Posted on 09/26/2007 11:26:45 AM PDT by toddlintown
Miller Beer has a connection to MoveOn.org: Most of MoveOn’s commercials are made by experienced operatives at a left-wing advertising firm in Santa Monica, California.
The firm of Zimmerman & Markman occupies a small suite of offices in a four-story building a few blocks from the beach. Bill Zimmerman, the agency’s strategist, has a PhD in psychology and got his start in politics registering black voters in Mississippi in 1962. He worked with Jane Fonda on anti-Vietnam War mobilization and has played a role in drug decriminalization campaigns. Pacy Markman, the agency’s copywriter, had a long career in commercial advertising (he wrote the indelible slogan “Miller Lite: everything you always wanted in a beer, and less”)...
(Excerpt) Read more at beerinfood.wordpress.com ...
“Miller also has some brands under its tent you may not be aware belong to them including:”
I’m a beer columnist, author, lecturer and consultant.
I’m very aware of the beer industry.
http://beerinfood.wordpress.com/about/
I don’t drink the stuff, it’s either Budd, the latest cheap stuff on sale, or home brewed beer.
But I’ll never allow anyone to bring it on my property again.
Call it fag beer. The rumor will spread.
In defense of Miller, I think I have figured out why they want to market to homos. If you are a bar owner and run a straight bar your best nights are Friday and Saturday, maybe Sunday if you have a sporst following. If you run a gay bar, you never have a down day. Hanging in bars and hitting on each other is what gays do. They don’t have families to take care of. It is the life of Peter Pan - they never grow up. From the bar owners and Miller’s point of view gays are money. All that being said, Miller beer sucks (maybe why the queers like it). Sorry to hear they controll Pilsner Urquell, good beer.
Never again for me!
Miller’s been overtly courting the homo market for years.
In a 1988 Wall Street Journal article, a Miller spokesman begged off on the idea of the brewery concentrating heavily on the gay market. Miller is now, however, open in its marketing to gays. In a sense, old Frederick Miller’s brewery has come out of the closet, but initially tripped over the threshold when it did. As recently as 1999, the brewery ran into problems with this approach.
There was little question what group of beer drinkers Miller was targeting with its ad featuring a shirtless muscle man. The spot was supposed to air on a cable program in San Francisco and feature a “Barechest Men” calendar for sale, the proceeds going to a local AIDS-funding group. The combination of Miller sponsoring a photo calendar of beefy hunks and indirectly raising funds for AIDS victims was too much for some straights in the San Francisco community. After loads of protests by conservative groups, the thirty-second ad was pulled. A Miller spokesman tried to lay the idea for the commercial at the feet of a local advertising agency and not at the door of the brewery’s Milwaukee headquarters. The idea of courting gays while possibly disenfranchising the much larger market of straight beer drinkers made Miller back off from openly advertising gay-themed commercials and ads for the next few years, except in gay publications.
However, maybe in a reflection of political correctness (and an almost stagnant growth in beer sales), a Miller commercial from 2001 had two women sitting at a bar, obviously on the prowl for some man-meat. In the TV spot, one girl has the bartender send a beer over to a man sitting alone. As he starts to acknowledge the drink, the women spot a better looking man behind him and have the female bartender go back and grab the beer from the poor slob who was about to sip on the bottle. “Sorry chief!” she says as she pulls the bottle from his hand and passes it over to the girls’ newest interest. Seconds later, another hunk joins the single man who is enjoying his free beer. “Jackpot!” one of the girls says, but she almost falls off her stool when the two men hold hands. “Well,” one girl declares, “at least he’s not married.”
http://beerinfood.wordpress.com/2007/06/08/were-here-were-queer-and-now-were-drinking-beer/
The Coors family who owns Coors supports the 2nd Amendment: http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Mags/Key-Second-Amendment-Races-2004.htm (search for Coors). They are rock-solid on gun rights and most other conservative issues.
DRINK COORS!!!
I thought FR didn’t allow multiple nics...
That sounds like a pretty good market strategy but even gays don’t like the clown gays at this “fair” according to stealth sources on FR who live in the area.
Well lets see, Miller supports gay orgy parades, they add their label to insults against Christians, support illegal aliens flooding across the border. I think the connection to Move-on is quite clear; The company is run by a leftist moonbat!.
It is interesting that they were the only "normal" company listed at the bottom of the ad. It doesn't matter too much to me anyway since I don't drink Miller anything. If they want to sell to the gay boys, fine, but I think there is more of a connection.
If you want to ding the ad agency for that reason, fine. However, to ding an ad agency’s client because of the ad agency’s other clients is still nonsensical. Maybe the ad agency is good at what they do (no maybes about it actually — look at the left’s propaganda skills).
I’ve shopped at stores that sell some products whose manufacturers support leftist organizations. Doesn’t make me a leftist. Just means that the store thinks my money is as green as everyone else’s. (BTW, those stores are called “grocery stores.”)
PS Ad agencies and ethics? Surely you jest. (It would be the ad agency’s ethics at issue — for example, if they took only leftist clients.)
PPS If you’ve got more on Miller that shows they fit in with those leftscum groups, fine — now we can ding them. Meanwhile, I’m gonna crack a Miller Lite (all American pilsner sucks, and it does have less calories, so I drink it when I don’t want a real beer).
Given those facts, that would be a reason to consider Miller to be leftscum. The fact that they also use an ad agency that has leftist clients might be considered as supporting circumstantial evidence, but of VERY little weight!
However, to ding an ad agency’s client because of the ad agency’s other clients is still nonsensical.
________________________________
I don’t know. I knew a very bright, very good PR person, ran her own agency, very high level, some extraordinarily effective campaigns. She was the hardest core, most ingrained leftist I’ve ever known. I think looking at the PR and Advertising people behind a company or campaign might be a great way to figure out where they are coming from.
Or...
Counter-example: If I get a ticket, I’m going to get a lawyer who probably has defended rapists, murderers, and other thugs. Does that make me a supporter of rapists, murderers, and thugs? Of course not, it makes me someone who needs a lawyer and whose money is green!
You beat me to it... I call it horse pea!
Bullfrog
I no longer use my previous handle, which was attached to a previous e-mail address.
I use this nickname exlusively.
H
Whew!!
Thank goodness there are still some enjoyments left.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.