PDA

View Full Version : ABC Bans Lane Bryant Lingerie Ad as "Too Sexy"



Treacle
04-22-2010, 11:11 PM
Yes...this is the very same ABC which shows the Victoria's Secret fashion every year. Fox News has also declined to run the Lane Bryant spot. Weird.

For your perusal, here's the Lane Bryant commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMxyZQfMmM4&feature=player_embedded) and here's the Michael Bay Victoria's Secret commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmNEG8IFd_Y) (which was shown on ABC during the last fashion show).

Obviously, curvy chicks are much too sexy for regular TV.

Edit: Link to article. (http://www.stylelist.com/2010/04/21/lane-bryant-says-abc-fox-censored-plus-size-lingerie-ad/)

The Hodag
04-22-2010, 11:16 PM
Is that actually the company line for the networks? Too sexy?

That's really weird.

But I have a feeling the ad will find a receptive audience in a certain Benbo thread...

greg donovan
04-22-2010, 11:20 PM
Is that actually the company line for the networks? Too sexy?

That's really weird.

But I have a feeling the ad will find a receptive audience in a certain Benbo thread...

it has been there for a few hours now. it is quite an ad indeed.

Kirblar
04-22-2010, 11:36 PM
There are a LOT of close-ups in the Lane Bryant ad, which maintain for a much longer time than in the other linked commercial. I kinda see why they pulled it.

BWC Boston
04-22-2010, 11:44 PM
There are a LOT of close-ups in the Lane Bryant ad, which maintain for a much longer time than in the other linked commercial. I kinda see why they pulled it.

Honestly? Me too. The Victoria's Secret commercials may have even more revealing garments in them, but the fast editing defuses their effects a lot. The Lane Bryant ad lingers over every closeup for several seconds before moving on, and it does border on gratuitous.

There's also the fact that the Lane Bryant girl is getting gussied up specifically to go out and have hot, hot sex. Victoria's Secret models are normally just walking around empty lofts and leaning against things in dramatic lighting.

greg donovan
04-22-2010, 11:46 PM
however, anyone with an internet connection is now going to see the ad and all lane bryant had to do was pay to make it.

NeverWanderer
04-22-2010, 11:46 PM
That's... really fucking ridiculous.

Treacle
04-22-2010, 11:47 PM
Honestly? Me too. The Victoria's Secret commercials may have even more revealing garments in them, but the fast editing defuses their effects a lot. The Lane Bryant ad lingers over every closeup for several seconds before moving on, and it does border on gratuitous.

There's also the fact that the Lane Bryant girl is getting gussied up specifically to go out and have hot, hot sex. Victoria's Secret models are normally just walking around empty lofts and leaning against things in dramatic lighting.


There are a LOT of close-ups in the Lane Bryant ad, which maintain for a much longer time than in the other linked commercial. I kinda see why they pulled it.

I hadn't considered either of those perspectives. Thanks, guys.

The Hodag
04-22-2010, 11:55 PM
Honestly? Me too. The Victoria's Secret commercials may have even more revealing garments in them, but the fast editing defuses their effects a lot. The Lane Bryant ad lingers over every closeup for several seconds before moving on, and it does border on gratuitous.

Just watched it again and I didn't see a single shot that stayed on her for more than two seconds. I'm not even sure if they quite hit the two-second mark. And most shots were the Bay-esque quick cuts.

I think the shots in the Lane Bryant ad are the same shots you see on every lingerie commercial, she's just got more flesh bouncing around than we're used to.


There's also the fact that the Lane Bryant girl is getting gussied up specifically to go out and have hot, hot sex. Victoria's Secret models are normally just walking around empty lofts and leaning against things in dramatic lighting.

Maybe that's it, though it seems pretty ridiculous to hide that lingerie might lead to sex. Baby steps, I suppose, baby steps...

Ashwin Pande
04-22-2010, 11:56 PM
That girl is fat.

The Hodag
04-22-2010, 11:59 PM
That girl is fat.

Whatever you want to call it, she wears it well.

Greygor
04-23-2010, 12:00 AM
For me that's a pretty tame ad, but I was raised in a country where National Newspapers have topless women.

