Austin Bar Makes Amends After Putting Out the Year’s Worst Sidewalk Sign

There are awesome chalkboard sidewalk signs, and there are less awesome chalkboard sidewalk signs. Minibar, a bar in Austin, Texas, recently put out a less awesome chalkboard sidewalk sign—and then scrambled to contain the damage.

The sign above would be bad enough at any time of year, but particularly so in October, which is domestic violence awareness month. (Also, sorry, but Heineken is an import.) An Austin resident who works at a women's shelter in town posted a photo of the sign on Instagram and Facebook, and it was soon picked up nationally.

The bar moved quickly to atone for the offense, firing the person responsible and pledging to donate $1 of every domestic beer sold this month to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. (Check out the Facebook comments for proof of how welcome this kind of swift, decisive action can be among consumers.) Might be time for copywriting lessons, too.


    

Starbucks Creates Delicious Doughnut-Muffin Hybrid, and Somehow Pisses Everyone Off

You would think only joyful celebration would follow the news that Starbucks has created the "Duffin," a doughnut-muffin crossover pastry. But instead, we've ended up with Duffingate, a tempest in a Twitter teapot.

The story starts a few years back, when a small British bakery chain, Bea's of Bloomsbury, began selling its own jam-filled doughnut-textured muffin that customers would soon dub the Duffin. All was right with the world until last week, when Starbucks U.K. announced its own Duffin—and even had its supplier, Rich Products, trademark the name.

"I never trademarked the name duffin because I didn't think it was necessary," Bea's chef Bea Vo tells the Guardian. "We are a tiny independent—can we afford to fight this trademark and any future cease-and-desist letter? No."

Starbucks reportedly says it won't enforce the trademark, but that hasn't stopped the digital fist-shaking from small business advocates." Another reason to boycott Starbucks," notes one Londoner, "if the terrible coffee is not enough."


    

Barilla Chairman Vows Never to Make Ads Featuring Gay People

In recent years, LGBT imagery has been increasingly appearing in mainstream ads for major marketers. Italian pasta brand Barilla has apparently missed the memo. The company is drawing calls for boycotts from LGBT rights groups after Guido Barilla (above), its chairman, said in an Italian radio interview on Wednesday that Barilla "would never" create an ad featuring a same-sex family, reports Reuters. "Ours is a classic family where the woman plays a fundamental role," he said, adding that if gay people "like our pasta and our advertising, they'll eat our pasta. If they don't like it, then they will not eat it, and they will eat another brand." The company issued a statement Thursday with a pseudo-apology, apparently only sort of understanding that comments like Barilla's are going to make a lot of people—not just gay people—not like its pasta or its advertising. Via Gawker.


    

It’s Been 101 Years, but It’s Still Too Soon for Titanic Jokes in Advertising

Even though more than a century has passed since the Titanic sank, it's still too soon to joke about it in ads. Red Bull got in trouble for this ad hinting that the more than 1,500 people who drowned in April 1912 could have survived if they'd had the renowned energy drink aboard—because it "gives you wings." Don't worry. In Britain, the Ad Standards Authority was alerted, as 79 complaints have been lodged against the ad, including one from the Titanic Heritage Trust. Red Bull's slogan is OK—it's better than the more truthful "Red Bull tastes like mouthwash"—but maybe they shouldn't apply it to real historical disasters anymore. Go ahead and crumple up those Hindenburg sketches, fellas.


    

Kenneth Cole Clarifies: Being a Jerk on Twitter Is Just Good Business

Whatever he was wearing yesterday—boots, loafers, sandals, pumps—Kenneth Cole appeared to really step in it when he tweeted out an awkward reference to the Syrian crisis as a way of promoting his footwear. It wasn't the first embarrassing tweet for the pun-loving would-be copywriter. In 2011, he famously suggested that protesters in Egypt were simply all riled up about his spring collection. It seemed quite odd that Cole—who writes the @KennethCole account personally—would have misfired in precisely the same way purely by accident. And that's because it wasn't an accident. In the upcoming October issue of Details, on newsstands Sept. 19, Cole speaks about the infamous Egypt tweet, and makes it clear that he's really not sorry about it whatsoever.

