Martin Luther King Jr. Commercial for Ram Trucks Is Swiftly Criticized - Sensationalist Headlines

[URL="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/05/business/media/mlk-commercial-ram-dodge.html"]Source[/URL] [QUOTE]The online blowback was swift for Ram on Sunday after the carmaker used a sermon given by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. as the voice-over for a Super Bowl ad. The general sentiment: Did the company really just use Dr. King’s words about the value of service to sell trucks? The commercial showed scenes of people helping others while Dr. King extolled the virtues of service. At the end, the phrase “Built to Serve” was shown on the screen, along with the Ram logo. “MLK wanted equal rights and for me to buy a Dodge Ram,” one Twitter user wrote. Another wrote: “Black people cant kneel and play football but MLK should be used to sell trucks during the super bowl. Unbelievable.” The response put Ram in a position that advertisers dread — misfiring with a commercial in the Super Bowl, which sells 30 seconds of airtime for upward of $5 million and is watched by more than 100 million people. “It’s the wrong mistake to make given everything that’s going on in the U.S. right now,” said Tim Calkins, a marketing professor at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management. “There’s so much emotion right now around race in this country that this was a high-risk move, and clearly it’s not going over very well.” The ad came after a tumultuous year for the N.F.L., which had a national spotlight placed on football players who sat or kneeled during the national anthem, a controversial gesture meant to draw attention to racial oppression and police brutality against black Americans. President Trump sharply criticized the players, which heightened some of the rhetoric surrounding the protests. And while many advertisers release their ads before the game, Ram did not, which added to the social media maelstrom. “I think it was well intentioned, but they’re going to have a lot of explaining to do,” Mr. Calkins said. “They did not release this ahead of time, so they went for the surprise. They got that, but at the same time, they now have a big problem with feedback and people being upset.” Adding to the disconnect, the sermon in question, delivered exactly 50 years ago, touched on the danger of overspending on items like cars and discussed why people “are so often taken by advertisers.” That was not lost on the ad’s detractors. [/QUOTE] [video=youtube;SlbY1tGARUA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlbY1tGARUA[/video]

As far as truck commercials go that was well done. It's about service and community and it's not like the commercial wasn't diverse. It seems like a really stupid thing to be upset about the me. It's not like they dubbed in "that I will buy a Ram" to the "I have a dream" speech. It was a pretty sermon about community dubbed over a pretty shot commercial showing community.

I think the thing that I find most irksome about this is it seems Chrysler/Fiat didn't even bother to ask to use it. [media]https://twitter.com/TheKingCenter/status/960328987955335174[/media]

I mean, remove the car and car-brand and it would've been a great little inspirational piece.

[QUOTE=Steel & Iron;53109774]I think the thing that I find most irksome about this is it seems Chrysler/Fiat didn't even bother to ask to use it. [media]https://twitter.com/TheKingCenter/status/960328987955335174[/media][/QUOTE] Hate to play devils avocado on this one but is it a requirement to ask or is it just seen as being polite? Tbh something always doesn't sit well with me when corporations use political figures and moments to sell products. I felt the same when Pepsi did it and to me it's just kind of fucking dumb. MLK legacy shouldn't be used to promote utes tbh

[QUOTE=fruxodaily;53109804]Hate to play devils avocado on this one but is it a requirement to ask or is it just seen as being polite? Tbh something always doesn't sit well with me when corporations use political figures and moments to sell products. I felt the same when Pepsi did it and to me it's just kind of fucking dumb. MLK legacy shouldn't be used to promote utes tbh[/QUOTE] From what I remember of the news floating around when Selma came out is that King's estate is VERY stingy about using the content of his speeches, to the point that Selma didn't use any of King's actual speeches since it wasn't in the film budget to get the license from them or something.

It seems like the typical emotional manipulation that commercials go for.

This is one of those times where I'd say people are misplacing their anger. FCA didn't really do anything out of the ordinary here, I mean car companies often use weird emotional appeal to sell giant hunks of metal. They didn't really bring race into it at all, rather the people reacting to it are the ones doing just that, unless I'm missing something.

[video=youtube;l_v1h6Zoi-Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_v1h6Zoi-Q[/video]

[QUOTE=Shibbey;53109873][video=youtube;l_v1h6Zoi-Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_v1h6Zoi-Q[/video][/QUOTE] Chrysler had the video taken down, lmao. Honestly how does Youtube's copyright system decide what is an isn't belonging to which companies? I feel all car commercials blend together.