BWC Boston
04-23-2010, 12:08 AM
Just watched it again and I didn't see a single shot that stayed on her for more than two seconds. I'm not even sure if they quite hit the two-second mark. And most shots were the Bay-esque quick cuts.

I think the shots in the Lane Bryant ad are the same shots you see on every lingerie commercial, she's just got more flesh bouncing around than we're used to.

Well, I only watched the thing once--I'm not going to analyze it like it's a curvy Zapruder film--but I did get that gratuitous vibe from it. Maybe it is just the novelty of seeing a thicker girl be filmed sexily on TV, I don't know, but I don't remember getting the same feeling from those (admittedly less steamy) Dove ads with all the women in their underwear, or the various "I'm stacked!" ads some bra company did not long ago.

The Hodag
04-23-2010, 12:10 AM
I'm not going to analyze it like it's a curvy Zapruder film...

:)

That's kinda funny.

Bedlam66
04-23-2010, 01:03 AM
That girl is HOT.
Fixed

Bill Nolan
04-23-2010, 03:20 AM
That girl is fat.

That's Lane Bryant's target audience.

Strikeout
04-23-2010, 03:30 AM
That girl is fat.

I'd take that chick over the victoria's secret one in a second.

Neither one of them would look at me, anyway, so I don't think I'd have that hard decision to make.

bachman
04-23-2010, 04:46 AM
In one of those clips, I saw a cheesesteak on the floor, in the back left corner...

adam_warlock_2099
04-23-2010, 04:55 AM
Maybe that's it, though it seems pretty ridiculous to hide that lingerie might lead to sex. Baby steps, I suppose, baby steps...

I know God forbid! Women wear lingire to try and seduce a man into sex? NO! Dear God save us from our carnal sins!

adam_warlock_2099
04-23-2010, 04:56 AM
Fixed

Agreed.

panco
04-23-2010, 05:00 AM
That girl is fat.

I have a boner.

Gregory
04-23-2010, 05:14 AM
The VS girls have so little up top in comparison that the LB girl looks cartoonishly zaftig (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/zaftig). She bounces when she strides, and her bounce is practically gelatinous. The VS girls jiggle.

In the post-Janet Jackson/Super Bowl FCC era, TV likes jiggle. It gets nervous over bounce.

Jason California
04-23-2010, 05:21 AM
Well, I like it. I am glad Ashwin and I would never have to fight over her.

Rod Nunley
04-23-2010, 05:21 AM
Here's what's offensive about the ad ... because she's a bigger girl they tag the end of the ad by her being excited about meeting some dude for lunch.

Why's it always gotta be about food? ;)

Caley Tibbittz
04-23-2010, 05:29 AM
I really didn't need to hear the word "mom" that many times in an underwear ad...:-?

Matt Jay
04-23-2010, 05:58 AM
Weird.

Ultimate Lurker
04-23-2010, 06:31 AM
Did the Victoria's Secret commercial air during "Extreme Makeover, Home Edition and Wipeout, Animated Wonderful World of Disney, Wonderful World of Disney, Dancing With the Stars, America's Funniest Videos, Game Shows." Cause if it didn't, all the other points are kinda moot.

Foolish Mortal
04-23-2010, 06:36 AM
Did the Victoria's Secret commercial air during "Extreme Makeover, Home Edition and Wipeout, Animated Wonderful World of Disney, Wonderful World of Disney, Dancing With the Stars, America's Funniest Videos, Game Shows." Cause if it didn't, all the other points are kinda moot.
I don't think Lane Bryant would be buying ad time on those shows.

An ad like this would be for shows like Grey's Anatomy or Desperate Housewives.

Superior Kiai
04-23-2010, 06:38 AM
The VS girls have so little up top in comparison that the LB girl looks cartoonishly zaftig (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/zaftig). She bounces when she strides, and her bounce is practically gelatinous. The VS girls jiggle.

In the post-Janet Jackson/Super Bowl FCC era, TV likes jiggle. It gets nervous over bounce.

Fuck jiggle.

I want bounce!!!!

