




The Tweet above showed up on Saturday, and people went nuts on the online gambling brand.










But then yesterday, they revealed the whole thing as a "corporate social responsibility" campaign:




Of course it was faked. How could anyone doubt that? But it's interesting to note that Paddy Power, who are not exactly know for social sensitivity in advertising, used predictable outrage as a way to get rainforest issues in front of soccer fans.

No, deforestation is not a laughing matter. But they played Twitter like a piano. And like it or hate it, that's one for the record books.

Thursday, October 10, 2013

Poster puts racialized sports logos in context

Some of you may have seen my comments quoted in a couple of Adweek posts, on September 11 and 30, about the Washington Redskins controversy. Basically, I said that while I understand how passionately the fans hold on to their traditions, the phenomenon of racial epithets and stereotypes in sports logos is ultimately doomed.

One of the common arguments is that nobody would accept the same treatment of other historically oppressed groups in sports marketing. The National Congress of American Indians however, recetly took it to the next level:

"Pro-Football's use of the 'Redskins' mark disparages Native Americans just as 'San Francisco Chinks', 'New York Jews', 'Dallas Wetbacks', 'Houston Greasers' and the 'Green Bay Crackers' would disparage other groups if they were the subject of trademark registrations," states a legal brief sent by the NCAI to the US Supreme Court. They're asking that the "Redskins" trademark be rescinded.




This mysterious poster, however, doesn't seem to appear on the NCAI site, even though it has been attributed to the organization by CBS news. All references to it, however, seem to use the same low-res screenshot posted on Tumblr, four years ago. Due to the recent re-emergence of the issue around the Washington Redskins, however, it has gained new life on the social internet.

Can anyone find the original source?






Monday, July 8, 2013

Surfwear brand pretty much asks "name that ass" #whoamijustguess


Back in June, surfwear brand Roxy released a teaser video featuring its new Roxy Pro Biarritz spokesperson, showing her only from the back:



The surfer has since been revealed to be five-time world champion Stephanie Gilmore.

Via Roxy
However, the teaser video continues to make waves online:





Steve Hall of Adrants reports that video has been dubbed "softcore porn" by some:
Of the video, Macquarie University Professor and advisor to the Australian Sports CommissionCatharine Lumby said, "There is nothing wrong with celebrating fit athletic bodies, I'm all for it, but this goes way beyond. It is really just very voyeuristic." 
A spokesman for the Australian Sports Commission said "The ASC considers it has a responsibility to ensure that images of female athletes are positive and are not sexualised. We discourage promotional activities that lead to female athletes being exploited." 
So which is it? Blatant voyeuristic sexualization of female surfers? Or a simple celebration of beauty?
It's a reasonable point. Pro athletes, male and female alike, are often objectified in popular media because their finely-tuned bodies are both aesthetically pleasing and motivational. But have you ever seen an ad featuring a male athlete with such a single-minded focus on his rump?

That's the problem I see here. Don't get me wrong. Ms. Gilmore has a really nice bum. But to make that anonymous part of her the whole point of being interested in the video — rather than her athletic achievements and accolades —really doesn't help the perception of women in sport. Especially when male sports journalists still feel entitled to comment on whether elite female athletes are "lookers" or not.

Update: There's already a parody.


Friday, March 18, 2011

Will a naked lady get Canadians excited about soccer?

Probably not, but AdFreak just posted this Vancouver Whitecaps "viral smash — at least as far as Canadian soccer ads go":



Although a moderate hit with YouTubers (closing in on 200K hits), apparently Bell's parent company was not impressed:

 “We understand that they’re an exuberant new team eager to get the word out, but this marketing effort clearly didn’t fit with Bell’s expectations,”Marie-Eve Francoeur, a BCE spokeswoman, told the Globe and Mail newspaper Wednesday. “We’ve spoken to the Whitecaps about this issue and they clearly understand our position,” she added.

I'd be more outraged that my logo was obscured.
But the BCE Brand Standards guide probably doesn't have a  rule for this placement.

I was actually shocked by how tame the whole thing was. Usually, body painting is used as an excuse to show lots of nudity, but this video keeps it well-hidden.

Also well-hidden is the billboard that goes with the campaign. Apparently posted at a major intersection in Vancouver, the billboard is part of a social media "treasure hunt", with the Whitecaps offering a pair of tickets to tomorrow's season opener to the first person who posts it on Twitter.

Whitecaps director of marketing Kim Jackman defended the provocative promotional video as demonstrating “the passion soccer fans have for their sport, including the tradition of body-painting and how it is done.”

I'm not seeing the passion for sport, or even the provocation. To me it just looks like a PG-rated fashion ad that, like soccer in Canada, somehow manages to miss its potential.