Shocker (not really): I Didn’t Watch The Super Bowl
February 2, 2009
Author 
In 
I didn’t watch the Super Bowl. Wait, let me back up – I don’t watch any sports. Actually, one step further – I don’t even watch TV.
Being a member of the male gender in our planet’s society, it is assumed that I watch sports. Apparently though, it is still forgivable that I don’t watch them 364 days a year. But to not watch one specific game, believe it or not, I am actually viewed by others as socially deviant.
My friend in the advertising industry commented to me, “oh, but you have to watch the commercials.” No, I don’t – I can let the internet crowdsource the sticky ones for me. I’ll see them later – if they are that good they’ll rise to the top of social media.
Super Bowl ads themselves are interesting from a marketing perspective. They are one of the last safe havens of the TV-industrial complex, a relic of the previous century. Some people like my friend who is in advertising watch the game just for the ads, proving once again advertising is content. This poses a bigger question: if people are tuning in to the Super Bowl purely for the ads because they know advertisers are bringing their A-game, why don’t advertisers bring their A-game all year?
Regardless, the targeting of mass audiences in itself is a dated tactic – it’s not about how many, it’s about who you are reaching. There’s no reason to pay ridiculous sums of money to interrupt people with messages when there are tactful, cheaper and directly measurable ways to reach people actually interested in them. Marketers need to move away from a world of just looking to reach more passive eyeballs, and instead focus on building real relationships with people and delivering anticipated, relevant messages in a multi-directional format.
Unfortunately most large brands are locked into a vicious cycle of throwing billions of dollars at TV ads, something that is a dated tactic in a fragmented media world. But it’s all they know how to do, they were designed for it. You can’t tell a shark not to feed, it’s a part of her DNA, just like TV advertising is a part of many brand’s DNA. The problem is, it doesn’t work the way it used to and is becoming less effective daily.
There also is no longer a reason to view content on someone else’s timetable – I view my time as more important than that. I hope you do as well. That’s why TV as a medium is essentially dead to me. It doesn’t fit into the lifestyle of someone sensitive to where their time goes. The only thing I can think of worth watching live would be something like a presidential debate/inauguration, or event of significant relevance to society and history. Even something in the genre of arts and entertainment does not need to be live (unless I am actually there, in person). If I want to see it, I’ll timeshift it.
It is actually quite the interesting phenomenon from a sociological perspective that others view me as deviant simply by not viewing the same content as them. Every year I get looks of shock and surprise from people when they ask the week before the Super Bowl what I’m planning on doing and I kindly answer that I don’t watch it. It’s the same type of look I receive from people when I discuss religion as a great example of marketing.
Related posts from The Future Buzz
The Difference Between Living Life And Not
10 Skills All PR Pros Need For 2009 And Beyond
7 Living Artifacts And Why They Are Done For
Related posts from around the web
Super Bowl Intellectual Property Insanity: No Big Screen Super Bowl Parties, Trademarking 19-0 (Techdirt)
The multi-billion dollar suicide pact between clients and television (Gaping Void)
The TV Dividend (Seth Godin)
Anton replied | Feb 2, 2009 (5 comments)
Nope. Didn’t watch it either. There came a time about 5 years ago when I abandoned TV and gained 3 more constructive hours back in my day.It seems to me there is nothing on the tube that will add to my life.Any info that I need can be found quickly on the web.
Tim Jahn replied | Feb 2, 2009 (59 comments)
I didn’t watch much of it. Like you say, it’s crazy how big of an event the Superbowl is more so for the ads and not the actual football.
If anything, it’s nice to at least see creative minds flowing thinking of ways to stand out and outdo themselves each year with creative ads.
I touched upon the timeshifting idea last night on my blog after I watched the Office on my DVR. This whole idea is huge when it comes to advertising. I mean come on…I can choose whether or not to watch that extremely expensive ad you produced. Doesn’t that worry you JUST a little???
Carrie replied | Feb 2, 2009 (3 comments)
I did watch part of the game but wasn’t much into it since I am not a TV watcher anymore either. I was suprised by a few things:
1. The eagerness and interest by the people I was at a party with, to watch the 3-d ads and the look of fascination of 20 people with 3-d glasses glued to the TV for a commercial break when during the game only 1/2 the people were watching the TV. They also used the DVR to rewind parts they liked or that they thought needed to be seen by everyone.
2. It always suprises me to see a lack of good, funny, original ads for an event that is supposed to be an advertising campaign launch point. The winners I thought were the cash4gold for it’s sillyness, the MacGruber Pepsi ad for the Richard Dean Anderson Cameo, the coke zero ad for revamping a classic and adding more humor and the Monster.com moose arse ad for it’s reality and cleverness. And the 3-d thing went over big with the kids.
I do think that a lot of companies throw their 3 million away if they don’t use amazing and new creative in these spots. (And the job sites really don’t need to advertise in this market.) Seeing old ads here always dissapoints the general viewers with groans of “we’ve seen that one before, that’s old”.
But I think this year more people will view these commercials online than on TV because online is becoming the main information/entertainment medium for most people.
internetsuperstar replied | Feb 2, 2009 (2 comments)
This is why I watch at home–because football is great entertainment, tired marketing execs wasting money isn’t–so I skip most of the ads. Exceptions: cashforgold.com and Hulu.com, for at least embracing some modern meta-style humor. Everything else was drivel. 3D? We aren’t done with that yet?
catering supplies replied | Feb 4, 2009 (1 comment)
Brands also get some promotion with advertisements in between the actual program. I know, that there is nothing more interrupting in this world other than adds.