Patterico's Pontifications

1/20/2011

Pro-Infidelity Ad Nixed for Super Bowl

Filed under: General — Aaron Worthing @ 2:06 pm



[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here.]

I’m kind of reluctant to talk about this, because as you will see in a moment, by talking about it I am possibly feeding the problem I am trying to kill.  But still, I read over at the Blaze that Fox TV will not be airing an ad from a pro-infidelity website called Ashley Madison.

Now let’s back up right there, and point something out.  The Blaze is a website created by Glenn Beck to cover various interesting stories and I do enjoy it a lot.  It doesn’t appear to be officially corporately affiliated with Fox or Fox news, but it is affiliated with it in the sense that it is founded by a major Fox News personality (Beck).  Which makes it all a bit much for them to write this and praise Fox’s standards.  Why?  Because Fox News advertises for Ashley Madison all the time, airing ads like this:

My Marriage Matters from Ryan Hill on Vimeo.

I mean this is exactly like a man getting up and saying, “Kids, you should not smoke cigarettes.  Especially not Marlboros, which are the choice of rugged cowboys and have a soothing menthol flavor.  No sireee, don’t you even think about smoking a smooth, cool Marlboro, the choice of rebels and cowboys.”  At best you have to think this spokesman is an idiot, but at worst you have to suspect the guy is full of sh-t and is actually trying to duck around bans on cigarette ads.

The same problem is presented by this My Marriage Matters shtick.  Notice how he stresses that Madison will guarantee you a discreet affair.  And then repeats it. And if you actually go to the site all you see is a repeat of the ad, and a link to a petition.  Um, really?  You think that if a whole bunch of people sign a digital petition, that the people making this pro-cheating website will cry their eyes out and fold up an otherwise profitable business?  Do you think they are capable of shame?

Do you think these are rhetorical questions?

No, to a company like this publicity is oxygen. So the best strategy is to deny it publicity and thus suffocate it, if you don’t mind the violent rhetoric.

But it gets even worse.  You see, if you look at some of the links you start to see extremely powerful evidence that the “My Marriage Matters” site is a scam.  Namely, a site called Monogamy Movement makes a compelling case that MyMarriageMatters.org is a front for Ashley Madison.  And Above the Law adds some additional evidence, such as old screenshot where this supposedly anti-Ashley-Madison site links to Ashley Madison.  Heh.

And the economics of this doesn’t make any sense.  Are we really supposed to believe that this guy, Ryan Hill, is doing this just to get us to sign a useless petition?  How much of his money has he spent on this waste of time?  And for what reason?  Are we supposed to believe he is doing this just out of the goodness of his heart?

Which of course brings me to my dilemma, because, well, now I am giving this stupid site publicity, too.  Oh well, all I can hope is that if enough people bring this up Fox News and other networks will stop airing this alleged anti-Ashley-Madison ad.  Even if by some miracle it is not a sham, the fact is it is doing more harm than good.  Now if they want to re-cut the ad so it doesn’t promote the cheaters’ site, I would be cool with that.  But I ain’t holding my breath.

By the way, I think a cheater’s site like this is the best argument yet for bringing back the tort for alienation of affection.  That is the cause of action, abolished in most states, which allows a spurned spouse to sue the other woman or the other man, as applicable.  (It is notable that this cause of action still exists in North Carolina, where John Edwards lived. Just sayin’.)  I don’t know if that traditional cause of action could be extended to an infidelity-facilitating site like this, but I think it should be.

[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]

21 Responses to “Pro-Infidelity Ad Nixed for Super Bowl”

  1. I suspect the whole thing — all of it, from Ashley Madison to My Marriage Matters — is bogus. It’s a viral campaign for a movie or something, I’ll bet.

    Kman (d30fc3)

  2. I don’t agree with the site, but to have your ad “banned” by the super bowl is pretty standard as a way to get publicity. The fake petition makes the whole thing too complicated though.

    I wonder why they didn’t just produce a real ad and try to run that? Then they could talk up their “banned” ad on the radio or online?

    carlitos (a3d259)

  3. carlitos

    i don’t think they will let they air even if they cleaned it up.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  4. Kman, Ashley Madison is a real site with millions of members.

    carlitos (a3d259)

  5. Aaron, I’m not saying they would air it, just that they could get the same PR value without a fake petition.

    – Make ad
    – Attempt to buy airtime on Super Bowl
    – Network refuses to run it
    – Cry censorship, generate publicity, talk about it in other media forms

    carlitos (a3d259)

  6. Unless they were stupid enough to think that the transparent petition ruse would work, in case…they don’t need my free advice.

    carlitos (a3d259)

  7. carlitos

    well, it has suceeded in getting them on fox news and reportedly in playoffs ads.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  8. carlitos, they probably don’t care that the petition ruse is easy to figure out. They just want more attention for their scheme of profiting from human misery.

