the offensive nike ad of pacquiao in prayer/Christ crucifixion and the real pacquiao in prayer visual

in early december of last year, for the pacquiao-de la hoya fight, we talked about the nike ad that we found offensive to the catholic faith (read here: http://tinyurl.com/c6mnpn).

the key point we raised was that the nike ad simulated pacquiao on the cross with his arms raised while kneeling in front of the corner of the boxing ring. the post was much larger than the real thing that made it look like a cross.

one of the things we said that made the reference to the crucifixion of Christ was that the arms were raised to the ropes and that is not the natural position for prayer. the fact that this ad showed manny raising his arms makes it an obvious depiction of the the crucifixion of Christ.

this is the ad:

in yesterday's pacquioa-hatton fight, we were able to finally get a picture of pacquiao in prayer at his corner which very clearly proves our point.

nike tv ad banned in china for being offensive

this happened in 2004, but it is one more incident of nike releasing an ad that offended people, this time the chinese. the lebron james ad shows lebron conquering "enemies" but some of these are chinese and the dragon. the dragon is a very important symbol for the chinese.

the ad shows lebron battling with "enemies", a combination of real people, real characters and animation characters. the ad is very obviously over the top and an exaggeration, an ad that should not be taken literally.

being out in the west, we are used to seeing images like these - in movies, comics and cartoons on tv and none of it strike us as offensive and we don't really take these seriously. we are fully aware these images are just make believe and purely for entertainment value.

but we are not chinese and not chinese who live in china. it becomes a very different story all together for them. we can see these images here as just pure entertainment but in the eyes of the chinese who live in china, it is a violation of who they are and what they believe in. lebron has won over chinese people, even though they are the china of many centuries ago and the dragon, a symbol that is not really religion, religion is banned in china, but it does have the same kind of emotions and meanings as we have on religious symbols like the cross for christians. and those are what the chinese offensive.

different people react differently to stimulus. but a company like nike need to understand that and that sensibilities do exist and is a reality. advertising is a very public form of communication and it is a powerful one. knowing your limits is something advertisers should know very well.

"Offensive" Nike TV commerical banned
Posted by Jeremy Goldkorn, December 6, 2004 6:38 PM


Last week Friday, the South China Morning Post and ChinaPR.com.cn both reported that Nike's new TV commercial was the subject of heated online discussions amongst Chinese people who found it offensive. The commercial, called 'Chamber of Fear' was produced by Nike's global advertising agent Wieden + Kennedy for global use.

The SCMP reported that Nike planned to continue using the commercial, despite the fuss. However, today the Beijing Youth Daily reports that the commercial has been banned by SARFT (State Administration of Radio, TV and Film), for insulting Chinese culture.

The commercial portrays NBA star LeBron James fighting his way through a pagoda of dangers and temptations. LeBron "keeps his mind on his game and his game on his mind" and conquers all. The problem is that all the dangers and temptations are Chinese people and symbols of China like dragons. So despite the fact that the commercial is quite clearly a pastiche of Bruce Lee movie scenes and video game cliches, it has been branded as insulting.

http://www.danwei.org/advertising_and_marketing/offensive_nike_tv_commercial_b.php

offensive manny pacquiao "Christ crucifixion" ad - given a "Cease & Desist Order" by the Ad Standards Council?

http://nike.com.ph/giveusthisday/



Show your support.
Post a shoutout for Manny.

another blog posted that nike's manny pacquiao ad was given a "Cease & Desist Order"(CDO) by the Ad Standards Council. if that is true, that means nike need to pull out this ad from media. but we still see the ad in the internet, so we don't know if it is true that a CDO was issued.

the Ad Standard Council is a self-regulatory body by the ad industry. its members are from all member organizations that are involved in the creation, publication/airing, research and production of ads. the ASC has specific rules or guidelines, developed by the ad industry, as to what ads can contain and not contain. all ads aired or printed need to pass through a screening committee and give each one a approval to air or print before we see it on media.

once aired or printed, other parties, everyone who is interested my file a complaint with the ASC if they see the ad is violating any of the guidelines set by the ASC. a hearing is conducted and if the hearing committee determines a particular ad has indeed violated a guideline, then that ad is given a "Cease & Desist Order" (CDO) that orders the ad agency who developed the ad to pull it off the air or print media. there is an appeals process, but that's basically how it goes.

