The Tebow Super Bowl Ad
[Guest post by DRJ]
Super Bowl XLIV pits Drew Brees and the New Orleans Saints against Peyton Manning and the Indianapolis Colts. It’s scheduled for February 7, 2010, so the famous Super Bowl ads haven’t even aired yet, but there will be added interest this year — especially from abortion advocates and their pro-life opponents — because of the Tebow ad:
“The 30-second spot, paid for by the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family, is expected to recount the story of Pam Tebow’s turbulent pregnancy in 1987:
When Tebow suffered from a dangerous infection during a mission trip to the Philippines, doctors recommended that she terminate her pregnancy, fearing she might die in childbirth. But she carried Tim to term, and he went on to win the 2007 Heisman Trophy and guide the Florida Gators to two BCS championships.
It’s a happy story with an inspirational ending, but pro-choice critics say Focus on the Family should not be allowed to air the commercial because it advocates on behalf of a divisive issue and threatens to “throw women under the bus.”
The Women’s Media Center, the National Organization for Women, and other abortion groups have initiated an online petition and letter-writing campaign asking CBS to pull the ad as too controversial:
“Greene, of the Women’s Media Center, says CBS should simply follow its own example and ban advocacy ads from its airwaves.
“CBS has a very long history of prohibiting advocacy ads that it deems controversial,” she said, listing banned commercials from PETA, MoveOn.org and the United Church of Christ. “We are calling them out for the hypocrisy and bias in making the decision to air an ad that clearly is on a controversial issue.”
Reportedly CBS is “not backing down,” releasing a statement that says, “At CBS, our standards and practices process continues to adhere to a process that ensures all ads — on all sides of an issue — are appropriate for air.”
— DRJ
I will not get into what I think about Teblow. Suffice it to say that I cannot wait to watch my Colts win another Super Bowl in Miami. I am still trying to find reasonably priced tix.
JD (0ef0e1) — 1/26/2010 @ 4:50 pmI’d just as soon not have to watch political ads during the Super Bowl. Let’s keep that politics free, if we can.
And JD, your Colts are going DOWN. This is the year for the Saints, my friend.
PatHMV (003aa1) — 1/26/2010 @ 4:56 pmthe ain’ts?
I wouldn’t bet on it, Pat.
I’m glad we live in a country were people can speak their minds. This isn’t some horrible message. I understand the concept of ‘leave politics out of this’, but this isn’t politics to some people. It’s just saying “hey, even when things look down, you can come through and have your kid and maybe things won’t actually require you to abort him”. You can lose 30 precious seconds of Budweiser commercials so that someone can have their commercial (they bought).
It’s amazing to me that NOW thinks denying women from hearing a point of view is somehow helping them.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:01 pmBeing hypocritically consistent, feminist groups, when given an opportunity to extol and get behind a woman who embodied the power of her courage and her convictions and rocked chutzpah so much so that she completely defied the odds, they choose to ignore that. Instead they’re angry that other women might take hope and courage themselves and dare to give life an opportunity rather than abort. And we can’t have that.
What they fail to acknowledge is that every time they make the decision to ignore the incredible decision of women like Mrs. Tebow, they expose their hypocritical selves to the point now where they are essentially moribund entities.
Dana (1e5ad4) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:01 pmIt should be shown, only because it is “divisive” and “contoversial”. Americans need not be fed pablum all the time. I hope CBS sticks to its guns and shows it.
nk (df76d4) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:01 pmI hope CBS shows it and the skanks of NOW choke on their bile. Let them buy their own ad instead of supressing someone else’s speech. BEYOTCHES!!!!
daleyrocks (718861) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:10 pmAmericans need not be fed pablum all the time.
I’m emailing CBS to encourage them to stand strong and air the commercial. This viewer can not only handle the red meat, but can take it like a woman. Too bad NOW are such wusses. Time to woman-up.
Dana (1e5ad4) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:10 pmYeah, it’s real controversial not to abort a baby.
Northeast Elizabeth (137d04) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:19 pmPat apparently likes Taints.
