Already a Bloomberg.com user?
Sign in with the same account.
?? When It Comes To Fruit Snacks, It's Apples and Grapes In My House |
| NASCAR News: Oh Joy! ??
July 27, 2005
Burger King's Coq Roq Site Stirs Pot. But Will It Sell Greasy Chicken Fries?
Here we go again. Just when the hoopla and angst by the taste police over Carl's Jr.'s Paris Hilton online video was starting to abate, Burger King managed to stir debate with the latest online ploy by the talented (Subservient Chicken) ad agency Crispin Porter + Bogusky.
BK launched a new website, www.coqroq.com, a site meant to appear as if a heavy metal band of the same name had created it. The site includes videos showing the fictional band members in chicken heads, downloadable ring tones and photo galleries with shots of young girls with handwritten captions like "Groupies love the Coq" and ??roupies love Coq." After the site went live on Tuesday, the bawdy captions were erased. Yawn. It was no doubt done to draw attention and unique visits to the site.
The site is well done for what it is, though I can't for the life of me understand why anyone of any age would want to spend much time taking in the "music" of a fake band and videos when the central theme of it all is chicken served at BK. Like I said...yawn.
The chicken schtick is supposed to be funny. But what I find hilarious are the deadly serious comments solicited by Advertising Age magazine to spotlight what dreadful fare this website is and how it is setting back women's status to the 19th century.
From Ad Age: "??ust the name Coq Roq in general is offensive to families,?said Aliza Pilar Sherman, an authority and author on women and the Internet and founder of cybergrrl. “I can’t imagine if parents of a smaller child saw this. They’d say they don’t want their child exposed to this. Where do we as responsible individuals draw the line? Of course there’s freedom of speech but does that mean Burger King should be perpetuating stereotypes, negative attitudes and demeaning behavior to the market.”...“Burger King is perpetuating a crude type of stereotype,” agreed Dr. Martha Allen, director of the Women’s Institute for Freedom of the Press. “They’re serving junk stereotypes degrading and harmful to women.”
Now, that's funny. The only thing harmful to women in this website is if it prompts them to actually order the chicken fries.
I also like the comment in AA's story from a Subway franchisee: “There’s a fine line between getting the attention of the core target and risking offending the masses,” said Chris Carroll, senior vice president and director of marketing for Subway’s Franchisee Advertising Fund Trust.
Yo...Chris. Subway built a whole campaign around a guy who decided to lose all kinds of weight by eating a Subway sammy every day. Talk about dumbing down one's diet. And did I just see that Subway canned Goodby Silverstein & Partners, probably one of the top two or three ad agencies in the country--along with Crispin Porter--after less than a year of working with them? Hmmm. I won't offer my opinion regarding the quality of bread, meat and cheese at Subway in this space, let alone the quality of Subway's ads.
Back to the coq fight. There is nothing more boring than listening to ad critics turned preachers when an advertiser decides to break the mold a bit. Just how many ads and images of grill marks on the chicken breast do we need to see before we all collectively holler: "IT'S CHICKEN. FOR THE SWEET LOVE OF GOD. I GET IT." This business of screeching "oh my, oh my" every time a kid under the age of 15 might be exposed to a sexual overtone is madness. The world, the schoolyard, the summer camp and the workplace is full of sexual overtones. The point is to deal with it appropriately, not seek to ban it from the media. Anyway, if enough people squawk to BK about the site in earnest, they'll change it anyway. But perhaps if parents and teachers actually discuss these things with kids, they wouldn't think they were such a big deal. Imagine, groupies at a heavy metal concert? I, for one was shocked at such a scenario. Paging Claude Rains.
And as long as companies like BK push the envelope with this sort of thing, advertisers will give us those opportunities in the way of conversation starters with our kids to talk about what is tasteful and appropriate, not to mention how cruddy the food is.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Burger King's Coq Roq Site Stirs Pot. But Will It Sell Greasy Chicken Fries?:
Coq Au Roq from LittleJudy.com
I'm catching up on a lot of television tonight, thanks to my DVR, including the last two episodes of Rescue Me on FX. All of a sudden I'm assaulted by a weird commercial set in a club with a heavy [Read More]
Tracked on August 6, 2005 01:09 AM
so let me get this straight - fruit snacks are offensive to your kid? sexual innuendos aren't?
