Turn the Hose off of Verizon's New Fake Emergency Ad

This week’s edition is another ad from Verizon:

There are two fine prints to notice in this one:

They say it is a test in the beginning of the ad, there’s no reason for the fine print. Who would really think it is an actual emergency? What would you do/call if you thought it was? My bigger concern is the “do not attempt” on the firehouse gag. The guy just stands there and is smiling as he gets wet. “Do not attempt” does not cover the blatant misleading portrayal of a fire hose in this ad. You do not see smiling or high-fiving among the riot police in this training video.

Something Fishy About Gillette's New Ad

This week’s edition is from Gillette:

The fine print was in the beginning and hard to see:

They chummed the water! No wonder the sharks swarmed to the nicks of the shaver. In fact, they never actually show the sharks going after one cage over the other, which is just clever editing. Now if they were able to get a close shave while chumming this water, and hiding in this cage, I would be impressed. Oddly enough, they compare this razor to their own “leading disposable,” instead of against a competitor like Schick. Maybe Gillette was scared of the FTC and wanted to avoid losing their title of the official razor of Shark Week.

AllState’s Ad for All States?

Here is an ad in a recent series from AllState:

While there is a lot of fine print, I noticed the one in caps:

AllState does not cover all states? I’ve never seen a fine print that directly contradicts the company’s own name. I cannot imagine GEICO caveman ads stating their policy is not available for certain government employees or New York Life not being applicable in Brooklyn.

However, sometimes even a fine print critique needs some fine print. Technically the fine print in the ad refers to the specific deductable deal, which depends on each state’s individual laws. Additionally, Allstate’s insurance does cover each state, and the origin of their name comes from a competition to name Sears’ tire division. Even so, they could have written the fine print differently to not include a part of their company’s name, like “participation varies by location” or “option dependant on local laws.”

A Problem With Lexus's Future Ads

This week’s fine print comes from Lexus:

The fine print to notice is not the “do not attempt” or “drive in a safe manner,” but:

At first glance this looks like a car commercial, but in fact, the car is not even real yet. They are actually advertising their simulator and concept vehicle LF-GH. While they are not claiming the LF-GH or any specific car will have the new reaction feature, they are misleading the viewers by association. Watch next week Mercedes comes out with an ad featuring future plans to add a flux capacitor to their new concept hovercraft or new engines on the long-awaited jet pack. Imagine touting to your boss on how great the new features on future TPS reports will be, or turning in a “concept paper” to your professor. Good luck getting away with that.

Thanks to reader Erryn Gallasch for the idea submission.

Do Not Attempt to Mimic Magnum Ice Cream and Ace Hardware

This week’s edition is a double feature, first from Ace Hardware:

Then from Magnum Ice Cream:

Notice the fine print on both?:

We shouldn’t walk on top of cars? Unfortunately, there is a time honored tradition in movies of this action. Whether it is tracking aliens, watching horse races, shooting aliens, or robbing cars, everyone seems to turn out fine. Oh, wait; maybe it’s a bad idea after all.

Thanks for reader David Marrin for the idea submission.

Ancestry.com and Vonage, Fortune and Fame

Here is an ad I saw for Ancestry.com:

The fine print on this one might be hard to read:

“Actor Portrayal”

While plenty of commercials use actors and actresses, you rarely see fine print about it. I guess Ancestry.com felt obligated since they were making claims and faked details. My question is why do they need to pay actors in the first place? Is their product not good enough where they can find a real person who found cool genealogy stuff on their website? Why don’t they just use actual customers like in the Vonage ad below:

And the bonus fine print:

Apparently I missed the memo about being able to appear on TV hocking your favorite stuff. I’m sure the offer for my testimonial for Skittles and Five Guys got lost in the mail or something.

Is it Jeep or Jip Wrangler?

Here is another car ad that makes an appearance on this blog:

This fine print is a long one:

What’s the point of showing all these cool stunts the car can do, when it cannot even do it? How lame has Jeep become that crossing a puddle is not covered by the warranty? It can only cross 20 inches of water? That’s good to know so next time I’m getting chased by aliens/zombies/dinosaurs through the swamp I’ll make sure to bring my yard stick and measure before crossing.

This week’s edition comes with a bonus fine print. Lenny Kravitz is obviously not driving through that water and is not the professional driver. They had to make sure the Jeep was extra clean for his fancy leather outfit.

Thanks to reader Sarah Stone for the idea submission.