     Q: In 2011, you were criticized for tweeting that the riots in Cairo happened because Egyptians "heard our new spring collection is now available." Did you write that tweet yourself?
     A: I did. I write most of them myself, often as people around me cringe. Billions of people read my inappropriate, self-promoting tweet, I got a lot of harsh responses, and we hired a crisis-management firm. If you look at lists of the biggest Twitter gaffes ever, we're always one through five. But our stock went up that day, our e-commerce business was better, the business at every one of our stores improved, and I picked up 3,000 new followers on Twitter. So on what criteria is this a gaffe? [Laughs] Within hours, I tweeted an explanation, which had to be vetted by lawyers. I'm not even sure I used the words I'm sorry—because I wasn't sorry.

In fact, Cole did apologize last time—though it's true he didn't use the words "I'm sorry." "I apologize to everyone who was offended by my insensitive tweet," he wrote on Facebook at the time, saying his "attempt at humor" was "poorly timed and absolutely inappropriate." Cole has not apologized at all for Thursday's Syria tweet—proving that, contrary to popular belief, he actually doesn't make the same mistake twice.


    

Dunkin’ Donuts Apologizes for Blackface Ad, but Not Everyone Is Sorry

Dunkin' Donuts in Thailand has just seen a 50 percent bump in sales on the heels of a new print, TV and Facebook ad campaign, and the CEO of the local franchise is crowing about the sugar rush. So what if it's all because of a controversial ad?

No, really, CEO Nadim Salhani says—so what? The ad in question shows a smiling woman in blackface with bright-pink lipstick holding the chain's new "charcoal donut." Predictably, this is kicking up a fury—outside its target region—though Salhani says that's just "paranoid American thinking." Salhani, whose teenage daughter is the model in the ad, further asks the Associated Press: "We're not allowed to use black to promote our donuts? I don't get it. What's the big fuss? What if the product was white and I painted someone white? Would that be racist?"

Dunkin' Donuts in the U.S. sees the situation differently, posting an apology on its website and promising a swift takedown due to the campaign's "insensitivity." Human Rights Watch called the ad "bizarre and racist." There's no word on whether Salhani, a surefire candidate in his own mind for father and marketer of the year, is still employed.


    

Facebook Just Can’t Handle Boobies, Human or Otherwise

Whether they're nourishing babies or enriching the biodiversity of islands in the Indian Ocean, boobies just don't sit well with Facebook.

The social network has long been criticized for its inconsistent approach to breastfeeding photos. And now, a small Australian island's tourism board says a Facebook ad inviting eco-tourists to its Bird 'n' Nature Week has been unfairly banned—for a pun about the seabirds known as boobies.

"Some gorgeous shots here of some juvenile boobies," the ad read, next to images of the Red-footed Booby, Brown Booby and endangered Abbott's Booby. That copy is certainly suggestive, and you may even consider the innuendo mildly pedophilic. But Christmas Island tourism marketing manager Linda Cash figured at first that the ban was a mistake. She tells Travel Daily News: "We presumed our original advert was blocked automatically so we appealed to Facebook directly who re-affirmed the campaign was banned due to the sexual language—particularly the use of the word 'boobies.' "

Sam Collins, founder of Ethos Travel, which offers trips from the U.K. to Christmas Island, adds: "One of the world's great eco-tourism destinations is being deprived of its lifeline because someone at Facebook cannot comprehend that a booby is a bird."

Christmas Island has used the same "juvenile boobies" joke before, as seen in this photo series from January.


    

Kraft’s Zesty Guy Returns to Sell More Dressing by Undressing

Kraft is bringing back the Zesty Guy for a new series of print ads, despite (or more likely because of) the backlash the brand received last time around from conservative protest group One Million Moms. Zesty Guy, created by agency Being, played by model Anderson Davis and photographed by Douglas Friedman, will be shirtless and sometimes pantsless in ads for the Raspberry Vinaigrette, Classic Catalina, Thousand Island and Classic Ranch dressings. (Check them all out after the jump.) His obsessive need for salad dressings in bizarrely nonfood situations is still a bit odd, but the variety of costumes and settings makes up for it. Plus, he seems like he's having a good time. And to think, he might not have come back at all if the moms hadn't complained about his "g*nitals" the first time around.


    

Um, What Exactly Is Brian the Robot Interrupting Here?

Recently, British insurance comparison service Confused.com and Publicis in London launched ads featuring a new mascot, Brian the Robot, who seems to have a knack for creating uncomfortable situations. Specifically, in one of the spots, he appears to interrupt a couple in mid-blow job. The brand has since denied this interpretation, with the director of marketing telling British advertising site Campaign, "Admittedly, the woman is somewhat startled by Brian appearing in the car window, having been tying her shoelace." The shoelace argument doesn't quite match with Confused's own write-up about the ad, which describes the setting as "a romantic spot overlooking a city at sunset" where "we see Brian approach a lone parked car and tap on one of the closed windows, interrupting a couple looking slightly flustered." According to several YouTube commenters, a newer version of the ad now shows the couple kissing, likely due to dozens of complaints to Britain's Advertising Standards Authority that the original version was inappropriate for children. Check out more of Brian's odd interactions after the jump.


