Uber Eats alters Super Bowl ad to remove part where it makes fun of potentially fatal allergies
Uber has reportedly cut a scene of a guy going into anaphylaxis from its lighthearted Super Bowl ad, for some reason
Aux News uber eats
As far as marketing messages go, “We don’t care if you live or die” is kind of a, let’s call it, tricky one. (Sprite could have pulled it off back in the 1990s, maybe, but those people were maniacs.) Hence, presumably, news that Uber Eats has had to slightly dial down one of its big, expensive ad spots for this weekend’s big, expensive Super Bowl, after some consumers pointed out that making fun of someone with a peanut allergy for forgetfully eating peanut butter might rub certain people (i.e., survivors) the wrong way.
The scene is part of Uber Eats’ major ad buy, which was supposed to be making headlines for reuniting Jennifer Aniston and David Schwimmer in a cute bit about how she’s forgotten that they worked together for basically forever. (The whole theme of the campaign is “Whoops, people forgot to use our product!” which is a weirdly self-effacing concept for a company’s marketing department to try to float, but we digress.) The ad also features such light-hearted moments as Usher forgetting his half-time show, Victoria Beckham forgetting the Spice Girls, and, yeah, some random actor eating peanut butter because he forgot it contained the tiny legumes that could send him into potentially deadly anaphylactic shock.
The ad (which was rolled out earlier this week, because our lives are now centered entirely on waiting for expensive commercials to come out ahead of the big sports game) quickly caught the ire of not-for-profit advocacy group Food Allergy Research & Education, which released a statement saying that “We’re incredibly disappointed by @UberEats’ use of life-threatening food allergies as humor in its Super Bowl ad. The suffering of 33M+ Americans with this condition is no joke. Life-threatening food allergy is a disease, not a diet. Enough is enough.” FARE has said that it’s talked with Uber, and that the scene in question has been removed from the ad.
This isn’t the first Super Bowl ad that’s had to be altered in the run-up to Da Big Ad Spot: Gambling company FanDuel also updated an ad featuring the late Carl Weathers in the wake of his death last week, in what’s sure to be the most touching and sensitive gambling advertisement you’re likely to see this year.
81 Comments
I was going to raise a stink about the insensitivity to those of us who suffer from memory loss but I forgot.
How funny would the real life consequences of showing up at the office without your trousers on be?
I’m watching this commercial a few days after being forced to watch David Schwimmer in a sexual harassment video as part of onboarding for a temporary position. So now I’ll associate UberEats with Jennifer Aniston recoiling from a predator. Good job.
I kind of assumed your workplace was, like, showing you clips from Friends where David Schwimmer was acting creepy. They’d certainly have plenty to choose from. But nope, I went online, and there are videos produced by David Schwimmer and starring him and a bunch of other celebrities about sexual harassment.That’s good, I guess. Very strange, but good.
Hell, there’s a video with Jennifer Aniston and Matthew Perry teaching you about the wonders of Windows 95! (nearly an hour long!)
All a workplace training seminar has to do is just include a bunch of clips of Ross getting so creepy and possessive of Rachel about Mark, or Ross, as a college professor, dating one of his own students. There are MORE than enough creepy Ross moments.
I’m not sure this is an effective message: “Don’t sexually harass people, or you my have to fuck Jennifer Aniston, Aisha Tyler, and Rebecca Romijn.”
Wow you get videos with Dave Schwimmer. I use to work for one of the biggest tech companies in the world and all our training videos starred what I can only assume were the cheapest actors they could find.
It’s a bit surreal because the majority of the presentation is a PowerPoint slideshow that could have been slapped together by an intern but it’s intercut with video content from various sources, some highly professional, some very much less so. The ones with real actors and good production values are actually harder to watch, which I guess is the point.
“I didn’t seriously harass her, we were on a break!”
“If you find yourself thinking you’re about to say something inappropriate, PIVOT to a new topic of conversation.”
But is Schwimmer a predator or was he just playing one in the videos?
I suppose it might make business sense to not openly declare that a business doesn’t care if their customers all die painfully?
Who doesn’t trust a food delivery service that doesn’t care if you accidentally ingest something that will kill you?
Perfect opportunity for a competitor to buy ad space right after them
Grubhub: A food delivery service that DOES care if you accidentally ingest something that will kill you.
Well, “thoughts & prayers” caring, obviously. Grubhub ain’t looking to expose themselves to liability by suggesting that they might actively participate in a person’s self-monitoring for allergens.
Nah bro they don’t care
I haven’t used one and I do worry about that. People make mistakes, do weird things. I worked a lot of server jobs throughout school and, although I’d never do something bad to anyone’s food, I knew people who were capable of it.
How are both you and the article’s author interpreting the ad this way? The ad is making fun of the idea that a guy with a peanut allergy forgot there were peanuts in peanut butter, because it’s obvious that peanuts are in peanut butter.I guess I could see the argument that it’s insensitive to make jokes involving people with people allergies, in all circumstances. (I’d disagree, but I could see it.) But there is no suggestion in the article that Uber Eats does not care if people with food allergies live or die. None at all. It just isn’t there.
Thank you.
