| Anti-gay marriage amendments to the federal and state
constitutions flourished in 11 states and nationally, all supported
by advertising that reflected the hostility that most Americans and
politicians felt about the idea, as well as gay organizations fighting
for it. Altogether, with politicians, gay and anti-gay organizations,
as well as several corporate advertisers, over 100 ads posited a
position on same-sex marriage in 2004 alone.
In fact, due in large part to the negative politicking, negative-rated
commercials in the Commercial Closet archive nearly doubled for 2004,
with an increase of 90 percent. Of the 87 ads rated by Commercial
Closet for last year, 40 (45.9 percent) fell into the Negative category,
compared to only 21 (19 percent) in 2003. Oregon was an advertising-heavy
battleground, with a strong TV presence by both gay and anti-gay
forces, while other states such as North Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah,
Georgia, Louisiana and Tennessee fared with mostly negative ads.
Over and over again, political candidates running for state or national
office — Republican and Democrat, male and female — touted
in their ads that they voted against gay marriage or worked to “protect
the sanctity of marriage.” More negative ads chimed in from
anti-gay forces including Focus on the Family and Americans United
to Preserve Marriage, a so-called 527 organization from fundamentalist
Gary Bauer, against presidential hopeful John Kerry.
Left-leaning MoveOn.org and LGBT organizations fought back, lead
by the Human Rights Campaign with 22 ads alone, along with GLAAD,
MassEquality.org in Massachusetts, Stonewall Columbus in Ohio and
the Constitution Defense League in Missouri. Up north, where full
marriage for lesbians and gays is expected to be approved nationally
soon, pro-gay organizations Canadians for Equal Marriage and Equal
Marriage for Same-Sex Couples have pushed for the cause.
MTV addressed the marriage issue in its ongoing, diversity-oriented
Fight for Your Rights series. One of the six featured a young man
stopping people everywhere, asking them for “permission to
marry Megan.” The ending asks viewers, “How would you
feel if you had to ask 260 million people for the right to marry?” Others
in the series perversely linked piercing, and pairs of hot dogs and
donuts to same-sex marriage.
Some corporations see opportunity too
Responding to the hot topic, some corporate advertisers chimed in too. Fashion
brand Kenneth Cole created a print ad showing two men holding hands, saying, “52
percent of Americans think same-sex marriage doesn’t deserve a good reception.
Are you putting us on?” Of course, the text has a double meaning and the
men wear a watch and black shirts by the designer, with their wedding bands.
Kenneth Cole’s gay marriage ad is part of a larger issues-driven campaign
that looks at HIV, affirmative action, the deficit, censorship, and the presidential
election (partisanship was carefully avoided). The marriage ad ran in both gay
media and GQ, though it is still rare for advertisers to run gay-specific ads
in both general media and gay media. Since 1994, Kenneth Cole has created advertising
sensitive to AIDS and gay issues, positioned as clever one-liner comments from
Cole himself.
Specific properties of Radisson and W Hotels have carried advertisements featuring
same-sex wedding ceremonies, a source of business for them.
Promoting it’s “WOW Vows, the W Los Angeles showed two grooms atop
a wedding cake with the headline, “Come celebrate your vows…in a
romantic world of wonder.” Radisson Hotel New Orleans showed two men holding
hands wearing a wedding band with the headline “Committed,” though
the individual hotel’s web site only reflects opposite-sex weddings. Since
2003, W Hotels have also run corporate advertising in the gay market, but Radisson
has not.
Two-hundred-year-old Boston jeweler Shreve Crump & Low ran print ads featuring
wedding bands and carrying the headline, “This Is Love. It’s Not
Up For A Vote.” Two years earlier, the store initiated ads in the gay community
with a headline putting a twist on old conventional wisdom, “Not all the
good ones are gay or taken. Some are both.”
Faced with a difficult political situation and a difficult history to overcome,
Coors Brewing Co. placed ads in gay media explicitly stating, “Let’s
be clear. We don’t support amending the Constitution.” In addition,
it explained, “This election year, there’s a lot of national debate
on issues that are important to the LGBT community, including the Federal Marriage
Amendment. And, as a political candidate, Pete Coors has expressed his personal
position on this issue. Coors Brewing Company’s position on this issue
differs from Pete Coors.’”
With the reintroduction of the Federal Marriage Amendment, and several more states
preparing to vote on amending their constitutions to address the issue, more
debate via advertising is surely on the way. Will corporate advertisers continue
to follow as well? |