    

British Ad With Mom Showing Off Cleavage to Her Son’s Friends Escapes Censure

Undeniably stupid, but worth banning? That was the tough call facing Britain's ad watchdog as it dealt with 176 complaints over the spot below, for soft drink Irn-Bru. The plot, such as it is, involves a mom proudly showing off her push-up bra to her son's friends—much to the acute embarrassment of the son, and the slack-jawed awe of the friends. The soft drink is positioned, also stupidly, as an antidote to the embarrassment. Each time the kid takes a swig, he becomes blissfully mellow again despite his dire circumstances.

The Ad Standard Authority's ruling? It cleared the spot on all grounds, saying the interaction between the mom and the friends did not constitute irresponsible behavior. "We considered that the action relied on the mum being confident and attractive, but not consciously or overtly behaving in a sexualized or flirtatious way," the ASA said. "We also considered that the focus of the ads was the son's embarrassment at the effect his mum's appearance was having on his friends. Therefore, and particularly in the context of ads intended to portray a surreal and lighthearted comedic approach, we did not consider that the action or depiction of the female protagonist was sexist or demeaning and concluded that the ads were not in breach of the code."

For its part, Irn-Bru maker AG Barr said it simply wanted the ad, created by The Leith Agency in Edinburgh, to "stay true to the traditionally cheeky and irreverent sense of humor" of its previous ads.

    

Is This Surfing Ad From Roxy Apparel Too Sexy for Its Own Good?

Surf and sports apparel brand Roxy's teaser ad for the Pro Biarritz 2013 surfing contest, which it's sponsoring, is more about butts than surfing, which hasn't sat well with some viewers. (See what I did there?) More than a few critics have sneered at the ad's focus on the surfer's body instead of her skills, and I have to say, I agree with them. The idea of not showing the woman's face was to have fans guess who she was—turns out it was Stephanie Gilmore, as you can see in the reveal video after the jump. But coming from a company that claims to speak to female athletes, the teaser video pretty much ignored athletics for blatant eye candy, and Roxy's official response to its critics was a non-committal word salad that didn't actually address the main complaint. Besides, it's not like Gilmore would be less attractive or marketable if they actually showed her surfing.

    

Vegetarians Have a Beef With Red Robin’s Garden Burger Ad

Back in January, Red Robin basked in the glow of good publicity after the manager of one of its North Carolina restaurants comped a pregnant patron $11.50 and added a good-luck message to her bill. Aww! The coverage this week, however, is closer to aww-ful, as the chain is taking heat from vegetarians for a commercial touting its 24 burger options. The 15-second spot includes the line, "We even have a garden burger … just in case your teenage daughter is going through a phase." The actress's overdone delivery, probably intended as conspiratorial, comes off as condescending. Now, you'd think vegetarians would be too scrawny and weak to kick up a fuss, but they flocked to social media (where else?) and accused the chain of being disrespectful and callous, demanding that it pull the ad and/or apologize. On Monday, Red Robin's communications chief, Kevin Caulfield, told the Huffington Post that the ad "is planned to be out of rotation and no longer on the air very soon." The controversy will have no lasting impact, and I expect any ill will to vanish as soon as the commercial does. It's not like the chain's employees posted videos of themselves licking garden burgers or sticking their toes in the lettuce—yet. Behave, burger people! See a few more spots from the campaign after the jump.

    

Kraft Salad Dressing Ad Gets Best Present Ever: A Slap From One Million Moms

Kraft's saucy ad campaign (via ad agency Being) for its Zesty Italian salad dressing launched in early April, but it's taken a rebuke from One Million Moms to give it a sudden enormous boost of visibility. The moms are super pissed off about the print ad above, featuring the campaign's hunky model, Anderson Davis, enjoying a naked picnic. The ad is far from subtle—the picnic blanket has pretty obviously been pulled over Davis's privates in such a way that it looks somewhat obscene. This infuriated the moms, which write on their website: "Last week's issue of People magazine had the most disgusting ad on the inside front cover that we have ever seen Kraft produce. A full 2-page ad features a n*ked man lying on a picnic blanket with only a small portion of the blanket barely covering his g*nitals. It is easy to see what the ad is really selling." Nope, they can't even say the words naked or genitals. The moms add: "Christians will not be able to buy Kraft dressings or any of their products until they clean up their advertising." Kraft responded with this statement: "Our Kraft dressing's 'Let's Get Zesty' campaign is a playful and flirtatious way to reach our consumers. People have overwhelmingly said they're enjoying the campaign and having fun with it."