Posted by: amanda at July 27, 2005 01:17 PM
So, junior high level jokes about fellatio being used to sell Burger King doesn't strike you as being a little bit, oh I don't know, bizzare?
I mean, COQ ROQ's "song" is called "Bob Your Head"! How can anyone NOT find that offensive (as a human, never mind as a woman).
This isn't just "pushing the envelope", this is pushing some crazy-like-Tom-Cruise shit down our throats.
Posted by: billy elipsis at July 28, 2005 10:02 AM
I do not consider myself a prude. I believe in providing sex education in schools, and I am not shocked or alarmed everytime I see a little skin in public. However, I do not understand the seemingly constant need for businesses to "sexualize" everything. I don't believe the "sex sells" argument is valid for everything, certainly not chicken fries. I think in some ways, its a calculated attempt by advertisiers to get some extra media play. BK is getting a free plug from your article as we speak.
Posted by: Tammy at July 28, 2005 11:54 AM
"IT'S CHICKEN. FOR THE SWEET LOVE OF GOD. I GET IT." This business of screeching "oh my, oh my" every time a kid under the age of 15 might be exposed to a sexual overtone is madness....
Hmmm...you don't really get it, do you? If we all had (and most people do unfortunately) attitudes of not caring what advertising agencies and major corporations are producing and feeding us, then we'd be all consuming garbage both figuratively and literally. Then again, sadly, most of us do consume the garbage.
I spent my early career in the music business when heavy metal ruled working for the likes of Metallica and Def Leppard. I witnessed first hand how the culture created by the bands, the corporate record companies behind them, the ad agencies and pr firms, was demeaning and destructive to both the young women who were objectified by the bnads and industry and the young men who hero-worshipped the image these bands projected, wanting to emulate what amounted to very bad behavior. I also watched band members believe the hype and destory their relationships, their health, and in some cases, their lives.
Sure sex and sexual overtone sells. But does that make it right? Does that make it healthy? And do you really want your kids or teens acting out negative stereotyping and behavior just because they saw it on TV or on a web site?
Because of the length of the article in AdAge, my quotes were very abbreviated and although I can't say they were taken completely out of context, the context of what I did say was not included. I talked about how I think we are all hypocrites to some degree.
Each one of us has various degrees of tolerance. I might think the CoqRoq ad is degrading to young women and glorifying an unhealthy attitude and lifestyle, but I may also like, say - Sex in the City - that also glorifies an unhealthy lifestyle. It is all a matter of degrees.
But to say it is "just an ad" means that you just don't understand how influencial media and advertising is on all of us, especially kids who haven't yet learned to properly discern truth from advertising, mockery from reality. If only more parents and teachers took the time to talk about these things to help kids become more media savvy.
Posted by: aliza p sherman at July 28, 2005 02:03 PM
Comments by this David Kiley person show just how far down the toilet drain advertisers are willing to go in the name of 'pushing the envelope'.
He suggests the workplace is full of sexual content as some sort of justification for sexual titilation in burger ads. Bull! Then it's a workplace rife for litigious action. With the possible exception of the showbiz and so-call 'artistic' communities, this kind of scummy pandering won't cut it in mainstream America, where people are still trying to raise families with some sense of decency and self-respect.
Not only is the mainstream workplace an environment where such nonsense isn't tolerated, the general public has just about had enough of this over-sexualized anarchy mascarading as edgy entertainment and advertising.
Get a clue. This stuff is crap and should never see the light of day.
Posted by: D. at July 28, 2005 03:19 PM
Actually, David, the sexual overtones all over the place is the whole point. I don't speak in sexual overtones (except to my wife), and I appreciate corporations who share my sensibilities. Burger King has it right -- there is no reason to keep pushing it. They are a family-friendly corporation, and I am proud to spend my fast-food dollars there.