this blog (http://mannypacquiaonews.blogspot.com/search/label/ad%20standards%20council) says this nike ad was given a CDO on the basis of violating this guideline:

The CDO was issued for violation of Art. I, sec. 3 of the ASC Code and is effective immediately. The section provides that:

"Advertisements must respect religious beliefs, and be sensitive to the diverse religions, mores, culture, traditions, characteristics, historical background and identity of the various Filipino communities and uphold traditional Filipino family and social values."

if this nike ad of pacman was indeed given a CDO, we wonder why we still see it in the internet?

manny pacquaio's nike ad - "ang mamatay ng dahil sa yo", this time on the philippine anthem

a nike tv ad has been featured in WAWAM! previously and was praised for showing a lot of class compared to all other pacquaio ads we see on tv. (click here to read : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/2008/06/nikes-manny-pacquaio-tv-spot.html).


from WAWAM!'s post:

it feels like manny pacquiao has at least a dozen tv commercials on air for different brands. but of all the pacquiao tv ads, this nike tv spot is the best and the one that has the most class of the bunch.everything works very well - the consumer insight is deep and hits home, the visuals and production values are excellent, copy is very sparse and the choice of the song and lyrics is brilliant.

nike philippines seem to like to use ad concepts that are deep and of national consequence. this tv spot uses lines and music from the national anthem and then now, using religion and the crucifixion of Christ. i guess, no guts, no glory. given pacquaio's stature, it seems highly appropriate, except that in the last one, they went overboard and became offensive.






read all posts on manny pacquiao here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/search/label/manny%20pacquiao

nike - used the offensive athlete on a cross image before

nike's abuse of creative license in using the image of chirst and the crucifixion is apparently nothing new. it's a different country, in england, but the same kind of offense was made - the use the cross and the same arms of the athlete stretched out to mimic how Chirst was when he was nailed to the cross.

while this ad is more offensive, because of the use of red paint which can be seen as blood, the pacquaio ad is as offensive just the same. the outstretched arms of pacquiao is NOT a pose for prayer and there is no hiding from that. the clear intent is to have a double meaning from the image - that of prayer largely due to manny kneeling down and the more offensive idea of Christ on the cross.

Nike attacked over Rooney 'warrior' picture

Drenched in blood-red paint and screaming a war-cry, this chilling image of Wayne Rooney was last night condemned as 'offensive', 'exploitative' and 'tacky' by MPs and church groups.
He may yet turn out to be the saviour of England's World Cup campaign, but the Christ-like pose of the striker in a new Nike campaign yesterday provoked fierce condemnation.

Five people complained to the Advertising Standards Authority watchdog on
religious grounds within hours of the advert being posted.

Its other interpretation as a battle cry from the dark ages or throwback to the Crusades was equally unfortunate as the poster's launch coincided with the first outbreak of serious violence involving England's army of fans in Germany on Monday night.

Labour MP Stephen Pound said the advert was 'truly horrible.'

'This is such a horrible image and is so horribly war-like that it can only be described as Nike being crass, offensive and insensitive as they try to hitch poor old Rooney to their commercial band-wagon.'

The MP for Ealing North added: 'He should go out and wear Adidas instead. It's offensive on so many different levels and extremely nasty.

'Wayne's a good Catholic boy and I think the obvious crucifixion nuance is one part of it, but the aggressive nature of the pose is something we could do without.

'If we have learned anything about football in the last few years, it should be that it doesn't need big business trying to inject even more aggression into the mix.'

Nike, who have a £5m contract with the 20-year-old striker, pleaded that they were merely showing him in his trademark goal-scoring 'celebration' gesture and denied they had sought to make any comparison with Christ on the cross.

Rev Rod Thomas of Church of England evangelical group Reform was not convinced. It's quite a disturbing image and because the paint is wet, it really looks like blood,' he said. 'It's offensive on several different levels'

'It therefore brings to mind the crucifixion to many people, and why Nike would want to do that, I haven't a clue, unless it is simply as a publicity stunt.

'The trivialisation of Christ's suffering is highly offensive to Christians and to God. This will cause real hurt to people.

'The other aspect of it is the aggression contained in it, bound up with the flag of St George, which you might see as a throwback to the Crusades, which is hardly going to go down well with Muslim countries. It's offensive on several different levels.'