    

Swiffer Feels the Heat After Putting Rosie the Riveter Back in the Kitchen

Now that women are the primary breadwinners in 40 percent of American households, it's a great time for Swiffer to co-opt the iconic image of Rosie the Riveter—who urged women to roll up their sleeves and join the workforce during World War II—and use her to get women back in the kitchen where they belong! Funny thing, though, a lot of women objected to that, and now Procter & Gamble, in one of those smart moves where companies actually listen to their consumers, is working to remove the image everywhere it's being used. Satisfied consumers are chanting Rosie's slogan of "We can do it!" relatively pleased that Swiffer heard them.

If you didn't know the history, the ad would seem boring at best. It has a woman in Rosie's trademark red polkadot hairkerchief and rugged denim button-down holding a Swiffer steam mop with an arched eyebrow and a no-nonsense look on her face. She's about to get her deep clean on with steam clean. If wardrobe had put that woman in nearly any other outfit, we wouldn't have thought twice about it. But now bloggers are not only upset over the soon-to-be-destroyed Swiffer ad, they're scrutinizing the entire cleaning category, which has been overpopulated for far too long with the sort of sexist bullshit that demeans both sexes, reducing men to bumbling children and elevating women to powerful princesses of cleanliness. Which is ridiculous.

I recommend they take some tips from Tide. Look, gender doesn't matter in cleaning. Women, men, even children and probably a few intelligent dogs can mop a floor. And that will be true until we ditch our Swiffers and start mopping the floor with our genitalia.

    

Will the Fantasy Genre Ever Grow Up and Ditch the Chainmail Bikini?

It's taken the fantasy genre decades to grow out of its image as a juvenile boys' club obsessed with cleavage and crossbows. And just as Game of Thrones seemed to be lifting fantasy into the modern mainstream, it's now taken a step backward—with many of the genre's professional writers shocked to see that a recent issue of their most-respected industry journal had dedicated its cover to the image of a warrior woman in a scalemail bikini straddling the corpse of a frost giant.

Sure, scantily clad women with swords were a staple of fantasy fiction in the 1960s through the 1980s, thanks largely to the popular artwork of husband-and-wife team Boris Vallejo and Julie Bell. But as the pool of writers and readers for the genre has become more diverse, the exploitative cover art style has fallen out of fashion. (Here's a good gallery of what modern fantasy covers look like.) So when the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America ran the scalemail bikini cover on its winter 2013 SFWA Bulletin, many members were offended. Making thing worse, the next issue featured an essay from a male writer praising Mattel's Barbie doll for "maintain[ing] her quiet dignity the way a woman should."

Then the minotaur shit really hit the fan with the next issue, in which two veteran genre writers, Mike Resnick and Barry N. Malzberg, argued at length that there's nothing wrong with busty barbarians and that the SFWA was being bullied and censored by irrational feminists bent on "thought control." The effect of this attempted rebuttal was a bit like dousing a campfire with a bucket of bullets and gasoline.

In recent days, female fantasy authors have blogged at length about what they perceive as a clear pattern of sexism by their own industry publication. "That isn't armor she's wearing, and she's not a warrior woman," author Foz Meadows fired back on Sunday. "She's a masturbatory fantasy from your misspent youth, and now you're trying to act as though the past fifty years of equality never actually happened." Similar reactions were posted by authors such as E. Catherine Tobler, Kameron Hurley and Mary Robinette Kowal, all of whom are worth reading for more context on how the debacle played out.

The SFWA president has issued a lengthy apology and created a task force to look into how the bulletin could or should be reimagined to better reflect the people writing fantasy today.

UPDATE: Here's a handy list of more than 50 authors who've written blog posts criticizing the SFWA for allowing a pattern of sexism in its quarterly Bulletin.