Posted by: Jeff Stucker at July 28, 2005 03:49 PM
RE: Burger King's Coq Roq Site Stirs Pot
Dear Mr. Kiley,
In regards to your comment “This business of screeching "oh my, oh my" every time a kid under the age of 15 might be exposed to a sexual overtone is madness. The world, the schoolyard, the summer camp and the workplace is full of sexual overtones. The point is to deal with it appropriately, not seek to ban it from the media.”
I totally disagree with you. The way you see the world now is not how everyone sees it or how the USA used to be. Sexual overtones does not belong in FAMILY entertainment or advertising. Pushing the envelope by these companies is undermining morals in this country. Believe it or not SEX is not the end all and be all. It is because of the homosexual movement with there emphases on their perversions that has lead to this.
People used to identify with being religious and upstanding. Boy Scouts were idealized. Hard working fathers and stay at home homes was normalcy. Leave it to Beaver was an ideal to meet. Children were allowed to be children and adults kept sex to themselves.
But the 1960’s with its “If it feels good do it” and sex is not longer for procreation but recreation destroyed all that. The process of being free and letting it all hang out, has put us in chains.
The emotions you express in your article are contributing to the increase in perversion and the downfall of the American Culture. People of faith, Christians not Muslims, are ridiculed. Family values are laughed at. Because of it divorce rates and child crime are up. It is getting that one can not go anywhere or do anything without seeing things that used to be only seen in “Dirty Magazines.” And society is poorer for it.
Shame on you and the other perverted elites that has destroy America, by laughing at our Morals, Customs, and values. For you have torn us down goodness and Godliness and left us with sick perversions and then insult us when fight against it.
Posted by: Exton at July 28, 2005 04:11 PM
I think David Kelley is right.
We should not screech every time 15 year old kids are exposed to the degenerate perverted trash that advertising agencies (devoid of any constructive talent) are passing off to advertisers. (for real money, too)
As mature adults, we should be screeching when WE are exposed to such filthy trash.
Posted by: Ronald at July 28, 2005 06:06 PM
Entirely inappropriate and nasty. The food, I mean.
Posted by: Sid at July 28, 2005 06:59 PM
I agree. No one screams about the internet...where there is loads of crap....consider: I googled a search for midgets...to show my girlfriend the difference between midgets, and dwarfs. I couldn't find one site that showed midgets for what they were, but if you want to see midget sex...well it's everywhere. I'm not offended...in fact I don't think I can be offended. And mebbe that's the point.
She learned the difference with the famous "midget basketball" image. Offended by this BK add...there food is more offensive
Posted by: freebie jones at July 29, 2005 02:55 AM
Excuse me? The way to deal w/ these unwanted sexual innuendos is to state "we don't want it" loud and clear! How much smut as a society do we have to be subjected to? As a mother, I will speak up and demand these smut purveyors stop trying to steal my children's innocence at younger and younger ages. For heaven' sake, when is it a bad thing to protect children from unnecessary sexual situations and violence before they are old enough to understand it? Society should be helping me raise my children to be good people, not forcing me to raise them despite it.
Posted by: Kerry Lovell at July 29, 2005 11:06 AM
Wow! Who is into censorship now? Love the irony.
Posted by: Kerry Lovell at July 29, 2005 11:08 AM
I think the campaign is completely lame. I think Crispin is taking the easy way out, possibly because they can't do any real marketing of BK since the food there is awful. I'm not worried about it setting back the women's movement, but I do worry about it setting back the movement toward more decent marketing. Coqroq is just plain rude regardless of age or sex.
Posted by: Katherine Stone at July 29, 2005 04:27 PM
Wow, the band, the commercial, the idea has been saying how women are pleasure objects for years. The number of sex offenders in this country ought to be an indication of what these messages are doing.
"Conversation starters" are from the parents or the children. Not social intellects like Fowl Mouth.
I'm twenty years old, and I can see this in my peers. They think it's ok. "It's ok to grope a woman. Hell, Burger King's commercial with Coq Roq said that 'girsl love the coq.' Everyone must think like that. They're representing a lot of people. It's ok for me to do this to her." And they've done jail time for it.
Parents don't need Burger King to teach their children about sex, values, or new pop-culture ideas. Just make the burgers. And stick to what YOU know.
