{"id":7323,"date":"2019-02-08T09:39:47","date_gmt":"2019-02-08T09:39:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/groupcaliber.com\/?p=1874"},"modified":"2022-01-24T13:06:41","modified_gmt":"2022-01-24T13:06:41","slug":"super-bowl-commercials-with-a-purpose","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/groupcaliber.banyodev.dk\/index.php\/2019\/02\/08\/super-bowl-commercials-with-a-purpose\/","title":{"rendered":"Super Bowl Commercials with a Purpose"},"content":{"rendered":"

Every year, over 100 million people gather around to watch the Super Bowl with friends and family. With that many viewers tuned into the same channel, advertisers fight what could be described as a battle of epic proportions; only instead of being armed with swords and shields, marketers and communication professionals have brand purpose and celebrity endorsements as their weapons of choice.\u00a0 Notably so, when a single 30-second slot costs upwards of $5 million<\/a>, blood, sweat and tears are to be expected.<\/p>\n

As brand-builders who believe in the power of purpose, we wanted to take the opportunity to analyze some of our favorite ads from this year\u2019s Super Bowl. In the past, we\u2019ve seen brands move away from objectified bikini-clad women to subtle political and purpose-packed social messages; but this year, advertisers seems to be moving to a more \u2018play it safe\u2019 approach. One of the reasons for this shift may have to do with the already tense atmosphere around the NFL. With players taking a knee to fight against racial injustices like Nike\u2019s Colin Kaepernick<\/a>, the Super Bowl just isn\u2019t the same safe, idyllic event it once was. Just deciding whether or not to run a Super Bowl commercial is turning into a political decision in itself \u2013 seen a Nike ad anyone?<\/p>\n

Importance of Authenticity<\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\n

Another reason why brands are shying away may be rooted in the signal of the act itself. If a brand truly wants to change the world, is spending $5 million dollars on a 30-second message really the most efficient way to help solve problems such as global warming or world hunger? This brings us back to the purpose for profits dilemma; and this season, The Washington Post<\/em> may have learned this the hard way. With a phenomenally well-constructed ad narrated by none other than Tom Hanks himself, the message concentrates on the importance of free press and pays tribute to the journalists whose lives were lost. While some loved the Democracy Dies in Darkness ad, others \u2013 like Post <\/em>journalist Sarah Kaplan – were quick to point out that the money spent on the ad could have been used towards \u201cbetter health benefits, parental leave, equal pay and more jobs for reporters\u201d. Whether you loved it or hated it, one thing is for sure \u2013 the public expects brands to put their money where their mouth is.<\/p>\n