Reading the Super Bowl Pictures: Just the Usual Racial Violence ... and Liberals in Logging Accidents

Here's my Take-Away on this Superbowl ad and corporate media's "critique"):

TIME wants to obliquely touch on marital wars, but they completely sidestep the issue of race in this supposed critique of the Pepsi Max Superbowl ad.  Not that the ad had anything to do with the the industrious white woman (yeah, a jogger, but reads like a soccer mom) getting attacked by a black couple soaking up all the product and all the attention, though. (No, any analogy to the Obamas or Michelle would probably be a far stretch, would it? Although who's to say its "appeal" wouldn't be lost on the Tea Party demographic out there).  So, I guess all that's going on here, besides the racial violence, is just one more instance where the black man, who can't help getting turned on by just the whiff of a hot white girl, gets emasculated by his black, uppity, second-rate wife.

And then, the Snickers' ad seems like a political and class warfare power fantasy as the outspoken far-left liberal Roseanne Barr gets taken out at a logging camp and the stereotyped whiney New York yuppified Richard Lewis gets ripped as a slacker until he eats a Snickers and morphs into a macho lumberjack himself. More power to Snickers at the expense of women and the quiche eaters.

(See our full take on the Super Bowl Snickers ad mowing down liberals in a logging accident at The Bag)

 ----------

For the latest in visual politics, visit BagNewsNotes (and follow us on Twitter).

 

Follow Michael Shaw on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bagnewsnotes

Comments

[Trickery]

08:24 PM on 02/07/2011

Mike, (can I call you that?) we have a problem. First, you don't have to be a black woman to know that you are portrayed as loud, violent, and arrogant in the corporate media. You also don't have to be a black man to know that you are portrayed (marketed?) as hyper sexual, unable to think for yourself, violent (again?), and a coward. Secondly, to suggest that the couple in the P-cola commercial were a reflection of the Obama's would not be far off. They are talked about every day in way or another and are great for making money off of. Don't believe me? See how much money Conservatives make on bashing them and also the Obama Chia pet is back. Lastly, the girl jogging. People are always talking about how black men are only able to get with fat, uneducated white women, so involving someone who is in shape and smiling at the black guy, is probably meant to incite anger amongst those who don't like the sight of interracial couples. But of course they couldn't see if she was okay after being hit with a can of soda, they had to run. (smh)

[pgurlatl]

05:55 PM on 02/07/2011

I've been all over FB on this one. It's ridiculous. There is a reason why time and money are spent on advertising campaigns and much like political ones, the driving force is to relay a message and to sway a viewer one way or another. This ad is no different and I refuse to be quiet about it.

I've spread the word on every social networking website and forum I belong to.

I know black woman who are cheerleaders, veterinarians, lawyers, accountants, teachers, waitresses, etc. and I have yet to find one who continually emasculates her significant other in the way this ad portrays.

This is reminiscent of Sapphire Stevens on the now defunct Amos & Andy show which thankfully, the NAACP at the time fought to have removed from network airing. Unfortunately, this ad is very similar to other ads and television shows that depict the same old and tired character.

The same imagery they tried to convince us was our very own First Lady.

I don't know how one could not be incensed.

[bdunlap52]

10:53 AM on 02/08/2011

does everything have to be a racial argument? everytime?

[larryjackshon]

11:54 AM on 02/08/2011

The charge here (erroneously) is that the OP is making 'everything' about race - which on its face is ridiculous and thus the OP (and their claim) is ridiculous. It is interesting (and transparent) the way this poster uses language that hides their obvious bias behind seemingly 'post-racial' rhetorical questions.

[orcinous]

06:26 PM on 02/08/2011

I agree, but the black man looks stupid for looking at the white girl in defiance of his wife/girlfriend. Everyone looks stupid. Violence to sell the corporation's crap. It is racist when you put different races in the same commercial and make one of them look stupid or lessor. Same with the Doritos commercial where the white man is sucking on the fingers of the black man. Time for this type of advertising to stop period.

[chelledc]

09:39 AM on 02/09/2011

So in order to have a video that is ok you have to have:
1. Everyone be the same race
2. Make sure that if the couple is black the man has the upper hand never the woman
3. Make sure that if it is people of mixed race that no one is allowed to do any sort of slapstick 2 Stooges type violence lest there be an outcry
4. Make sure that if the couple is black there is no slapstick type violence whatsoever because we know ignorant non-blacks will be too damn dumb to realize that it is a joke and an exaggeration not real life.

The black man does not look stupid for checking out the girl in booty shorts. The white girl looks like a butch for being overly flirtatious with a guy who is obviously with someone and is smiling politely. I think the man would lose in this commercial no matter what. If he hadn't smiled and ignored her people would say he was bowing down to his overly aggressive wife. You can't win for losing black man. Tsk tsk

Since people are saying the core issue is violence I'm looking for an outcry over the Pepsi can to the nuts commercial, the dog hurting the owner and his girlfriend not caring commercial, and a boycott fo football all together because it is pretty damn violent. Not UFC violent but violent nonetheless.