Strategic Lyrical Exculsions in Commercials

The phenomenon of TV commercials using songs that are, at best, irrelevant to the product advertised is well known and documented. However, I have noticed a recent strategy where commercials use songs that actually stand in direct contradiction to the intended message of the ad - but made to look relevant by the strategic inclusion and exclusion of lyrics. Two such commercials com immediately to mind: One using The Who to pitch an SUV, and the other uses a Rolling Stones song to advertise Amstel (I think). Anyway, it is not the products that are important, it is the music.

Let us start with The Who. This commercial features an SUV racing around a scenic landscape, near some cliffs, while a sale is announced with some thundering Who-riffs in the background. During breaks taken by the announcer, Roger Daultry yells "I call that a bargain! The best I ever had!"

Now, this song seems a little too obvious for a commercial. One can almost picture The Who sitting around a table in early 1971, agreeing: "this song will make us so much money when we sell it for commercials. We will have to be willing to wait perhaps 30 or more years, but it will pay off." That is, until you listen to the rest of the song.

The following are the listed terms of the 'bargain' that The Who originally described:
1.) lose me (i.e. lose myself)
2.) give up all I had
3.) suffer anything
4.) pay any price
5.) work all my life
6.) stand naked, stoned and stabbed
7.) run and never stop
8.) Surrender my good life for bad
9.) drown an unsung man

Now, for true love, this might indeed be a bargain. But for an SUV it is far from it. It would be a terrible and horrifying place where a dealership would be allowed, on any level, to collect on these debts in exchange for a 2005 Nissan Pathfinder.

I get the impression that the advertising executive that came up with this idea only had a passing knowledge of classic rock from a local radio station. Probably the kind of guy who went to see The Who reunion show and responded "Who is Keith Moon?" when the people next to him lamented the loss of the charismatic drummer.

The next commercial features a bunch of friends enjoying Amstels around a fire as one of them sings and plays "Let It Bleed" on his acoustic guitar. "Life tastefully," the ad announces at the end. First of all, let us comment on the absurdity of association the Stones with any kind tasteful, or even respectable, lifestyle. They practically invented rock-star excess: drugs, booze, sex with dirty women and the consequent bacterial/viral consequences, destroying property. The Stones did it as well as anyone (with the possible exception of Led Zeppelin). More specifically, though, this song is entirely inappropriate for the intended message.

Everyone smiles and sways as the somewhat scruffy, nonthreateningly attractive mid-twenties performer sings:

"Well we all need someone to lean on
And if you want it, well you can lean on me"

What a great sentiment! I think we all sang that in 3rd grade music class along with "This land is my land" and "You can get it if you really want."

Or not. In fact, the song goes on to some less savory images. Among my favorites:

"You knifed me in my dirty filthy basement
With that jaded faded junky nurse" (note: most likely a heroin reference)

"We all need someone we can feed on
And if you want it, well you can feed on me
Take my arm, take my leg
Oh, baby, dont you take my head" (note: I don't really know what this means on a metaphorical level, but, even if we take 'head' in a nonsexual sense, it presents an explicit image of cannibalism)

"We all need someone we can bleed on
And if you want it, baby, well you can bleed on me" (note; I don't know if this follows the earlier images of stabbing and eating, or if it is a reference to menstruation. Either way: Eww.)

And of course, my real favorite:

"Yeah, we all need someone we can cream on
And if you want to, well you can cream on me"

So, ya, not so tasteful. In fact, pretty tasteless and reprehensible.

I ripped the decision making behind the first commercial, but I have to say, this one might, just might, be a stroke of genius. There is a good chance that it is intended as a tongue-in-cheek, winking to the audience sort of inside joke. If so, it is brilliant.

If not, it is just another case of the bureaucratic ignorance of a corporation: "Well, middle aged folks love the Rolling Stones, therefore they are inoffensive and recognizable and should be used in our commercial."