Category Archives: Uncategorized

Could a Full-Page Newspaper Ad Keep the SS United States From Being Sunk?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and working my way through the Sunday New York Times (an endeavor for which there should be some kind of federal subsidy, don’t you think?), when I came across this ad on A7.

Who knew the big boat had lost its home and was in danger of being 1) chopped up and melted down, or 2) scuttled and sent to the briny deep. Think this effort to salvage the ship might float, Doc?

– Sink or Swim

Dear SoS,

Coincidentally (or not), here’s what appeared several days later on Page One of the Times.

Jesse Pesta’s piece details the crusade to save the SS United States launched by Susan Gibbs, whose grandfather William Francis Gibbs “designed the ship, known as the Big U, which spent nearly two decades racing between its home port of New York City and European destinations [and] still holds a trans-Atlantic speed record that it set in 1952.”

(Times deputy editor Jesse Pesta “crossed the Atlantic aboard the United States as a 2-year-old and has written about the ship extensively,” for those of you keeping score at home.)

You should read the whole piece because, well, it’s a corker. (YouTube has plenty of videos, if you’re so inclined.)

But here’s the problem that the SS United States faces.

The ship is being evicted from its pier in Philadelphia. The [S.S. United States Conservancy, which owns the ship] has just a few weeks to find a new home for the United States . . .

It turns out that one of the things that makes the ship worth saving, its immensity, is what makes it so tough to save. Not only are huge piers in short supply, but there’s not even a master list of where they might be located.

The conservancy’s website explains the legal state of play for the ship: “After a lengthy legal dispute, the US District Court in Philadelphia ruled on June 14, that the SS United States must vacate the berth at Pier 82 she has occupied for decades by September 12, 2024. In her ruling, Senior Judge Anita Brody determined that the ship’s landlord, Penn Warehousing, could not double dockage fees without notice to force the ship from her pier. But the court order established a 90-day deadline to move the nearly 1000-foot-long ship to a new home.”

Axios Philadelphia’s Isaac Avilucea reports that the courts might still buy the ship some time.

A federal judge could decide Monday whether the historic SS United States can stay in its South Philly dock for a few more months while its owners negotiate a deal to sell it.

Why it matters: The ship’s stewards, SS United States Conservancy, face a looming Sept. 12 deadline to find a new home for the 1,000-foot ocean liner — and it appears multiple parties are interested, including two who want to move the ship to Florida’s coast.

Driving the news: The Conservancy wants to push the September deadline back to Dec. 5.

Unfortunately, even that could turn out to be a pyrrhic victory. Each of the Florida counties “wants to sink the boat and use it as an artificial reef and diving destination.”

The Doc’s diagnosis: This story needs a Big U-turn if the SS United States is to finally find safe harbor.

An Ad Says Babe Ruth’s ‘Called Shot’ Jersey Is Worth $30 Million. Seriously?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and leafing through the Weekend Wall Street Journal, when I came across an ad for a New York auction house offering “the Babe Ruth jersey worn during one of the most iconic moments in sports history” – the home run he hit in the fifth inning of Game 3 of the 1932 World Series between the New York Yankees and the Chicago Cubs, which, according to legend, he “called” by pointing to center field right beforehand.

Two questions, Doc: First, did Ruth actually “call” that shot? And if so, are we sure that’s the jersey he wore when he did it?

– Babe Truther

Dear BT,

Good questions both. First, though, here’s the ad.

And here’s the money shot.

Yes, that’s a 30 followed by six zeroes, for those of you keeping score at home.

As for whether Ruth actually called the shot, you be the judge.

The next day’s edition of the Chicago Daily certainly heeded the call.

Then again, not everyone is sold on the legend, as MLB.com’s Chris Landers lays out in great detail. You should read it all, but here’s the nuts to that graf.

