Probably went something like this:
“Marketing believes that this will do well in grass roots advertising as it suggests cunnilingus, while not being so explicit as to make it obvious. These things get shared around with ‘did they know’ or ‘how’d this make it past marketing’ comments quite often so at best, we get free word of mouth, at worst we say ‘we had no idea how this fell through and are reviewing our reviewing proccess.’ Either way, we increase distribution of our campaign.”
It worked too, I had no clue a second one, let alone a third, existed
honestly i never would have noticed it had i not been primed by the question.
as for marketing, there’s a lot of inconsistency. you’ve got the Gerbers and Tony the Tigers of the world, completely blind to how things might be misinterpreted, and you’ve got the Wendy’s of the world, who 100% know what they’re doing. Venom? dunno enough to place them in one camp or the other.
allegedly, Gerber had trouble entering regions where the literacy rate is low because in such places consumers identify food products based on the imagery on the packaging, or the contents itself if the packaging is clear. in Gerber’s case, you have a jar of unidentifiable mush, with the image of a (likely foreign-looking) baby. conclusion: what’s in the jar?
dunno if that’s folklore or real. but the Wendy thing is just that they’re always doing edgy stuff on their socials. they know how to spot an innuendo, because that’s what they do.
Saw an Xbox ad for Palworld that was the epitome of a filler ad: “check out the hottest new game here” that’s what I write when I’m trying to wireframe a template, not when I’m trying to actually sell something.
Tell me your marketing team was replaced with AI without telling me your marketing team was replaced with AI
So what’s that funny here?
Not safe for work, or “NSFW,” usually means that the post contains content that might be upsetting to your co-workers, such as sexual content or violence
Because sex sells and subliminal sex sells sublimely