Bedlam66
04-23-2010, 06:38 AM
I have a boner.
I'll see your Boner and raise you two Blued Balls.

Bill Nolan
04-23-2010, 06:48 AM
http://blog.zap2it.com/thedishrag/2010/04/lane-bryant-ashley-graham-ad-too-busty-for-tv-or-a-publicity-bust.html

Roman Noodles
04-23-2010, 06:49 AM
The ad is no different than the Victoria Secret ad, like frame for frame identical. Except minus the flashing lights and mulitple women.


Ridiculous. Just ridiculous. :lol:

BGPu
04-23-2010, 06:56 AM
The only problem with that ad is that there's no HD version of it.

Matthew Brown
04-23-2010, 06:58 AM
Well, I like it. I am glad Ashwin and I would never have to fight over her.

You'd never win. Dude's an action hero.

jason hissong
04-23-2010, 07:01 AM
We're so prude, as a nation, it's rediculous.

I wish our culture flip flopped how we view sex and violence.

Both commercials are fine. People have sex, and it's a beutiful part of life.

Heroic Age Moe
04-23-2010, 07:07 AM
I really didn't need to hear the word "mom" that many times in an underwear ad...:-?

hahaha that's the first thing I thought of!

And yeah I'm not getting the ban.

PatrickA
04-23-2010, 07:14 AM
Having now read the article it looks like Lane Bryant isn't being truthful.

ABC is basically saying that they are lying and that they only restricted the ad from some programming (for example, they wouldn't show it during The Wonderful World of Disney).



ABC says Lane Bryant is full of hot air, and their claims are no more than a publicity stunt. The broadcasting company issued a statement today saying they did not treat Lane Bryant any differently than other advertisers.

"Their statements are not true," it said. "The ad was accepted. Lane Bryant was treated absolutely no differently than any advertiser for the same product. We were willing to accommodate them, but they chose to seek publicity instead."

In response, Lane Bryant says, "ABC's statement that 'Lane Bryant was treated absolutely no differently than any advertiser for the same product' is simply not true."


Of course...now we've all watched a Lane Bryant ad.

dEnny!
04-23-2010, 07:15 AM
I really didn't need to hear the word "mom" that many times in an underwear ad...:-?

I think that's what hurt it, plus it was a minute shorter than the Victoria's Secret ad, which means ABC wouldn't make as much money and we wouldn't get as much eye candy. :p

Akira
04-23-2010, 08:14 AM
Yes...this is the very same ABC which shows the Victoria's Secret fashion every year. Fox News has also declined to run the Lane Bryant spot. Weird.

For your perusal, here's the Lane Bryant commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMxyZQfMmM4&feature=player_embedded) and here's the Michael Bay Victoria's Secret commercial (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmNEG8IFd_Y) (which was shown on ABC during the last fashion show).

Obviously, curvy chicks are much too sexy for regular TV.

Edit: Link to article. (http://www.stylelist.com/2010/04/21/lane-bryant-says-abc-fox-censored-plus-size-lingerie-ad/)

Well duh. ;) I'll take 1 Cacique (or hipsandcurves.com for that matter) commercial over 100 Victoria's Secret ones.

JABSEN
04-23-2010, 08:16 AM
Man, that's way tamer than a lot of Victoria's Secret's ads. Lame move by ABC.

Heroic Age Moe
04-23-2010, 08:34 AM
I also just wanna say that that VS commercial is the Bruckheimer one right? Well were I cringed at "mom" in the Lane ad I find myself oddly laughing at the VS one just cause it's sooooooo Bruckheimer. It's awesome with the balls of flame and all that shit.

Treacle
04-23-2010, 11:45 AM
I also just wanna say that that VS commercial is the Bruckheimer one right? Well were I cringed at "mom" in the Lane ad I find myself oddly laughing at the VS one just cause it's sooooooo Bruckheimer. It's awesome with the balls of flame and all that shit.

The Victoria's Secret one is by Michael Bay, and I love it because it's so ridiculous.

We have lingerie. And explosions!!!

Mister Mets
04-23-2010, 11:54 AM
I don't think Lane Bryant would be buying ad time on those shows.