So, what’s the problem? Well, there are a few. For starters, of all the reporters at Wrigley that day, the majority didn’t make any mention of it: not Red Smith; not Shirley Povich; not even Grantland Rice, a man who never missed an opportunity to be as dramatic as humanly possible. The Chicago Tribune managed to have two differing accounts in the same issue: Westbrook Pegler claimed that Ruth “laughed derisively and gestured at him, ‘Wait, Mugg, I’m going to hit one out of the yard,'” while Irving Vaughan maintained that the Babe was simply counting how many strikes were on him. What’s more likely? That half of such a collection of sportswriting talent simply missed the biggest athlete in the country talk junk at the plate in the middle of the World Series, or some scribes (including, as it happens, those from Ruth’s hometown) got a little overexcited?

Let’s go to Ruth himself for the tiebreak. Landers says an interview Ruth gave early in 1933 seems awfully definitive.

Hell no. It isn’t a fact. Only a damned fool would have done a thing like that […] Then there was that second strike, and they let me have it again. So I held up that finger again, and I said I still had one left. Now kid, you know damn well I wasn’t pointing anywhere. If I had done that, Root would have stuck the ball in my ear. I never knew anybody who could tell you ahead of time where he was going to hit a baseball. When I get to be that kind of fool, they’ll put me in the booby hatch.

As for that costly jersey (which returned to Wrigley Field last week on a promotional tour), it looks kinda skimpy for the Big Guy, no? For those of you keeping score at home.

Is This Missouri Republican’s TV Spot the Most Racist Campaign Ad of 2024?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and checking out Jim Swift’s Overtime newsletter at The Bulwark, when I came across this item.

Meanwhile, in Missouri… Gubernatorial candidate Bill Eigel seems to have hired ad people similarly offensive and cringeworthy to Kelly Loeffler’s.

You gotta see it to believe it, Doc.

What the hell, right?

– GOPsmacked

Dear GS,

There is no bottom to that well.

As the redoubtable Charlie Sykes has noted, racism was once a recessive gene in the Republican Party. With the advent of Trumpism, it’s become the dominant one.

Exhibit Umpteen, via Joe Perticone’s Press Pass newsletter at The Bulwark, is the GOP’s mad rush to label Kamala Harris a “DEI hire.” After calling the roll of several House Republicans who led the charge, Perticone highlighted the verbal assault from this media lowlife.

Alec Lace, a podcast host and right wing commentator, brought things even lower. On Fox Business, he could not stop saying “DEI” (the repetitions making clear exactly what he meant by it) and suggested Harris has slept her way to her presumptive spot on the Democratic ticket:

There’s the DEI press secretary telling you that the DEI vice president is the future of the party here. And so the future looks kinda dim for the Democrats here, but this is no shocker, either. Kamala Harris—she’s the original “hawk tuah” girl, that’s the way she got where she is, and the party’s going downhill if it’s in her hands.

(Perticone provided this gloss for those of you keeping score at home: “Neither Fox host on the panel objected to Lace’s crass insults, which referenced a recent viral video in which a woman describes—well, we’ll just call it a sex act.”)

No bottom . . .

But back to the original question: Is Bill Eigel’s Translator spot the most racist campaign ad of the 2024 election cycle?

The Doc’s diagnosis: It’ll do until something even more vile comes along.

Do Donald Trump’s Fundraising Emails Really Claim Biden Will Behead Him?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and working my way through Politico Playbook, when I came across this item about the latest scam from the Cheeto in Chief.

Donald Trump’s campaign is lying in fundraising emails to juice big bucks.

Isn’t this a dog-bites-dog story, Doc? Trump’s a pathological liar – what else is new?

– Chatter in Chief

Dear CiC,

Right – if Donald Trump’s mouth is moving or it’s a day ending in y etc. etc. But this particular grift does plow new ground, as Josh Dawsey and Isaac Arnsdorf report in the Washington Post.

The fundraising pitch from Donald Trump was neither accurate nor subtle.

It read: “1 MONTH UNTIL ALL HELL BREAKS LOOSE! THEY WANT TO SENTENCE ME TO DEATH.”

The message blasted out to his supporters was a reference to the former president’s sentencing scheduled for July 11, when he faces fines or possible jail time after being convicted on 34 charges of business fraud in connection with hush money paid to an adult-film star. A death sentence is not under consideration in the case. Neither is a “GUILLOTINE,” as another fundraising pitch suggested last week.

