Ed Vitagliano
AFA Journal news editor
September 2001 – It is no secret, as numerous surveys reveal, that parents are just plain sick and tired of the increasingly smutty sitcoms and dramas that continue to accelerate onto the highway of prime-time network television. Hollywood, however, has remained completely indifferent, forcing parents and pro-family groups to pressure advertisers into the role of cultural emergency brake.
That pressure has led to some positive signs, including 35 major corporate advertisers banding together to create the Family Friendly Programming Forum. The coalition works to improve the nature of prime-time TV by pushing Hollywood to provide more programming choices with less sex, violence, and profanity; handing out annual "Family Programming Awards;" and even funding new family-friendly sitcom and drama prospects for network television.
A handful of TV sponsors, however, appear to be following the bawdier trail of network shows, making it unclear whether companies will ultimately restrain filth on television or dive deeper into the sewer with Hollywood.
Tamer times being left behind
In the past, TV advertisers have been considered notoriously conservative when it comes to sexual themes. Even the WB Network, for example, which is no stranger to sex in its prime-time line-up, was jarred in 1999 by a provocative television ad for Candie's perfume. The spot showed a man pulling open his boxer shorts and spraying the fragrance on his genitals while his lover awaited him in bed. The WB refused to air the spot.
Times may be changing, however. Some companies seem more willing to move beyond the tamer advertising conventions in order to grab viewer attention on the tube.
One of the more famous examples is the marketing campaign for Clairol Herbal Essence Shampoo. In that series of ads, women in various settings are shown washing their hair, moaning in ecstasy to clearly mimic sexual pleasure. The woman is always overheard by others, and the ad touts the shampoo's "organic experience" as an obvious double entendre.
Sexual imagery and innuendo continue to infiltrate mainstream television advertising concepts. For example, a recent Mello Yello ad focused on a teenage boy at his girlfriend's home prior to the prom. As the mother proudly fusses over the young lady in the background, the girl's father takes the young man aside and asks, "What are your intentions with my daughter?"
The young man is shown giving three possible answers, one of which is, "I don't want to jinx it, but I think tonight is the night!" While it is clearly the teen's hope that he and the girl will be having sex later on, the commercial lets the viewer know that his third answer - the "smooth," Mello Yello answer - is better. In wink-wink fashion, the young man tells the father that he only has "honorable" intentions.
A television ad which uses a teenage boy's sexual designs on a young lady - while blowing smoke in the face of dear ol' dad - is something which would have been unimaginable even five years ago.
However, sexual content in ads sometimes goes beyond mere innuendo into a shamelessness usually reserved for network sitcoms. In a recent spot for Arbor Mist wine, men on a beach have to impress their girlfriends/wives in order to be allowed to imbibe. They create a sand sculpture of a male nude, which is shown from behind. One of the women, apparently staring at the anatomically correct image from the front side, exclaims, "Oh my! Now that deserves an Arbor Mist!"
Even the conventions regarding sexual "diversity" appear to be shifting in TV advertising. During the 1997 Super Bowl, for example, Holiday Inn offended many viewers with an ad about a transsexual. Showing up at a high school reunion, a beautiful woman - who appears to have had numerous cosmetic surgeries - is confronted by a man trying to recall her name. He then realizes that she used to be a male classmate.
USA Today, which sponsored a volunteer "Ad Meter" to gauge viewer reactions to the Super Bowl advertisements, said the Holiday Inn transsexual spot did not fare well with volunteers. Angry complaints from viewers, Holiday Inn franchisees and hotel guests led Holiday Inn Worldwide to pull the commercial from future rotation.
In 2001, however, such "alternative" sexual orientations do not seem capable of stirring much controversy. In June episodes of ER, Will & Grace and the NBA playoffs, homosexuality was used to sell beer for Miller Lite. The spot showed two women sending a complimentary beer to a handsome man sitting across a crowded bar. Then the man's homosexual lover sits down, caressing his hand - which now holds the women's gift. Viewer reaction was light to nonexistent.
The 'drool factor'
Trying a new advertising approach during the Super Bowl has become something of a tradition over the last few years, as the annual television event has become a showcase for some of the most inventive commercials shown all year.
In 1999, however, industry observers noted that numerous Super Bowl ads used sex to hawk their product. Labeling it "the drool factor," Advertising Age pointed out that companies such as Doritos, Victoria's Secret, Visa, and Hotjobs.com used sexy and seductive women as a way to catch the eye.
A similar TV ad approach has been used this year to market Warner-Lambert's Dentyne Ice. A beautiful young woman spots a man - apparently a total stranger - across a pool hall. As the woman slowly approaches, she seductively places a square of gum on her tongue. She kisses the man, and as they turn to face the camera, their breath has turned ice cold.
Of course, the old advertising axiom is that "sex sells" - it always has and it always will. For example, some might argue that the fact that ads for Victoria's Secret have begun to appear on TV is not an indication that something new is happening, but rather the continuation of a very old trend.
That being noted, at least using sex to sell lingerie makes sense - however objectionable it might be to see women parading around seductively in their skivvies. But using sex to sell potato chips, credit cards, and chewing gum indicates that something else is at work: the complete sexualization of our culture. It is precisely because every area of our lives is being boiled down to sex that television advertisers are joining the crowd.
It may backfire. If advertisers join the trends of Tinsel Town instead of curbing them, frustrated parents may only have one last option, and ironically it is a suggestion made by the purveyors of filth themselves. Parents may have to simply turn off the TV. 