Posted by: Sam at July 29, 2005 05:09 PM
What kind of workplace are you in? And get a new school yard and summer camp!
My workplace doesn't tolerate sexual harassment or any kind of sexual references towards another worker. BECAUSE IT DOESN'T BELONG THERE. Nor does it belong on tv or chicken adds. When you get done with breaking the mold of your advertisements, society will break the mold with new kinds of sex offenders, broken marriages, and mis informed youth. Keep up the good work. I'm affraid you messed up with your article in recoginzing the seriousness of sex.
Posted by: Sam at July 29, 2005 05:23 PM
I hope my comment gets posted. I heard you're not one for criticism.
Posted by: Sam at July 29, 2005 05:24 PM
The problem here is that just because some guy writes for a magazine, he thinks he is some type of judge as to what is or is not a moral issue, and an expert as to the harmlessness to children who are exposed to society condoning more and more smut.
The grey line is eroding as smut becomes more and more a part of our life, no longer controlled and kept as a separate entity that parents can judge as to when and where they should expose their children to the concept of lifes many unfolding wonders.
Agree with Kiley or your as much of a joke as the folks he intimates are such in his article.
Well, one would have to be intentionally stupid to not comprehend that the more society allows sexually motivated advertising to reach ever widening circles of younger and younger viewers, then society is itself is contributing to the ever escalating downward spiral of moral decency.
Parents and Uncles, and Aunts, and Grandparents take their children, grandchildren, neices and nephews to Burger King (WHERE KIDS ARE KING), remember that slogan?????
We don't need some moral degenerate shoving their perverted depraived concept of innocents on our children. We also don't need some moral animal degenerate writer who sees no wrong here or danger to society, ramming his capitulation of decency down our minds or our society either.
Whoserves the greater good, the folks who try to take a stand and stop the decline of society, or the fool who degrades them from the security of his pompous position hiding behing the name of a famous periodical.
If this moron can't see how the morals of society affects society, then he has no street smarts at all, contrary to the matter of fact attitude he exibits would indicate.
He is no better than the company that saw this as appropriate for the kids who eat at Burger King.
What garbage from the mouths of writers of magazines can we expect next?
As to any doubts as to Burger Kings intentions, why spell c-ck as coq???
Posted by: Dave G. at July 29, 2005 07:25 PM
I see my comment still hasn't been posted. I heard you didn't take criticism well. I hope that's not the case.
Posted by: Sam at July 31, 2005 07:35 PM
Regarding David Kiley's article, 27 Jul 05...specifically the statement "This business of screeching "oh my, oh my" every time a kid under the age of 15 might be exposed to a sexual overtone is madness. The world, the schoolyard, the summer camp and the workplace is full of sexual overtones. The point is to deal with it appropriately, not seek to ban it from the media." The reason the world, schoolyard, summercamp and workplace are full of sexual overtones is because we've allowed it to become that way, by not voicing our concerns over the sexualization of the media. Each time we let this kind of advertising (or dialogue on a sitcom or lyrics in a song) go, we encourage the next person to try something a little more risque, a little more raunchy, to get noticed, to get a laugh, or to sell something. It's not acceptable, it's not appropriate for decent public consumption, and we don't have to deal with it. We have to demand it stop.
Posted by: Terri Donahoe at August 1, 2005 02:09 PM
I like the original version with Annihilator in their Chicken and Corn video from years back. The chicken heads were more comical. Burger King should have gotten the actual band to do those ads and incorporated the Annihilator music as well.
Posted by: chichi at August 1, 2005 04:06 PM
This is an absolutely RETARDED ad campaign. What was BK thinking?
Posted by: Jeremy Gagne at August 2, 2005 12:05 PM
I must admit to some degree of curiousity... when did it become the right of parents everywhere to expect everyone else to do their jobs for them? I see people bemoaning the BK Coq ads - which I happen to think are crap - because 'some degenerate is shoving their perverted depraved concept of innocence on our children' (corrected for spelling and the like)and other such stances. I often wonder if they remember what the world is like outside their four worlds, or, indeed, as one person pointed out with regards to the Internet, within. The people who came up with the ad wanted to push some buttons - which they clearly did sucessfully. However, if you are worried that these spots wil make your kids want to do something sexually perverted, you might want to stop and consider that YOU may have been doing something wrong. Besides, any 'kid' who can get ideas from the word 'coq' and variations on the theme is probably long past the point where they can be shocked by an ad of a guy in a dumb chicken suit. Stop being hypocrites people - if you can. No one is supposed to be a parent but you.