A spokesman for the ASA said the complainants who had see the advert either in a huge 60ft wide roadside hoarding in West London or in some national newspapers, all thought the picture was a reference to the crucifixion.

Some added they found the image 'alarming'.

The picture was the product of a three-hour photoshoot by an unnamed hotographer and was the brainchild jointly of Nike executives and their advertising agency Wieden and Kennedy, which also has accounts with Honda, Pizza Hut and Yakult yoghurt.

Although the poster was prepared a few weeks ago, during Rooney's enforced absence from the pitch due to a broken metatarsal bone, Nike decided to publish it. along with their logo 'Just Do It', once his return to the England starting line-up looked likely.

The limited campaign is known in the trade by the unfortunate phrase of a 'tactical execution', according to Wieden and Kennedy's website.

The agency refused to discuss the advert, but a Nike spokeswoman said it would not be shown nationwide or in other countries.

'It was intended solely as a celebration of Rooney's return to the team and is based on his own trademark goal-scoring celebration, nothing to do with the crucifuxion at all, ' she added.

'If we have offended anyone on those grounds, we would stress it was unintentional and we apologise. It is not meant to be an aggressive picture, either. It was a case of catching the mood of the nation as everyone urges Rooney on to great things, and of course our slogan puts it perfectly.

'The red paint is not meant to be blood, it's just echoing the body paint which fans cover themselves in and the rest of Wayne's body is painted white. It's the flag of St George, and nothing else.

'We have had nothing but positive reaction to the poster and a lot of people have been asking if they can buy it. We have no plans to produce it as a poster.'

Rooney was wearing a pair of Nike's new Total 90 Supremacy boots when he injured his foot in a game against Chelsea in April.

The firm rejected claims by Manchester United boss Alex Ferguson that the design of the boot had put extra pressure on his metatarsal, causing the fracture. Rooney's girlfriend Coleen McLoughlin also has a £1.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-391684/Nike-attacked-Rooney-warrior-picture.html

nike's manny pacquiao ad - we applaud the artistry, but deplore the offense to the catholic faith

we understand what manny pacquiao means to the filipino people. he is a hero of national proportions. it is a country hungry for an authentic hero and this man from general santos city fits that to a T. he is brave, he is determined, he is fearless, he wins and is a champion boxer who is truly world class in skills and abilities.

this fight with oscar de la hoya will probably become either his greatest fight or his worst as de la hoya seem to be a formidable opponent. winning in this fight is a must for this filipino icon. and as the country is mostly catholics, this is where the nike ad fits into.

it is a brilliant ad. the concept of manny in prayer in the corner of the ring and the copy that goes with it, "give us this day" is an excellent fit specially to the audience and to the fight.

the artwork is also brilliantly done. very high concept as well. manny in his knees, praying at the corner of the ring with the ropes and the corner post forming an obvious cross.

but that is what we find offensive.

manny's outward stretched hands, resting on the ropes, with the obvious image of the cross in front of him show manny in a position where it appears he is mimicking the position of Christ on the cross. that to me is the obvious double meaning intended to be communicated by the art director.

outstretched hands the way it is done in the ad is not the position for prayer. it is holding the hands together, even with the boxing gloves on, is the position for prayer. we see many boxers do that in the ring and most of them do the sign of the cross even with their gloves on.

the art director choosing to show manny with his hands stretched apart is not really to show manny in prayer, but it mimicks the position of Christ on the cross. manny's hands stretched out that way in front of a cross is what i find offensive. it violates one of the most revered images in the catholic faith - Christ's sacrifice of his life during the crucifiction. the nike ad wants us to think that manny is nailed to the cross, as Christ was. that is very offensive.

the viewers of the ad are also being asked to contribute or post their prayers or wishes for manny. and one particular shoutout seem to be the favorite of the ad:

BECAUSE OF THE FILIPINO FAITH... GOD WILL INDEED GIVE US THIS DAY! GOD BLESS YOU MANNY! - gabby, nueva ecija

with that kind of message - what if manny does not win? should filipinos feel guilty that we do not have enough faith and that is why manny lost? and should we see God in that way? is that the proper way to look at faith and religion?

we like creative work. we like brilliant work even more. but this creativity and brilliance need to be sensitive and respectful of religion and the beliefs of people.

on the whole, this ad offends us.



click here to view in full : http://nike.com.ph/giveusthisday/



Show your support.
Post a shoutout for Manny.