An ad like this would be for shows like Grey's Anatomy or Desperate Housewives.
I was under the impression the ad was meant for Dancing with the Stars, which is a "family hour" show.


Having now read the article it looks like Lane Bryant isn't being truthful.

ABC is basically saying that they are lying and that they only restricted the ad from some programming (for example, they wouldn't show it during The Wonderful World of Disney).



Of course...now we've all watched a Lane Bryant ad.Most of us aren't the target audience, though.


I really didn't need to hear the word "mom" that many times in an underwear ad...:-?The ad's not really meant for us.

Ultimate Lurker
04-23-2010, 12:22 PM
I don't think Lane Bryant would be buying ad time on those shows.

An ad like this would be for shows like Grey's Anatomy or Desperate Housewives.

Lane Bryant got upset because they wanted it to air during Dancing with the Stars and American Idol.

Ultimate Lurker
04-23-2010, 12:23 PM
I really didn't need to hear the word "mom" that many times in an underwear ad...:-?

I wasn't really listening to the ad.

The Hodag
04-23-2010, 01:47 PM
Here's what's offensive about the ad ... because she's a bigger girl they tag the end of the ad by her being excited about meeting some dude for lunch.

Why's it always gotta be about food? ;)

:lol:

RegularJoe
04-23-2010, 03:34 PM
i think it says that ONE woman with actual, sexy, luscious curves is sexier than a whole commericial full of whore-heel wearing skinny chicks.

that ONE woman was so sexy, so overpowering, that they wouldn't handle it. but them skinny bitches? not that big of a deal.

RebootedCorpse
04-23-2010, 05:08 PM
And now a word from the ABC executive who made that decision:

http://www.teesforall.com/images/Family_Guy_No_Fat_Chicks_Gray_Shirt.jpg

jonanthebarbarian
04-24-2010, 10:39 AM
i think it says that ONE woman with actual, sexy, luscious curves is sexier than a whole commericial full of whore-heel wearing skinny chicks.

that ONE woman was so sexy, so overpowering, that they wouldn't handle it. but them skinny bitches? not that big of a deal.

Amen brother amen

Nick Spencer
04-24-2010, 11:00 AM
The Lane Bryant model is way hotter.

costello
04-24-2010, 12:53 PM
The Lane Bryant model is way hotter.

That's why Michael Bay included explosions.

I think the Victoria's Secret advertisement was way too long. The sexy was dragged right out of it. The Lane Bryant advertisement was perfect.

dasNdanger
04-24-2010, 04:57 PM
This is silly. Jay Leno had a bit on it last night, and he showed programming from ABC's tv shows - scenes that lingered longer and showed just as much and more, and in sexual situations. Just doesn't make sense that suddenly they go all Puritan on the thick gals...unless...it means that the big gals are just way sexier than the skinny ones.


das

BWC Boston
04-24-2010, 05:15 PM
This is silly. Jay Leno had a bit on it last night, and he showed programming from ABC's tv shows - scenes that lingered longer and showed just as much and more, and in sexual situations

So Leno has ditched the comedy entirely and has turned THE TONIGHT SHOW into an entertainment blog?

I'll admit, I didn't see it coming, but now it seems long overdue.

adam_warlock_2099
04-24-2010, 05:27 PM
i think it says that ONE woman with actual, sexy, luscious curves is sexier than a whole commericial full of whore-heel wearing skinny chicks.

that ONE woman was so sexy, so overpowering, that they wouldn't handle it. but them skinny bitches? not that big of a deal.

But this America! And we sure don't want to think that any gal over 100 lbs is having sex with a willing partner and enjoying it!

But I agree with you. If I had god's hands I would roll four of them VS chicks together to make one hot sexy woman.

Nelson
04-24-2010, 05:33 PM
This is silly. Jay Leno had a bit on it last night, and he showed programming from ABC's tv shows - scenes that lingered longer and showed just as much and more, and in sexual situations. Just doesn't make sense that suddenly they go all Puritan on the thick gals...unless...it means that the big gals are just way sexier than the skinny ones.


das
ABC doesn't want to upset their key demographic.




http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/9738/473nofatchicks.jpg