Regardless . . .

There’s no doubt Trump would die a little if New York County Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan slammed the big door on him, but that’s highly unlikely to happen. Even more unlikely is Trump ever starring in a very special episode of The Celebrity Beheading.

Of course, that matters not at all to the ride-or-die MAGA mob, as WaPo’s Dawsey and Arnsdorf detailed.

Campaign finance records filed [June 20] showed the Trump campaign, the Republican National Committee and an allied super PAC raised $171 million in May. The surge left Trump and the RNC with more cash on hand than Biden and the Democratic National Committee, the reports showed.

The Doc’s diagnosis: Hang on tight. There’s no bottom to that well.

Is My TV Really Smart Enough to Track – And Sell – All My Ad-Watching Data?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and tooling around Xitter, when I came across this post from the always lively and informative David S. Bernstein.

Here’s the rest of Maggie Severns’ post: “. . . you’ve been hit with and how often. Sometimes they can connect TV data to a voter file, or tie your TV to your IP address, allowing ads to follow voters from one screen to another.”

That’s some serious surveillance, yeah Doc? Is that even legal? It sure doesn’t feel kosher.

– Oh Well

Dear OW,

It’s actually worse than you think, as NOTUS reporter Maggie Severns notes.

“Television now watches us more than we watch it,” said Jeff Chester, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Digital Democracy. “The same kinds of strategies used to track and target individuals in order to sell advertising popularized by Google and Meta have been purposely and deliberately exported to the television.”

Televisions that can stream platforms like Hulu or Max usually come loaded with technology that collects information on what viewers are watching, and buyers consent to have their viewing tracked when they open their new TV and click through terms of service agreements. Sometimes, data firms can connect those viewing habits to a voter’s phone or laptop via their IP address, promising a trove of information about an individual and the ability to track them across screens.

In other words, political campaigns can attach themselves to your digital data like Tim Scott to Donald Trump’s tush.

Of course, the question then arises: Does political advertising even work in this day and age? (The Doc diagnosed the current condition of presidential primary ads here.)

On the one hand, according to this piece by New York Times reporter Nick Corasaniti, traditional campaign ads are far less efficient than they used to be.

According to Cross Screen Media, an ad analytics firm, only 63 percent of Iowa Republicans [were] reachable with traditional or “linear” TV ads [this year], as viewers switch to streaming and social media. In 2016, that percentage was still in the 90s. At most, Republican campaigns this year reached 42 percent of likely caucus voters.

On the other hand, as Politico’s Jessica Piper reported, a study by Swayable, a platform used by Democrats to test the effectiveness of different messages and advertisements, was more encouraging: “[The] study’s authors . . . note that the greatest benefits would likely accrue to the best-funded campaigns and groups that can afford to create (and test) many ads in real time, not cash-strapped efforts further down the ballot.”

Either way, traditional television spots are definitely the wave of the past. Which makes the smart TVampires even more attractive to political campaigns, as NOTUS’s Maggie Severns wrote.

Today, more than half of ads booked on traditional television go to target only 11% of swing voters, according to data collected by Cross Screen Media, an analytics firm started by GOP operative Michael Beach.

Cross Screen Media estimates that close to 40% of video advertising budgets — around $4.2 billion — will go to digital ads this cycle, up from about 27% four years ago.

The Doc’s diagnosis: When your TV is smarter than you are, go listen to the radio.

Will the Biden/Harris ‘Snapped’ Ad Really Make Donald Trump ‘Snap More’?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and tooling around Xitter, when I came across this post from corgi lover/Never Trumper/legal eagle George Conway.

That’s Adrienne Elrod, senior adviser and senior spokesperson for Joe Biden touting his latest swipe at the Cheeto in Chief, which “reminds voters of Trump’s presidency, which was just the beginning of Trump’s decline into the unhinged, power-hungry candidate he is today.”

Whaddaya think, Doc – is the Biden campaign on to something here?