Posted by: Darren at August 16, 2005 10:26 AM
As for the sexual innuendo- This ad seems too blatantly sexually degrading to call "innuendo"... hardly subtle in its references. And the food IS disgusting- though it wasn't always.
Our family recently tried BK- where we rarely go- because we had some coupons... and were reminded why we never seem to go there- and why so many BK's around here have gone under. In our surrounding 5 towns they are down to only the one franchise at our local mall... 10 yrs ago each town had a BK- maybe when they were still family oriented and believed their slogan: WHERE KIDS ARE KING...
As a mom & teacher, I agree with KERRY LOVELL's statement... That Media -in CHOOSING to be a reflection of society -should be making a contribution TO creating DECENT world citizens... NOT corrupting our youth by CHOOSING to appeal to & reinforce the most BASE of human characteristics & stereotypes.
And further, our family find the creepy plastic images of the Burger King himself, in another ad series, voyueristically Tom-peeping in through people's windows, as they eat, quite pathetic and disturbing. Overall, BK needs an ad dept. overhaul!!! And they need to fix how crappy their food & service is if they want to attract sales again!!!
As SAM said: They need to STICK to making burgers!!!! And get THAT right above all!!! Live up to their OWN name!!!
A FEW FOOTNOTES:
Re: DAVE G's query... "Why 'coq'? ...Because it is a French variation for the word "chicken"... Though the fact that they're selling chicken seems to get rather lost in all this. I hope they are NOT planning to launch a similar BKfish campaign next!!!
re: EXTON: talk about targetting and demeaning groups, or "reinforcing the most base characteristics & stereotypes" of a group ... Why the statement "People of faith, Christians not Muslims..."? "NOT Muslims"??!! What has THAT differentiation got to do with THIS Burger King controversial campaign???
But as YOU brought it up... I want to address this because such perpetuation of ignorant attitudes are very frightening in these times. And such ignorance is what creates so much heart-breaking and needless violence and volatility in this world. EXTON's reference was very sadly unfair & potentially inflammatory. Your statement makes you sound very IGNORANT ( fr. Latin: IG= without/ NORIS= knowledge):
~ of the fact you have just attempted to imperiously offend people of faith who are non-Christians & the one-fifth of the world population that ARE Muslim- most of whom ARE NOT fanatical or terrorists from extremist groups of the Middle-East, just everyday faithful family people the world over- with the same appreciation for the convenience of fast-foods & the same conflicting concerns over health- body & spirit -affected by the popular culture we all participate in;
~ of the fact that there IS a difference between EXTREMIST fanaticists of ANY faith VERSUS those who represent the greater NORM of their faith group (the formerly fighting Irish Catholic & Protestants hardly represent the masses of Christians- or other Catholics & Protestants the world over any more than the KKK's take on faith truly represents faithful Christians! Muslim extremists & their type of faith do NOT reflect the faithfulness of the majority of world Muslims).
~ of the fact that Muslims & those of other religions ARE also "people of faith"; that people of ALL religions may be offended by the BK ad- OR their food in general- OR offended by our being innundated seemingly everywhere, by the concept that "sex sells" and seemingly laissez-faire prevalent attitudes to accept this as a norm;
~that there are also people of ALL faiths that also believe in the EXACT SAME GOD- and share many overlapping family & community values who may be conversely thinking "IT's CHICKEN! For the sweet love of GOD (a.k.a. Mon Dieu; Allah; Deus...)!!!"
May the God that made us all look out: for our divergent & convergent societies; for our weaknesses with addictions to things that are convenient, taste soooo good & yet are sooooo bad for us; and maybe make some of that stuff actually good for us... LOL!!! (Hey! It could happen... Chocolate & ketchup now have vitamin & anti-toxident recognition!!!)
Don't BK... B good 2U!
