Provocative / Offensive Ads #1

[Paulbpc]

LOL the Puma ad.

I highly doubt that Starbucks ad had any subliminal messages about 9/11. That's being a little paranoid.

 

[Trista]

I agree, I doubt there were hidden messages in it but it can get looked at over and over and someone's gonna find something wrong with it.

 

[kissmesweet]

^^

 

[iluvjeisa]

Honestly, I don't find the starbucks ad all that offensive for the simple reason that my first thoughts have absolutely nothing to do with sept. 11 or the twin towers.

Yes, after reading that report I can see why the word collapse, and the timing of the posters could be construed as offesive and inappropriate, but other then that there's nothing that screams controversy.

Until I read that it was published back in 2002 I was thinking it was just a bunch of hypersensitive activists complaining about it.

Well, I can see the reference, but it's hard for me to see that it is offensive at all. I mean, they are drawing from the powerful imagery of something deeply traumatizing and they're transforming it into a soothing image, and beverage. I think it's rather ingenious, and I can't see anything disrespectful about it.

 

[primaballerina]

A&F ads quite often borderline p*rn, i mean sometimes they're just kinda hot or racy...but then other times its like "whoa can you even post that stuff?!"

 

[Ivee_]

Probably my favourite threat =)
Dior ad with Gisele and another female model, advertising the logo saddlebag

edit - please see tfs guidelines regarding credits

 

[xmodel citizen]

^^ WOW. Sexy!!!

 

[testinofan]

^^ WOW. Sexy!!!

yes sexy but maybe not provocative

 

[crow_watcher]

Here's a new meaning for the "G spot"

Gucci ad from Europe

gurl.com

 

[Ivee_]

yes sexy but maybe not provocative

well, I do think it's provocative.
An ad doesn't need to have naked people to be provocative, an expresion can tell so much more.

 

[ChrissyM]

ivee please provide a source for the dior ad you posted so that it won't be deleted.. thanks

 

[TheGlassAngel]

I think its quite provacative

 

[shoexgal]

Why do the puma ads have to be so downright sexual? They are not selling any products to me that way. And if they want more people to buy their stuff, its not going to make mom's buy their daughters those shoes for High School

 

[KhaoticKharma]

I find the majority of these ads more disgusting than offensive... apart from a few, like the Opium ads with Sophie Dahl, these ads are all trashy. You can have sexuality- just try to inject some form of class, please!

 

[evae]

Why do the puma ads have to be so downright sexual? They are not selling any products to me that way. And if they want more people to buy their stuff, its not going to make mom's buy their daughters those shoes for High School

i think the puma ad was a fake

 

[Sweet rus]

my scans


sorry, I wanted to post it in another thread

later I will post Loreal ads with Doutzen and Michelle Buswell

 

[eternitygoddess]

^I don't see anything provocative about those two.

 

[evae]

^^ me neither

 

[TheGlassAngel]

I think Sweet Rus was going to post them on the FW 2006 ads thread

 

[Anastasia]

jimmy choo

adpulp.com

That Jimmy Choo trunk ad is really...I don't know. It certainly got my attention. I don't find it "offensive", but I don't like it at all either. What's the message? Who wants to aspire to being a murdered body in a trunk, about to be buried in the desert? Even the fake Puma ads, I can see what they were going for - sex sells, and even something as tacky as that will appeal to some. I can see some women desiring to be on their knees in an alley, thinking it's cool. I can't any woman desiring to be a corpse, even a well heeled one. And I'd be highly suspect of any man that ran out and bought Jimmy Choos for his partner after seeing that