[QUOTE=KingofBeast;53109843]This is one of those times where I'd say people are misplacing their anger. FCA didn't really do anything out of the ordinary here, I mean car companies often use weird emotional appeal to sell giant hunks of metal. [B]They didn't really bring race into it at all, rather the people reacting to it are the ones doing just that,[/B] unless I'm missing something.[/QUOTE] Because MLK was the black civil rights dude, so the only way this commercial could be disrespectful is in a racial way, right It's not like there's a shitton of other reasons why twisting sermons into truck-selling-ploys without consent a fucked up strategy. Nobody, civil rights leader or not, would want their passionate speeches made into manipulative marketing. Ironically, in trying to be aware of racism, you've reduced MLK to a guy who has nothing but opinions on black people. You want to point your finger at people bringing race into this, start by reading your own damn post - but not before you read another one of MLK's opinions: [quote]Now the presence of this instinct explains why we are so often taken by advertisers. You know, those gentlemen of massive verbal persuasion. And they have a way of saying things to you that kind of gets you into buying. In order to be a man of distinction, you must drink this whiskey. In order to make your neighbors envious, you must drive this type of car. In order to be lovely to love you must wear this kind of lipstick or this kind of perfume. And you know, before you know it, you’re just buying that stuff. … I got to drive this car because it’s something about this car that makes my car a little better than my neighbor’s car. … I am sad to say that the nation in which we live is the supreme culprit. And I’m going to continue to say it to America.[/quote] ^ This is the text from the video above that was taken down, by the way, if anyone wanted to read it

[QUOTE=Ajacks;53109756]As far as truck commercials go that was well done. It's about service and community and it's not like the commercial wasn't diverse. It seems like a really stupid thing to be upset about the me. It's not like they dubbed in "that I will buy a Ram" to the "I have a dream" speech. It was a pretty sermon about community dubbed over a pretty shot commercial showing community.[/QUOTE] yeah no, this is a shit ad, through and true You can't get more corporate and disconnected than something as pure market-reviewed as this

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;53110224]Because MLK was the black civil rights dude, so the only way this commercial could be disrespectful is in a racial way, right ... You want to point your finger at people bringing race into this, start by reading your own damn post[/QUOTE] From the OP's very own snippet: [quote][B]Black people[/B] cant kneel and play football but MLK should be used to sell trucks during the super bowl. Unbelievable.[/quote] [quote]There’s so much emotion right now around [B]race[/B] in this country that this was a high-risk move[/quote] [quote]The ad came after a tumultuous year for the N.F.L., which had a national spotlight placed on football players who sat or kneeled during the national anthem, a controversial gesture [B]meant to draw attention to racial oppression and police brutality against black American[/B]s. President Trump sharply criticized the players, which heightened some of the rhetoric surrounding the protests.[/quote] I'm sorry that you interpreted my post as the one bringing race into it, god damn lol. It was just my thoughts, chill

If there's anything I hate the most it's corporations trying to look human. At the end of the day they just use these emotional scenes to make you buy their products. It's honestly one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen. MLK would never endorse a product, and the fact that Ram had the nerve to make this commercial shows just how soulless they really are.

[QUOTE=Steel & Iron;53109774]I think the thing that I find most irksome about this is it seems Chrysler/Fiat didn't even bother to ask to use it. [media]https://twitter.com/TheKingCenter/status/960328987955335174[/media][/QUOTE] [url=http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/04/news/companies/ram-trucks-mlk-super-bowl-ad/index.html]Well according to CNN[/url] [quote]Following the backlash, the King Estate said in a statement that it had reviewed the ad before it aired to make sure it met its standards and "found that the overall message of the ad embodied Dr. King's philosophy that true greatness is achieved by serving others." "Thus we decided to be a part of Ram's 'Built To Serve' Super Bowl program," the King Estate said. Fiat Chrysler (FCAU), which owns Ram, said in a statement that it "worked closely with the representatives of the Martin Luther King Jr. estate to receive the necessary approvals and estate representatives were a very important part of the creative process every step of the way."[/quote]

[QUOTE=KingofBeast;53110275]From the OP's very own snippet: I'm sorry that you interpreted my post as the one bringing race into it, god damn lol. It was just my thoughts, chill[/QUOTE] I stand by what I said at its core, but yeah I came off as really sanctimonious there. At least it's fitting that I choose to be preachy in a thread about a pastor

I was waiting for this to become a Tide ad

[QUOTE=Steel & Iron;53110347][URL="http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/04/news/companies/ram-trucks-mlk-super-bowl-ad/index.html"]Well according to CNN[/URL][/QUOTE] A lot of companies like to do it because the nature of advertising has changed. It's now important for the consumer to buy into "company culture" than it is to just buy the products. For a good look of this, see the branding behind corporations like Google, Apple, even Tesla. It's not about their products, it's about buying from a company you, the consumer, are supposed to like. The Estate are correct, though - their intentions and the meaning behind the ad is absolutely a commendable one, though. Personally I find using public/historic figures a bit cheap though, but that wasn't a terrible ad, either. They weren't using it to say "MLK would've bought our trucks!" Which would've been crass and tone deaf. I mean, didn't John Cena make a great message two years ago with a similar style of ad? [video=youtube;0MdK8hBkR3s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MdK8hBkR3s[/video] I'm not even American, but goddamn :terrists: I don't think this ad is bad, it has a good messaging, wasn't in your face with the truck peddling and was classy. I guess people who wanted something to be mad about are going to get mad.

Oh man when I saw this ad I thought "wow yeah that's a little much.." Guess I wasn't the only one.