Posted by: Sare B. at August 16, 2005 10:28 AM
In response to this whole "sexual innuendo" thing, I really just have one thing to say.
Get over it.
The ads aren't being shown during kids shows, they're being shown during programs that are aimed at adults and older teenagers that SHOULD have the sense to understand the humor behind it.
As for being offensive to women, maybe the folks that believe that should be looking up a few ladies called the Plaster Casters. Groupies exist, and sex is pretty much what they're after. Yet again, deal.
Saying that this ad is going against the grain of a "family-oriented" business is a load of hooey. The Chicken Fries aren't being marketed to children, who don't really care that the container can fit in the cupholder of your vehicle and has a special dipping-sauce carier built in. They're being marketed for on-the-go adults that like to snack in the car.
Frankly, if folks are that fired up about sex on television, then maybe they should start a campaign to stop showing tampon commercials during Pokemon.
Posted by: Bob at August 16, 2005 12:35 PM
See, there's this metal band called "Slipknot" and they all were these weird masks, and see Burger King is, like, parodying the whole Slipknot mask thing, but that fact has been lost on a nation of idiots who cannot see the ad for what it is: a clever parody of a current pop cultural phenomenon. Did it occur to anyone that the target demographic for chicken fries is EXACTLY that group that will recognize this as a brilliant Slipknot parody? Hello!? Plus, the music rawks--who cares about the lyrics. Think about it--I want to get 15-25 year old males to eat my product. That demographic knows who Slipknot is and thinks their masks are cool. The ad succeeds perfectly for that reason. Get a clue, morons!
Posted by: candice at August 16, 2005 04:37 PM
Dave . . . COQ AU VIN?? French for chicken, although that's an oversimplification, if you didn't get the play on words.
Moral decency, spiraling downward? come on! Kids know that people have sex, and that people poop, and that mom and dad are probably santa claus.
BUT seriously -- LETS KEEP THE AIRWAVES CLEAN while the bombs are falling.
Posted by: george at August 17, 2005 01:41 PM
Yes, this advertising campaign is absolutley mentally incapable. I can't stand all the people that use the word 'retarded' and 'gay'. Come on and be a little more creative in your namecalling. Jeez...
Posted by: jorhyne at August 17, 2005 01:55 PM
I believe that the idea that we shouldn't try to speak out or ban things that go against our moral values is ridiculous. What would be the "appropriate" way of dealing with this? To try to teach a 6th grader about the sexual innuendo/double meaning of "groupies love the coq" and why BK thinks its funny? Sure, I think it's humorous, but I'm a grown man. I don't agree that it should be a national ad campaign that is targeted at all potential fast food consumers, including young children. Not speaking out is exactly the behavior that encourages ad agencies to push the envelope further....maybe next year, profanity and nudity in mainstream commercials will be acceptable. Relativism is a slippery slope.
Posted by: Travis at August 17, 2005 02:02 PM
At least BK is using non-mainstream music to promote their product. This is an amusing ad campaign. Personally, I never eat at BK unless necessary. Come on people, it's all just silly fun. If your children ask you why the band is called "Coq Roq" tell them the truth - THEY ARE ROOSTERS PLAYING ROCK MUSIC. This whole thing a A LOT more tame than a lot of other ad campaigns out there.
Posted by: Jon F at August 18, 2005 03:59 PM
Here's an idea. If you don't like the ads, turn off the TV.
Posted by: Rich at August 19, 2005 10:11 AM
When it comes to the topic of sex, everyone brings their "baggage of pain" to the table-- And, at least in this culture, nearly everyone has more than their share. And THAT is why sex sells in the good ol' U.S. of A.
Does it send the wrong messages? Does it treat women with a lack of respect? I have to ask why we're trying to find such qualities in a television commercial in the first place-- And why we ALLOW our children to do so.
But what about the message its supposed to send? Does this make anyone WANT to eat chicken fries? Would most viewers even notice that it's trying to accomplish that goal in the first place? Does it sell?
I've read recently that the increase in brand awareness & sales at Carl's Jr.'s is attributable to their advertising of the recent past. We're expected to assume that a campaign with the apparent demographic of young-surly-undisciplined- men-with-poor-table-manners-and-dietary-habits has resurrected this company. Oh, and displaying their products as sloppy and unappealing must have contributed too. "Outside the box," indeed!
