It’s the day after the Super Bowl so I suppose it’s de rigueur to comment on the ads and the New York Times does its part with this piece. Here’s how it begins:
No commercial that appeared last night during Super Bowl XLI directly addressed Iraq, unlike a patriotic spot for Budweiser beer that ran during the game two years ago. But the ongoing war seemed to linger just below the surface of many of this yearâ€™s commercials.
We then learn that the violent commercials were influenced by the war (“It was as if Madison Avenue were channeling Doc in ‘West Side Story…'”), the sweet, happy commercials were influenced by the war (“…welcome counterpoint to the martial tone of the evening.”), and the dream commercials were influenced by the war (“Those who wish the last four years of history had never happened could find solace in several commercials that used the device of ending an awful tale by revealing it was only a dream.”). Oh, and those sweet, sappy, Coke commercials? Guess what else they drew on for inspiration? You got it, the”Peace” Coke commercials from the Vietnam war.
This is all so silly it’s hard to believe it made it into the pages of any newspaper, much less the NYT. Perhaps the article’s author, a baby boomerish looking Stuart Elliott, got tired of hearing how to baby boomers everything’s about Vietnam and decided to make everything about Iraq (and a little about Vietnam). I don’t know about “Best” and “Worst,” but I do know I didn’t see any ads about Iraq.
Uh, wait a minute, maybe they were too subtle for me; they were working on a subconscious level. Maybe I just needed the New York Times to tell me what was going on. Yeah, that’s it. Now I understand; those ad guys sure are crafty devils, pushing all those ads at me with the subtext of the Iraq war. Jeez, and me not even catching on!