Super Bowl Ads: Focus On The Family Spot Sparks Social Debate

The decision by CBS to accept a 30-second "advocacy ad" from Christian group Focus on the Family during Super Bowl XLIV "has set off a debate that is indicative of the polarized climate in the country," according to Stuart Elliott of the N.Y. TIMES. Super Bowl viewers have been "conditioned to watch the spots because they know that, unlike almost every other day of the year, Super Bowl Sunday will bring commercials they might not mind interrupting the show to see." San Diego State Univ. advertising professor George Belch said, "They want to be entertained; they want to see funny ads. Now, does this become a forum where we start to debate controversial issues?" Northwestern Univ.’s Kellogg School of Management marketing professor Tim Calkins: "It makes the Super Bowl a bit of a controversial event." Elliott notes the "extensive discussion about the spot demonstrates a reason advertisers spend so much on Super Bowl commercials: the talk value." Consumers discuss Super Bowl ads "before, during and after they run -- not only in the living room or around the water cooler but also on blogs, Facebook and Twitter." Alterian and Zeta Interactive yesterday separately reported that their "monitoring of online conversations about Super Bowl ads had found that the Focus on the Family spot had already been discussed more than any other planned to run in the game" (N.Y. TIMES, 2/2).

CBS Rejects Ad Submission From Gay Dating Web Site ManCrunch.com

STEPPING OVER THE LINE: Author Dave Zirin in a special to the N.Y. DAILY NEWS writes viewers should "reject the utter hypocrisy on display by CBS" in airing the Focus on the Family spot, which features former Univ. of Florida QB Tim Tebow and his mother Pam. CBS has "long stated that it has Super Bowl rules against 'advocacy ads,'" and this year rejected a "humorous commercial" from gay dating site ManCrunch.com. Zirin: "And yet, the network takes money from Focus on the Family." The idea that this organization is "acceptable to CBS ... actually adds up to a right-wing assault on free speech" (N.Y. DAILY NEWS, 2/2). Former AP football writer Dave Goldberg wrote the "idea of a 22-year-old college senior stating his view on the most watched television show of the year bothers me." American politics right now is as "divisive as I've ever known it," and the Focus on the Family spot "takes the debate to another level" (WASHINGTONPOST.com, 2/1).

FREEDOM OF SPEECH: In DC, Sally Jenkins writes CBS "owns its broadcast and can run whatever advertising it wants, and Tebow has a right to express his beliefs publicly." Jenkins: "We're always harping on athletes to be more responsible and engaged in the issues of their day, and less concerned with just cashing checks. It therefore seems more than a little hypocritical to insist on it only if it means criticizing sneaker companies, and to stifle them when they take a stance that might make us uncomfortable" (WASHINGTON POST, 2/2). Also in DC, Leonard Shapiro writes the ad is "nothing less than a free speech issue." Whether you "agree or disagree with either side, the Tebows have as much right as anyone to voice their view on the subject, and CBS would be guilty of the worst form of censorship by refusing to air their ad" (WASHINGTONPOST.com, 2/2).

A BIGGER ISSUE? Attorney Gloria Allred in an open letter to CBS Corp. President & CEO Les Moonves vowed that she will file complaints with the FCC and FTC if there are "misleading elements" in the Focus on the Family spot. The ad is rumored to deal with Pam Tebow's decision to keep her baby, which turned out to be Tim, amid a difficult pregnancy during a mission trip in the Philippines. Allred in the letter noted an abortion "was and still is a crime for both doctors and women in the Philippines." She wonders if the ad will say that Pam Tebow "could have been sentenced to prison for having an abortion" (CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, 2/2).