JD (0ef0e1) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:22 pm…especially from abortion advocates and their pro-choice opponents…
Abortion advocates are pro-choice. I think you meant pro-life.
Or am I mistaken?
[You are absolutely right. Thank you and I’ve corrected it. — DRJ]
Pious Agnostic (b2c3ab) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:26 pmA woman had the freedom to choose. And she chose. So what’s the problem?
Dana (1e5ad4) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:27 pmThe Saints may have used up their intervention from higher authorities with that bad call on the pass reception that put them in field goal range. He was clearly juggling the ball as he went down and trapped it with his thighs.
I was pretty neutral until I saw all the borderline late hits they did on Favre. The Vikings couldn’t believe he dragged himself out there after being the meat in a quarterback sandwich in the 3rd quarter. That last interception was the result of the beating he had taken all night.
Mike K (2cf494) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:35 pmI really don’t understand the dislike of Tebow that exists among some sports fans, such as JD, as evidenced by his “Teblow” comment.
While it’s true that many members of the media have gone overboard in their praise of him, I don’t hold that against Tebow. In fact, if there were more athletes like him, it would be MUCH easier to be a sports fan.
I mean, professional and “big time” college sports are populated to a great degree by thugs, punks, and outright criminals, so I can’t imagine why some people think a clean-cut, clean-living guy like Tebow is a bad thing.
As SI columnist Stewart Mandel pointed out recently, the fact that so many people openly root against Tebow is not a good sign about the state of our culture.
P.S. If the Saints play in the Super Bowl like they did in the NFCCG, they’ll lose by three TDs.
Bubba Maximus (456175) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:41 pmEven the Super Bowl is taking a hit from the down economy.
The big game is still the most expensive time on television, with the cost of a single spot quadrupling in the past 20 years, but the average cost of a Super Bowl spot is expected to be down this year compared to last, according to new figures from TNS Media.
CBS is reportedly charging between $2.5 million and $2.8 million for a 30-second ad during the game, TNS said. That’s down from the $3 million that NBC fetched in 2009.
The price of a Super Bowl spot can vary depending on where it is in the game and whether it is part of a package deal, among other factors. CBS insists that the pace of ad sales is on par or better than last year and that it hasn’t had to cut prices.- source, NYPost, 1/12/10
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:42 pmPer DCSCA, I wonder if CBS would be so accommodating if the ad market was better. Cash over liberal principles in action.
steve sturm (7629b0) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:51 pmI don’t know nothing about football, but any game with the Colts in it is worth watching regardless who you’re rooting for.
nk (df76d4) — 1/26/2010 @ 5:51 pmAnyone see the ratings from the Colts vs Jets game last weekend? The Colts vs Saints might be a really really really highly watched game, by Super Bowl standards.
JD (8cb8de) — 1/26/2010 @ 6:19 pmI don’t view this as a political ad. It’s an advocacy ad, that’s for sure, but no different than one which asks for donations to help Haiti.
Chris (ded5f2) — 1/26/2010 @ 6:20 pmTo add: I expect pro-choicers will demand equal time and will produce a counter-ad.
Chris (ded5f2) — 1/26/2010 @ 6:21 pmThe idea that the ad is too controversial is a sad one, but it is their right to complain about it. As I recall weren’t there things that were anti-Kerry before the 04 election that threat of protest caused TV and theatres to back down on?
I wonder if it was intentional that this was info was released. It likely was, but I would have thought they might have simply kept it quiet until it aired and let it stand, unless someone at CBS aware of the ad didn’t like it…who knows.
As far as not liking Tebow, I think it is just jealousy. I find it hard to like him because I’m a Big Ten (OSU, PSU, Wisc.) fan. But I know that is why and it is just a visceral reaction that is petty of me.
It is the same about Brett Favre, many are jealous and they react to the hype of the past even while they play along with the narrative of slamming him now. Many articles and TV stories start out with “Brett Favre again ended a season with an interception in the NFC title game that cost his team a victory. Because he has to be the big man he blew it again”. That is a very skewed way of thinking that only makes sense if you want to find a reason to dump on Favre, whether he deserves it or not. Sure, it would have made sense for him to run down field and go out of bounds instead of throwing the pass, but maybe he had put running with the ball out of his brain given the pounding he had already taken. One could just as easily start a story with “in spite of a determined effort to overcome 5 (was it 5, or “just” 4) lost fumbles, one more last second mistake proved too much (along with a poor call and the Minnesota defense not being able to hold one last time). (Thanks for indulging me, I wanted to let that rant out somewhere).