– Snappy Comeback

Dear SC,

According to this piece by The Hill’s Alex Gangitano, Snapped “is part of the [Biden] campaign’s $14 million paid media buy for May and will run on general market television and digital platforms across battleground states, as well as on national cable television.”

De Niro: “From midnight tweets, to drinking bleach, to tear-gassing citizens and staging a photo-op, we knew Trump was out of control when he was president, and then he lost the 2020 election and snapped. Desperately trying to hold on to power. Now he’s running again, this time threatening to be a dictator, to terminate the Constitution . . . Trump wants revenge, and he’ll stop at nothing to get it.”

Nidia Cavazos of CBS News reports that the Biden campaign is also running this spot “slamming Trump on gun control 2 years after Uvalde shooting.”

The Doc’s diagnosis: George Conway is on to something. We’re likely see gun control before we see self control from Trump.

Did Apple Really Have to Apologize For Its Totally Crushed ‘Crush’ Ad?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and poking around Douglas McLennan’s Arts Journal newsletter, when I came across this link.

Apple Apologizes For Horrifying Art-Crushing Ad

– Reuters

I know you wrote about Apple’s ‘Crush’ ad the other day, Doc. What’s up with the company’s moonwalking? Doesn’t Apple have any core convictions?

– Johnny Applecede

Dear JA,

So, to recap: Apple Inc. sought to introduce its new iPad Pro with this ad, set to Sonny & Cher’s “All I Ever Need Is You.”

The immediate reaction was, well, Appleplectic. Actor Hugh Grant actually said it represented “the destruction of the human experience courtesy of Silicon Valley.” When lots of other boldface names piled on, Apple did an about face, as Reuters reported.

Apple apologized on Thursday after an advertisement for its latest iPad Pro model sparked criticism by showing an animation of musical instruments and other symbols of creativity being crushed, Ad Age magazine reported.
“Our goal is to always celebrate the myriad of ways users express themselves and bring their ideas to life through iPad. We missed the mark with this video, and we’re sorry,” Ad Age quoted the iPhone maker as saying.

While the company pulled the ad from TV, Business Insider’s Matt Turner suggests the damage to Apple’s  bottom line will likely be minimal. “First quarter iPad sales came in at $7 billion. In comparison, iPhone sales were almost 10x that. Apple is a $2.8 trillion giant.”

Deadline’s Dominic Patten adds that Apple isn’t really all that sorry, since “after two days they still haven’t taken the literally and figuratively destructive ad down” from its YouTube channel, where it has 2.6 million views so far.

The Doc’s diagnosis: As a news story, this kerfuffle has been dead for three days now. In the end, the whole thing will probably end up ipadding Apple’s sales. Somehow, they always seem to crush it, don’t they?

Is Apple’s New ‘Crush” Advertisement As Soul-Crushing as Critics Allege?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and reading Oliver Darcy’s CNN Reliable Sources newsletter, when I came across this item about a new ad for Apple’s latest iPad.

What do you think of Apple’s new “Crush!” advertisement? Julian Sancton writes that the “dystopian spot, which depicts the relentless destruction of instruments and artworks, marks a dark turn for the company, and begs the question: Will 2024 be like 1984?” (THR)

The spot has generated blowback, with actor Hugh Grant saying it represents “the destruction of the human experience.” (Deadline)

Whaddaya think, Doc? They sound kind of Appleplectic to me.

– Candid Crush

Dear CC,

Right now, Apple has a core problem: It revenue “declined for the fifth time in the past six quarters.” according to Aaron Tilley’s piece in the Wall Street Journal, with iPhone sales down 10.5% from last year in the most recent quarter.

So . . . the new iPad Pro to the rescue! Here’s how The Hollywood Reporter’s Julian Sancton describes Apple’s new TV spot, which is set to the Sonny & Cher oldie “All I Ever Need Is You.”

It seems at first like a brilliant, if unsubtle, piece of dystopian satire: countless symbols of human creativity — books, musical instruments, artworks, arcade games — crowded onto a platform and slowly, painfully, sadistically pancaked between the massive metal jaws of a machine. An upright piano splinters and cracks. Paint gushes like blood.