It has to be that. It can't possibly be that their agency buys up an astounding number of ad blocks . It can't be that audiences now hears the Carl's Jr. name every 12 minutes.
Certainly, "outside the box" advertising can be a powerful tool. But, just like any other sales technique, if it's poorly executed it just wastes a whole lot of money.
Posted by: Daniel at August 21, 2005 07:39 AM
Well I think the commericals are funny. Women dancing, wow, what a big deal.
Posted by: sam at August 21, 2005 05:08 PM
Ya know folks, perhaps we need to keep teaching our kids the right thing before someone else gets to them. Good people need to reproduce to keep the idiots out numbered.
Posted by: RobinRI at August 21, 2005 09:12 PM
OK.. first off if anyone goes as far as to ban the website.. they have wayy to much time on their hands i mean. its a website about a made up band and all the "sexual things" in the commercial are just pretty much basic things that happen at concerts..
there are groupies and crazed fans.. i think that they were just trying to capture the whole feeling of a gig.and to me they really mellowed it out alot. at least they didnt show people doing drugs. and all the kids watching are just going to be exposed to it sooner or later.. u cant protect them forever.. and like most kids growing up now a days its gonna happen sooner. and also like most kids.. it will happen more then once. so its not a big deal. i figure. let ur kids see now so its not a shocker when they are older. besides they are starting to swear on Nickelodian now.
Posted by: Boomer at August 21, 2005 10:31 PM
Sure the it's trash, but I love that song.
Posted by: dan at August 21, 2005 11:16 PM
First of all, Coq Roq is not a slipknot ripoff. Slipknot is lame/trashy nu-metal, and Coq Roq is just generic (yet catchy) rock n' roll. If anything, they remind me more of old old old GWAR than slipknot.
As far as sexual innuendo, I think you're looking wayyyyy too deeply into it. Kids aren't going to understand the "groupies love the coq" reference unless you explain it to them. Otherwise, they won't think it means any more than "girls love this band". If they already DO know what it means, then the reference won't exactly tear down their moral structures.
And I didn't percieve "bob your head" as suggesting fellatio, because I didn't intentionally seek out the sexuality of the commercial. To me, it just seems like a bunch of guys in post-apocolyptic chicken helmets rocking out, and trying to cross the street. Not that big of a deal.
Posted by: Jared at August 22, 2005 12:53 AM
This commercial did'nt seem to be a sexual innuendo reference to me when I watch it(but now that all you pervs mention it....maybe),it's shocking that a chicken is selling fried chicken,BARBARIC!It's even funnier now that Slipknot is suing CoqRoq for being a better punk band than they are.11-15 yr. olds find sexual innuendo in everything(ie.crack of dawn etc.)I applaud BK for doing a spot that's outside the box.(oops there's another sex reference...sorry)I have a 15 yr old boy that only wants to eat some more greasey chicken,and did'nt see the "SEX!"that the "adults" do.Now if they would have said something like 'i got a big box-a-Coq'you may see the FCC here.That spot is only offensive if it gets you go to the local BK and actually eat the fried Coq.
Posted by: paul at August 22, 2005 07:21 AM
I am total fan of these guys. Are hope if they are not a real rock band that they decide to continue on past the BK campaign. As far as all the double entendres go regarding the name and song lyrics. I had only thought of one or two until I read this blog. But it still doesn't bother me.
Posted by: Johnnycoqfan at August 22, 2005 04:05 PM
I am a 15 year old girl and I have no problem with the ads they put out.In junior high and in high school we "children" learn a lot more than what our parents and teachers teach us about sex and violence just from the other students alone.It does not bother us one bit.And besides,it is a good thing that we know about it;if we didn't then there would be a lot more teenage cheerleaders out there getting pregnant.This song and commercial are actually the least offensive compared to a lot of music out there now,a lot by rap groups.You want to hear something offensive?Go hear some songs by Petey Pablo.That is much more offensive than this.What is SO bad to you people about this commercial??!I love it!I even like the band and their songs for the commercials.Keep your comments to yourself because it's only offensive to people who try to live in their perfect little utopia that does not exist.