MD in Philly (d4668b) — 1/26/2010 @ 6:22 pm“To add: I expect pro-choicers will demand equal time and will produce a counter-ad.
Comment by Chris”
Call me crazy, but there’s no way they can be as persuasive as the Tebow ad will be. The cure for bad speech is more speech. The cure for good speech is censorship.
And maybe I’m unfair, but it seems like this uplifting ad is a lot more appropriate than the type of ad one might see selling abortion. But I think fair is fair and wish every woman considering killing their kids would hear the best argument on both sides first.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 1/26/2010 @ 6:33 pmIt doesn’t sound like it’s much different than one of those ads listing famous folks who were adopted. Is that too an “advocacy ad”? (That is a very overbroad term. An ad for Miller Beer surely is advocating something.)
Mitch (e40959) — 1/26/2010 @ 6:50 pmDid you know Teblow has a big heart, and is the greatester QB in college football, EVAH ?!
JD (8cb8de) — 1/26/2010 @ 6:51 pmBut I think fair is fair and wish every woman considering killing their kids would hear the best argument on both sides first.
Ironically, this is precisely why they are pushing to have the commercial bumped: it gives one of the best pro-life arguments there is.
Dana (1e5ad4) — 1/26/2010 @ 7:00 pmIf women were not given the right to choose, just think of how many Heisman trophy winners there would be every year!
Intelliology (00d844) — 1/26/2010 @ 7:37 pmJust remember the libturd motto on speech and everything falls into place: Free speech for we, but not for thee.
daleyrocks (718861) — 1/26/2010 @ 7:51 pm#
If women were not given the right to choose, just think of how many Heisman trophy winners there would be every year!
Comment by Intelliology
The argument isn’t that Tebow is a worthy human being because he won an award. It’s that people have great potential, even when they aren’t yet born, and if you fight the good fight, it can be worthwhile.
I think you’ve hit on something I detect when I talk to pro-abortion hard core nuts. The fact that the mommy might be susceptible to abortion means she probably wouldn’t be giving birth to a child that’s going to be well taken care of, isn’t going to be wealthy and go to harvard, probably isn’t going to have the ideal genetics.
Isn’t that what planned parenthood was all about? Eugenically culling the black menace?
Well, reality doesn’t work like that. The hardest hit sometimes become our best and brightest. The idea of overcoming problems on your own might be hard for you to understand, but that’s the message Tebow is trying to get out there.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 1/26/2010 @ 7:56 pmBeing a “weird,” “creepy” person, maybe I shouldn’t comment, but I will because that’s the way we creepy weirdos roll.
Focus on the Family has a great spokesman in Tebow as long as his arm and knees hold out. Will he make it in the NFL? I don’t know, but Focus has a good shot right now at good exposure for its message and subsequent donations.
“The Women’s Media Center, the National Organization for Women, and other abortion groups” have a willing media to spread their message. Will their trivialization of womens’ issues hold out in 2010? I don’t know, but they have a a good shot right now at exposure for their message and subsequent donations.
And CBS gets to say “show me the money.”
That’s why I love the First Amendment and capitalism. Everybody wins.
Ag80 (1592cc) — 1/26/2010 @ 10:06 pmHow do these people find out what ads are going to be run?
Krusher (ceb4ea) — 1/27/2010 @ 2:00 amAnybody know what other ads are coming? Maybe Obuma
will advertise Government Motors or Fannie/Freddie or a
good anti-bank commercial…..
Did someone cut a sarcastic racist fart at #25?
Icy Texan (cbd930) — 1/27/2010 @ 4:39 amToo bad that so many will overlook, or simply not notice, the tactics of attempted suppression being employed by NOW and the other like-minded pro-choicers. This DOES go to show how weak & thin-skinned these people are. When it comes down to brass tacks, they basically have NO faith in the strength of the message that their spiritual/philosophical leaders espouse.
