The Ram Truck Super Bowl ad that used a Martin Luther King Jr. speech was an "absurd ad because no one with even a scintilla of knowledge about MLK can imagine that he would have ever had anything to do with shilling for pickup trucks," according to Tony Norman of the PITTSBURGH POST-GAZETTE. Reaction to the ad was "swift and pretty much unanimous on social media." People "hated it because it was a blatant attempt to commodify something increasingly rare in this country -- unambiguous moral authority." Fiat Chrysler "defended its use of MLK’s words completely out of context by reminding outraged tweeters and Facebook posters that the King estate ... gave their permission and blessing." This is "not surprising." There is a "faction of MLK’s family that has been attempting to make money off of his image and words for decades." Though the ad itself was "artfully done, the very fact of its existence spoke to the utter crassness at the center of the enterprise" (PITTSBURGH POST-GAZETTE, 2/6).
UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: A N.Y. TIMES editorial states that MLK "did not ask to be a huckster for a line of trucks" (N.Y. TIMES, 2/6). In L.A., Michael Hiltzik writes the ad was "seen as a landmark in crassness." It is "one thing to vet a commercial campaign to ensure it doesn't undermine King's message; quite another to pretend that a profit-making corporation is undertaking its charitable efforts out of altruism, or that the King estate isn't involving itself, for money, in a truck company's effort to greenwash its reputation" (L.A. TIMES, 2/6). In Toronto, Vinay Menon writes, "This ad was not the crass commercialism its detractors imagine." Instead, the spot was a "lunge for inspiration, a quality that was mostly absent on Sunday night as companies unveiled Super Bowl ads animated by gentle humour, celebrity cameos, special effects and relentless irony." Dodge was "trying to offer an uplifting message on the milestone anniversary date of a speech that would’ve otherwise come and gone without any mention on Sunday." For that alone, the company "deserves hosannas, not catcalls" (TORONTO STAR, 2/6). In Detroit, Frank Witsil notes those who "loved the ad praised King's key message of service." Those who "hated it questioned whether it was appropriate for the automaker to use King as a pitchman." Witsil: "There is another question: Was King's quote taken out of context?" (DETROIT FREE PRESS, 2/6).
TRUCK STOP: Late night talk shows also took aim at the Ram Truck ad. ABC's Jimmy Kimmel last night said, "I learned a lot from commercials yesterday. For instance, I had no idea Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. had a dream to sell light-duty trucks" ("Jimmy Kimmel Live," ABC, 2/5). CBS' Stephen Colbert said the ad "sounds inappropriate until you remember that Dr. King was awarded J.D. Power & Associates' 'Best Midsize Humanitarian And Initial Customer Satisfaction' award" ("The Late Show," CBS, 2/5). TBS' Conan O'Brien said, "A lot of people are mad about a Ram Truck ad that uses the words of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. People were particularly suspicious of the part where Dr. King said civil rights are 'Ramtastic'" ("Conan," TBS, 2/5).
FINDING FAULT: Twitter commentary on the ad was largely negative. Filmmaker Justine Bateman tweeted the ad was "totally offensive." Satire site SportsPickle: "'You know, if Rosa Parks had a Ram truck, she wouldn’t have needed to take the bus.' - Ram Trucks second half commercial." The Hill columnist Dr. Eugene Gu: "So Martin Luther King Jr. can be used to sell Ram trucks but not a single NFL player can #TakeAKnee to fight the very injustice Dr. King dedicated and sacrificed his life to fight." ThinkProgress.org's Lindsay Gibbs: "Actually painful to watch." Gizmodo CEO Raju Narisetti: "A lot of people mad at Ram Trucks for their #SuperBowl ad. The MLK Estate very tightly controls who gets to use his words and clearly sells these rights for specific uses, so worth redirecting the angst."
AVOIDING CONTROVERSY: The WALL STREET JOURNAL's Alexandra Bruell writes in this year’s Super Bowl, many brands "opted for feel-good themes like diversity, public service and philanthropy that they hoped would be less controversial." But some ad experts warn that viewers could "become fatigued with ads trumpeting social messages over the long term." Ad agency Eleven CEO Courtney Buechert said that brands that "steer away from the most controversial topics risk being 'washover generic.'" She added consumers “wont remember who the company was." Buechert: "They’d probably rather you have that honest exchange -- 'buy my stuff.'" Bruell notes TiVo’s list of the top-ten most engaging ads from Sunday’s game "didn’t include any of the social advocacy spots." The list was "topped by a spot for Doritos and Mountain Dew." Ad execs said that brands are "fixated on social advocacy because they are trying to reach millennials, who they believe will only buy from companies doing social good" (WALL STREET JOURNAL, 2/6).