    The lawyer in the ‘pro marriage’ ad is quite a specimen.

    I’m amused that the thought that millions of idiots trust a company that is obviously dishonest with a secret that is probably of great financial value.

    Brilliant.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  9. Perhaps this is just cover for Fox News and the NFL to advertise. They know it’s a ruse, but it gives them deniability.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  10. AM has bought a bunch of site names, including (I think) ashleymadisonscam.com. They may have a lot of members (not millions) but those members are almost entirely men. Virtually everything about the commercials screams, “Scam.” (Same for Seacaptaindate and a million other scammy date sites.)

    I think the alienation of affection tort is a particularly awful idea, but AM is in the business of removing cash, not spouses. They have ads in which the hot sexy chick leaves the chubby balding spouse for the quick AM affair, but for those of you who are or who have met women…. yeah, they aren’t going to sign up for a website to meet random douchebags for sex.

    –JRM

    JRM (de6363)

  11. JRM, that’s a good point. I can’t believe I hadn’t questioned their claims more closely. I got “4.5 million since 2001″ from their FAQ. The fact that they advertise on Howard Stern, who accepts ads for other scams, should have given me a clue. Meh.

    carlitos (a3d259)

  12. . yeah, they aren’t going to sign up for a website to meet random douchebags for sex.

    Um yeah. This is true. I wasn’t really thinking about it, but the kind of woman who would actually want to meet up with some guy from this site is a) screwed up and b) thankfully rare.

    Still, I bet it’s not rare enough. I wish our society were at the point where it was obvious that adultery is an outrage that should have legal consequences.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  13. Ashley Madison has tried to run these ads before during the Superbowl. Can’t find the link, but am pretty sure they were denied last year, as well:

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/28654770/Cheating_Site_Denied_Ad_In_Super_Bowl_Program

    Jim (87e69d)

  14. JRM

    I think i will sum up your view with a haiku.

    Ashley Mad’son:
    the world’s largest factory
    of sausage

    Aaron "Haiku" Worthing (73a7ea)

  15. Have to admit am gullible enough to believe this guy was being serious, except I thought, the guy looks unattractively beady-eye angry, on the verge of tears, sweaty forehead, red in the face, and thought, “jeez, can’t they get a bit more telegenic specimen to champion fidelity?”

    Now that I notice how much they’re highlighting the site in this “protest” I think they want this guy to look like just a bit of an unphotogenic dweeb. *smacks forehead*

    no one you know (325a59)

  16. I actually saw the commercial for that site a few months ago once. I was sorta torn. Part of me thinks: Hey, way to see a market and exploit it. But most of me is just disgusted. I mean, grow a pair and get a divorce if you’re not happy in your marriage. Or better yet, get off your ass and work to make the damn thing work for both of you.

    The commercial did make me laugh for the same reasons others mention though: the way it tries to show that it’s hot women with lazy, fat guys looking for a fling. Yeah… as said: they don’t need to use a damn web site to find guys willing to sleep with them.

    Miguelitosd (f443a7)

  17. ashley madison
    breathe new life into term “rode
    hard put away wet”

    ColonelHaiku (5430d1)

  18. Isn’t Elliot Spitzer doing ads for Ashley Madison?

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  19. Ashley Madison has had trouble finding broadcasters and billboard operators willing to run ads encouraging infidelity. At first, I thought “My Marriage Matters” was part of a movement to quash commercials that found their way to air, but it turns out MMM is as phony as “Hugh Jidette,” the presidential candidate whose slogan is “Borrow & Spend.”

    I first saw the MMM ad months ago, and smelled a rat. When I went to the site, I noticed that it had more to do with slamming Ashley Madison than promoting an authentic agenda. Rat status confirmed.

    The dude who came up with this idea is a contemptible human being, but I can’t say that it’s not clever.

    L.N. Smithee (fee6be)

  20. Carlitos: that link made my day.

    Dustin (b54cdc)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2378 secs.