Icy Texan (cbd930) — 1/27/2010 @ 4:50 amApparently, freedom of speech only flows one way. If NOW and the pro-death left can’t shout you down with ideas, they shut you down.
For once, CBS is doing the right thing and I hope they air the ad.
Jonny Fever (76003c) — 1/27/2010 @ 5:25 amI don’t give a rat’s ass about Tebow one way or another (wouldn’t know him if I saw him), but the “should not be allowed” wording above sends shivers up and down my spine and has me reflexively reaching for my Bible and a gun.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 1/27/2010 @ 6:25 amDon’t lie, EW1. You bitter clingers sleep with you bible and guns. That is what Jesuslanders do.
JD (a553d9) — 1/27/2010 @ 6:33 am#35 JD:
Well, of course! That goes without saying.
Problem is, that I was awake when I read that!
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 1/27/2010 @ 6:47 am#35? Well, I thought I was awake, anyway.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 1/27/2010 @ 6:48 amI wonder how Pro-aborts would feel about “Post Natal Abortions”? Especially if Pro-abortionists were targeted for Post Natal Abortions.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 1/27/2010 @ 7:01 amThe left makes too much money from the abortion industry to let this ad come to light. God forbid we give women a real choice and show them a different view. Dems really like that “keep women dumb” plan.
J (2946f2) — 1/27/2010 @ 7:03 amIf women were not given the right to choose, just think of how many Heisman trophy winners there would be every year!
The ad doesn’t advocate anything about abortion laws.
Gerald A (a66d02) — 1/27/2010 @ 8:42 amGreat freaking point Gerald. This is purely an appeal to women making a choice. It’s always conflated with banning abortion for every reason, in ever jurisdiction, whenever anyone tries to tell women to choose life. I hardly even notice this enormous leap.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 1/27/2010 @ 8:50 amHow many feminists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
daleyrocks (718861) — 1/27/2010 @ 11:34 amWhy do feminists lack the maturity to listen to someone speak about their beliefs or actions which may be contrary to their own without suffering an emotional breakdown?
daleyrocks (718861) — 1/27/2010 @ 11:35 amIf women were not given the right to choose, just think of how many Heisman trophy winners there would be every year!
I thought President Obama won the Heisman trophy.
Louise B (90ead2) — 1/27/2010 @ 4:44 pmBeethoven is an even better example than Tebow. (For those who care, anyway.)
nk (db4a41) — 1/27/2010 @ 4:52 pmRe: #43
Icy Texan (3ae7ac) — 1/28/2010 @ 3:32 amRemember that photo of Bambi holding the Heisman? I still like my entry in that caption contest: “Run, OJ, run!”
When people talk about a woman’s right to abort, why do they not see that they are talking about a mother’s right to kill her own baby. And why do people want to suppress an ad that presents views differing from their own? I am not Christian but I support Tebow’s right to wear his silly eye black. I would favor abortion if I could justify it because I do not want to see the world filled with unwanted babies. But a mother killing her own baby, the baby she should want to protect with all her heart? That is too horrible. That women’s groups would self-righteously assert not only the right to kill babies as if it is a good thing but also the right to suppress the speech of those who value every single human beings life is unbelievable to me. Do the anti-Tebow people even know what they are saying?
Lorene (fc1407) — 1/28/2010 @ 8:51 amI guess this is Fox Sports’s idea of being clever.
I think it’s pretty messed up to put a gigantic “PRO CHOICE” banner next to some dude’s head who just said he was pro-life. The coverage is lame, but hey, it’s Fox Sports… they end with a giant boob (the go-daddy ad), as some kind of funny allusion to what’s going on here. Though their premise is that this is OK, they make a lot of statements about how CBS has lowered their standards, so they must be very ‘anything goes’ about ads now.
No big deal. I don’t expect or get much quality from Espn or Fox or most sports newscasters. But the huge banner “Pro-Choice” isn’t clever.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 1/28/2010 @ 10:41 pm