Posted by: Faye at August 22, 2005 06:28 PM
"Believe it or not SEX is not the end all and be all. It is because of the homosexual movement with there emphases on their perversions that has lead to this.
Posted by: Exton at July 28, 2005 04:11 PM"
What on Earth does homosexuality have to do with faux hetero metal bands with girl groupies?
You need to think before you type!
Posted by: Grant at August 23, 2005 03:03 AM
I fast-forwarded through this commercial since the first time I saw it a couple of weeks ago. I momentarily watched little pieces of it; all I knew was that it was an ad for Burger King, and that I didn't like it.
Yesterday I finally watched the whole thing. Now I know why I didn't like it. (Oh and I finally found out what they were trying to advertise after watching the whole damn ad...) Talk about LAME! That whole ad is some advertising dweeb's pipe dream. If they think that it’s going to sell chicken...???
The tune is kind of catchy, but I like to think their target audience is a little savvier than that with their dollar. Besides BK chicken tastes TERRIBLE.
And everyone's gripe about sex and innuendo in the commercial? Who cares? The truth is its just a poorly written ad, poorly targeted at their preferred demographic, and I don't think its going to help an already struggling fast food company.
Besides what I'm really bothered by is that Burger King doesn't accept email, and I had to post this here instead of sending it directly to them.
Posted by: Danh at August 26, 2005 01:05 PM
I went to there site and downloaded the music. Very nice :)
Posted by: Shakeebo at August 27, 2005 02:34 PM
exton you are way off the mark my man. that leave it to beaver world was a figment of your own imagination that came crashing down. you make it sound so dreamy but what about the racism, the bigotry, the sexism, the domestic violence used to keep women 'in their place'? i guess the beav forgot about all that huh? but it was aokay because you went to church and your kids didnt know what the word cock meant. the ad is stupid, and id raise my kids to be able to discern that for themselves without me having to cover their eyes everytime it comes on
Posted by: rob at September 12, 2005 11:32 PM
The same people that bash these commercials are the ones that believe Cookie Monster made them fat. (poor guy has to sing C is for Celery now!)I personally feel much better about watching a CoqRoq song for Burger King than I do watching those damned Sponge Monkies from Quizno's Subs.
Posted by: Paula at September 13, 2005 04:05 PM
dude you hella just necro posted that
Posted by: shakeebo at September 29, 2005 03:45 PM
I wont go back to any Burger King. BK is on my permanent Boycott list.
Posted by: . at October 10, 2005 10:34 PM
hey!! bk rules!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: hey at October 19, 2005 05:25 AM
I don't see how you could, in good conscience, buy a 6 dollar burger at a fast food place on a regular basis unless your name was Donald Trump.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 13, 2005 11:41 PM
Wow/ In our country burger cost 50 cents. I live in Ukraine
Posted by: Dmitr at December 20, 2005 11:50 AM
I fast-forwarded through this commercial since the first time I saw it a couple of weeks ago. I momentarily watched little pieces of it; all I knew was that it was an ad for Burger King, and that I didn't like it.
Posted by: Marry at January 2, 2006 03:48 AM
im a 14 year old guy and i have heard and seen so much worse then this junk. by the tme you reach my age, talk of sex will surround your every waking moment. well at school anyway. if ur old enough to kno wat coq means, then its not gonna affect you. and if u dont kno wat it means, then its just another word for u. and u'b best be happy that they didnt show the true reality of a concert. with all the drugs i mean. this is reality and u people's kids will kno it all in time and potentially partake in it far be4 they r married. and as far as degradin women goes, well this stuff really happens and women really do do that to themselves.
Posted by: Elias at September 25, 2006 09:19 PM
yo i just read this and all you freaks who shit your pants over the sexuality of those commercials are soooo ignorant of the world around you that its not even funny. im only 16 and i know this 16 not that old but i still understand that its just a commercial and nothing more as to the degrading women bit ive seen women do much worse and of their own free will so chill out old people be more open minded
Posted by: jake at January 31, 2007 04:42 AM