    

Flight Attendant in Czech Drink Ad Fantasizes, ‘You’re All Going to Die’

The Prague office of Lowe & Partners heads into some dangerous airspace with its ad for the "relaxing drink" Zenonade, which apparently motivates a flight attendant to fantasize about all her passengers dying. Admittedly, I too find myself thinking we're all going to die whenever I get on an airplane, but I doubt this ad was delving into my paranoid subconscious so much as intentionally courting controversy. As a provocative ad for a new product, however, the spot seems to fail on two fronts: It doesn't do much to explain the product, and it hasn't even drummed up the outrage its creators had intended. (Agency CEO Martin Lochmann seemed disappointed when he told the Huffington Post that he “expected it to be worse.”) A related spot for the drink, which you can watch after the jump, avoids threats of imminent death—unless you happen to be a piece of Ikea furniture.

    

Lego Under Fire for Sticker Set Featuring Leering Construction Worker

You can build almost anything with Legos—even controversy!

The company came under fire this week for a licensed sticker set that includes a leering, waving male construction worker and the caption, "Hey Babe!" Journalist Josh Stearns set off a mini firestorm after spying the stickers in a store and calling out Lego on his Tumblr. "I was stunned … street harassment is the most prevalent form of sexual violence for both men and women in the United States," he writes. (He also pointed to a great Lego ad with a girl from 1981 to show "how far they have fallen" in their treatment of gender issues.) Some also noted that the stickers are exclusionary—no women on that crew—and generally portray construction workers as insensitive loafers.

Lego initially responded by saying, "We firmly believe in the play experience we offer, a system that lends itself to years of unlimited play possibilities for any child. To communicate the Lego experience to children we typically use humor and we are sorry that you were unhappy with the way a minifigure was portrayed here." (The "humor" remark subsequently came under fire.) Turns out the product was discontinued in 2010, and the company that made it, Creative Imagination, tanked two years later. Ultimately, Lego told Stearns, "We would not approve such a product again." That's good news, and to its credit, Lego has built up plenty of goodwill through the years, particularly recently. Still, even before stickergate, the company was taking heat for reinforcing gender stereotypes, and they need to do more to counteract that or risk looking like a bunch of blockheads.

    

Reminder: Do Not Show a Man Having Sex With a Pig on Your Billboard

Of all the images to take from British TV series Black Mirror, the one that made a billboard for Australian TV network Studio was of a man doing the underpants Charleston with a pig. Cable provider Foxtel issued an apology in response to the immediate blowback, and it's as spineless as the offending image was tasteless and bewildering. "[The billboard] was intended to provoke," it said in a statement, "but it is clearly in appalling taste and demonstrates a lapse of judgment by Studio, and a failure in the approvals process at Foxtel." Well, no kidding. Why even move forward with an idea like that when you know you'll just have to apologize and take it right down? Part of me wants to see what would have happened if they'd stood their ground.

    

New Zealand Brewer Shows You How Not to Reference Gay Marriage on a Billboard

The latest Tui beer billboard from New Zealand's DB Breweries is a homophobic eyesore, according to feedback on the brand's Facebook page. Or else it's funny and people should get over it, also according to feedback on the brand's Facebook page. Tui's marketing manager claims the ad's headline—"Dad's new husband seems nice." "Yeah right"—is an innocent combination of the brand's iconic catchphrase with current events: New Zealand's parliament passing a Marriage Equality Act earlier this month. The ad was meant "to highlight the common situation or uncertainty experienced when someone's parent remarries," he says. In other words, the "Yeah right" refers to the awkwardness of a parent remarrying another, not just someone of the same sex. I don't think Tui meant any actual harm here, but the delivery was crap. If you have to explain a joke, that's proof that it bombed. That's not something you can blame on the audience.

    

The New York Times Defends Putting Ad With Bloodied Man Next to Bombing Coverage

The New York Times took some heat from readers on Monday for allowing an online ad showing a bloodied man lying on the ground to appear next to coverage of the bombings in Boston. The ad, for the Sundance Channel show Rectify, received enough criticism that the paper's public editor, Margaret Sullivan, weighed in with a piece Wednesday—giving some background and confirming that the paper did indeed approve the juxtaposition, and that it wasn't just some oversight. "This did not feel like it crossed the threshold," the Times's ranking advertising executive, Todd R. Haskell, tells Sullivan. Haskell says that by Monday, it had been a full week since the bombings, which made the ad more acceptable. "We try to be as respectful as we can but these are subjective calls that we make in real time," he adds. (The show premiered Monday, which also made it more difficult to move it to a later date.) Sullivan ends up agreeing with Haskell and with Richard J. Meislin, a former associate managing editor who now is a liaison between the newsroom and the ad department, who said he thought the juxtaposition was "unfortunate, but it did not cross the line to the point where we would ask that the ad be taken down." What do you think?