[QUOTE=clutch2;53111349]Oh man when I saw this ad I thought "wow yeah that's a little much.." Guess I wasn't the only one.[/QUOTE] Laying on thick you say? [video=youtube;C-rumHvmqCA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-rumHvmqCA[/video]

it's something called lifestyle marketing, there's a youtuber called peter coffin who talks about it a lot and has a lot of cool insights about it. with regards to this incident, i'm honestly convinced they did this on purpose so that they can seem good when inevitably they have to apologise for it (we've heard your complaints! we listen! we're a humanised corporation now!) and i don't buy for a second that they were legitimately this tone-deaf

There's so many 'Oopsies' that happen with commercials or social media marketing recently that I think it's intentional. There's no way you spend millions to pay hundreds of people to come up with an idea, gather what's needed to produce the idea, and secure the spot during the super bowl with another $5 million MINUMUM, to make such a huge mistake as using a MLK speech to sell cars when in a speech he was against advertisements that sell cars. It's made on purpose to stir up a bit of controversy and get people to talk about it because no fucking body pays attention to commercials otherwise And if you can get your commercial in the headlines for 2 days then the entire world sees it rather than the handful (Comparatively speaking) that were just watching the game. Not only does EVERYONE hear about it, a few days later, they'll issue an apology to gather some sympathy by pointing out the things they AND MLK both stand for or some bollocks, and get even more people on their side than they started with. It's a 10 for 1 marketing deal

probably more disrespectful that it's a commercial for such a shitbox

[QUOTE=Steel & Iron;53111364]Laying on thick you say? [video=youtube;C-rumHvmqCA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-rumHvmqCA[/video][/QUOTE] That was pretty cringe worthy as well.. the only thing that saved me the teeth gritting was trying to figure out what the tune in the background was from. It's one of those songs I feel like I've heard a bunch of times, but I can't place it. Infuriating, especially combined with an obnoxious plea from a cellular provider to use their service as if it's going to usher in the new era of humanity. People who write these commercials should be buried, along with any idiots who fall for their marketing ploys. And don't get me started on the latest Febreez commercials that are all just obnoxious innercity-oriented pop rap sounding songs. Breathing happy means nothing if it comes along with the side effect of bleeding out the ears.

[QUOTE=clutch2;53111876]That was pretty cringe worthy as well.. the only thing that saved me the teeth gritting was trying to figure out what the tune in the background was from. It's one of those songs I feel like I've heard a bunch of times, but I can't place it. Infuriating, especially combined with an obnoxious plea from a cellular provider to use their service as if it's going to usher in the new era of humanity. People who write these commercials should be buried, along with any idiots who fall for their marketing ploys. And don't get me started on the latest Febreez commercials that are all just obnoxious innercity-oriented pop rap sounding songs. Breathing happy means nothing if it comes along with the side effect of bleeding out the ears.[/QUOTE] Xylophone cover of All Apologies by Nirvana

How are those speeches not public domain?

[QUOTE=Bradyns;53111899]How are those speeches not public domain?[/QUOTE] Copyright law states that a work enters public domain 70 years after the authors death. So, 2038. Unless Disney does something to extend it again.

[QUOTE=jimbobjoe1234;53110281]If there's anything I hate the most it's corporations trying to look human. At the end of the day they just use these emotional scenes to make you buy their products. It's honestly one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen. MLK would never endorse a product, and the fact that Ram had the nerve to make this commercial shows just how soulless they really are.[/QUOTE] The entire superbowl was basically me rolling my eyes at the soapboxy "look at what good we're doing!! wow we are great people and great people use our trucks" sort of bullshit advertising. Not that FCA is pulling the wool over anyone's eyes about their rapidly declining quality, but I digress. The ad is bad but I don't think it's worth any sensationalism.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;53112531]The entire superbowl was basically me rolling my eyes at the soapboxy "look at what good we're doing!! wow we are great people and great people use our trucks" sort of bullshit advertising. Not that FCA is pulling the wool over anyone's eyes about their rapidly declining quality, but I digress. The ad is bad but I don't think it's worth any sensationalism.[/QUOTE] It's very actively sanctimonious and hilarious that the company telling us that we should be treating people as equal, T-Mobile, ironically also breaks net neutrality with Binge On, so it's okay if they discriminate. But let's go tell people that we shouldn't. One thing that's always held true since the dawn of time as far as companies go is that if your product is consistent and always good, you don't need anything more to grow your consumer base; your consumers will advocate your product for you. Look at Nutella or Sriracha sauce for examples of this. Now, as a form of cheap PR companies like to tell you about their unsolicited stance on popular issues by inserting themselves into it while actively fucking you over. It's like a corporatized version of when someone "sends their thoughts and prayers" every time a tragedy occurs on all their social media, to make it about themselves. To Dodge: Fix your damn vehicles first. Spend less money on a fancy-ass Superbowl ad to reach your audience. If your products were as reliable as you claim them to be, you wouldn't need to be doing this in the first place. It's not like Dodge trucks weren't previously known to be reliable that you need to go and make a name for yourself. You eroded that trust over years and years and years of half-assing. You still [I]are[/I] continuing to half-ass it by trying to applecrate your way out of it on Speaker's Corner. Stop it and fix your shit.