Sort of the flip side to Ridley Scott’s 1984 spot for Apple, this one “[reflecting] a widespread anxiety about the global advance of fascism and the inexorable rise of artificial intelligence: ‘2024 will be like 1984.'”

Uhh . . . no.

Deadline’s Dominic Patten points out that it’s not just Hugh Grant who’s pearl-clutching over the Apple ad. “Among those taking the tech giant, who is facing a Department of Justice suit over an alleged illegal monopoly over the smartphone market, to task for its sheer insensitivity and misstep are Hugh Grant and Justine Bateman.”

Also weighing in with critiques:  Creed II scribe and Luke Cage creator Cheo Hodari Coker; Emmy-winning and Directors Guild Award winning Handmaid’s Tale director Reed Morano; and Bill & Ted franchise and Men in Black screenwriter Ed Solomon – a regular Murderers’ Row of Tinseltown glitterati.

The Doc is laying plenty of eight-to-five that each of them will own a new iPad Pro before the month is out.

Don’t be crushed. That’s just show biz.

How Can an Ad Claim That Donald Trump ‘Couldn’t Be Hired at a Local Mall’?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and reading Jim Swift’s Overtime newsletter from The Bulwark, when I came across this item about a new ad campaign from Republican Voters Against Trump.

No mall would hire Trump… So why would we make him President again? A new ad from our friends at RVAT airing on TV and online in battleground states.

I dunno, Doc – does that sound right to you? Donald Trump does have an awful lot of experience in sales.

– Mall Rat

Dear MR,

Yeah, the thing with Trump is, so much of what he’s sold during his career has been irregular.

Beyond that, the rest of his resumé is even more problematic, as this RVAT press release explains.

WASHINGTON – April 22, 2024 – Today Republican Voters Against Trump launched a new six-figure ad campaign as part of an ongoing $50 million campaign, highlighting Donald Trump’s 88 felony charges.

The ad uses first-person hidden-camera footage of a job applicant going to several stores and repeatedly being rejected after sharing that he has been indicted for stealing classified documents, paying hush money to porn stars, and attempting to overturn an election.

Here’s how that worked out.

The ad is scheduled to run nationally on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” and Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” and digitally in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Republican Voters Against Trump is yet another effort from the irrepressible Sarah Longwell, publisher of The Bulwark, impresario of The Focus Group Podcast, and founder of Republican Voters Against Trump/Republican Accountability Project.

Sarah Longwell is the undisputed Queen of Never Trumpers.

Ask for her by name.

Do the New McDonald’s Billboards in the Netherlands Pass the Smell Test?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and poking around MediaPost, when I came across Tanya Gazdik’s Marketing Daily piece about a new ad gimmick debuting in Europe.

Remember Smell-O-Vision? It’s coming to billboards!

McDonald’s is trying it out in the Dutch cities of Utrecht and Leiden.

“The plain red and yellow billboards don’t use a single word or image to advertise McDonald’s offerings—and they don’t need to,” according to Fast Company. “Instead, the billboards pump out the aroma of warm french fries to passersby, who seem to instinctively know the scent of a McDonald’s french fry compared to any other form of fried potato.”

I dunno, Doc – kind of reeks of desperation, don’t you think?

– Odor Eater

Dear OE,

First off, this is shaping up to be the Year of the Billboard, no? It started with smackable billboards that dispense Heinz ketchup packets, as the Doc noted last month. Now it’s smellable billboards, which McDonald’s is promoting with this YouTube video.

The Mickey D billboards represent the olfactory extension of audio spotlight technology employed in supermarket advertising, which Evan I. Schwartz detailed in a 2004 MIT Technology Review piece: “Known as directional sound, it uses an ultrasound emitter to shoot a laserlike beam of audible sound so focused that only people inside a narrow path can hear it.”

Now we have directional smell. Ain’t progress grand. Then again, when someone comes up with Chanel N°Fry, you’ll know they’ve gone too far.