Yeah, I don’t know why our health care industry hasn’t started doing that. Since it’s broken beyond repair they might as well just start boasting about it. It will make the entitled insured feel even more special.Scene: Well-heeled family of four standing in front of a 1.5 million dollar home.Dad, beaming: “See? We did everything right. Now we don’t have to die! We’re having a big BBQ next week. Do everything right and you can come on over. I’m having an awesome double by-pass the day before!
This is more uber flexing about how they’re not responsible for the actual food, but still get to profit from it. In other words, they’re rent-seeking cunts and laughing at us all.
Probably
Nah.The theme of the campaign is “Uber Eats is so important that people don’t forget it, even when they forget other very important things.”Hence forgetting a long time coworker, or forgetting that peanuts will kill you. It’s not a great campaign, I saw the one with a guy forgetting how to do a handshake like 3 times before I got the joke, but it’s not anything like what people seem to be describing.
Disappointing to see Uber Eats cave in to pressure from Big Food Allergy.
Seriously, looking at these comments you’d think people with food allergies were a massive lobbying bloc rather than a group trying not to need their epipens.
The world would be better off if we stopped credulously reporting on what advocacy groups like Food Allergy Research & Education say, as if they were representative of the real people they claim to fight for. These groups depend on generating publicity for themselves. Even if they are actually making these complaints in good faith, the groups are inevitably made up of the people who are most fanatical about an issue.It’s like looking at the statements of the Catholic League to determine whether Catholics think something is offensive. The Catholic League is made of people who, by virtue of being in the Catholic League, are prone to find things offensive, and the organization has every incentive to always say things are offensive.
Okay, so some propagandists shined a light on something, and that got all of us to pay attention. You say, “even if they are actually making these complaints in good faith…” but then you leave it at “if.” Did you stop to think? Did you come to any conclusion about their arguments? Now that you’re aware of what happened, do you have anything of substance to say? You’re attacking the messenger without addressing the topic at all. Lame.
For real, all advocacy organizations for any group survives based on finding false outrage to fundraise off of. Enough already
“everyone’s so sensitive can’t say anything anymore nobody can take a joke I am not a crackpot gen-whatever is becoming so prudish about food allergies everyone wants to be offended these days.”
Nailed it—this article is a great example of why non-profit advocacy groups should just generally be treated with a lot more skepticism, since polling reveals that their stances frequently clash with those of the people they purport to represent. I’ll admit I don’t have any polling in front of me as to whether people with peanut allergies found this ad offensive, but I’d bet a lot of money that the overwhelming majority do not, because the idea that using morbid humor equates to saying “We don’t care if you live or die” is plainly absurd. There are countless shows/movies with nut-allergy jokes in them; the only reason people are yelling at this one is because people love looking for reasons to get mad at corporations. Would anyone at all care if a joke like this popped up in, say, The Good Place?
FARE is a good source for reliable, practical information about living with food allergies. It would be a bit strange for a food allergy advocacy organization not to comment on public representations of food allergies, but that isn’t their primary activity. This post is a blend of tired internet jabber that’s both passionate and completely incoherent. It’s kind of perversely fascinating – there’s a false analogy between a medical advocacy group and a religious organization. But even that analogy contains the false premise that the Catholic League isn’t a mouthpiece for Catholics. So it’s like an untruth built on top of a mistake. I guess the unifying idea is that a single outlet can’t speak on behalf of an entire large group? But that’s just the basic Internet strategy of stating the obvious as a complaint.
Weird double-standard in Super Bowl ads… you can kill Mr. Peanut, but Mr. Peanut can’t kill you.
Lol. Best comment I’ve read here in a long time.
Take your star.
“… might rub certain people (i.e., survivors) the wrong way.” People with peanut allergies who ate peanut butter and didn’t die are an interest group with enough clout to have portions of a Super Bowl ad pulled? I sincerely have no idea what to think about this.
It’s three seconds in a one minute ad. Okay, let’s always remember to be self-serious.
I don’t want to get all right wing grandpa here but man people really can’t take a joke these days. Uber eats wasn’t wishing anyone dead. It’s a silly commercial.
Yeah, the hills people decide they’ll die on is getting really fucking annoying.
People have every right to decide which hills to die on. Who are you to say otherwise? You couldn’t be more wrong if you tried. You should be banned for life from life.
You first you whiny fucking bitch
It’s a topsy-turvy world, and maybe the problems of two people don’t amount to a hill of beans. But this is our hill. And these are our beans!
Okay well you’re back on my good side for the Casablanca reference.
Uhhhhh… that’s Naked Gun. Anyway I had been trying to make a joke but it clearly failed. I agree with your statement “the hills people decide they’ll die on is getting really fucking annoying.” Shit, there aren’t really even hills there. What even is this article about? Oh yeah, Wil Wheaton calling out Larry David for assaulting Elmo. This is hardly Israel-Gaza we’re talking about. Who gives a shit. Goddamn I miss the old AV Club.
Sorry I missed your original joke! But I still like and respect you.
Yep.I feel like Wheaton taking up for an actual felt puppet last week was a new nadir, but hey, it’s a new Monday. The culture war can always go deeper and weirder!
And as always it takes away from language that really *does* work to dehumanize actual vulnerable minority groups. Nobody is demonizing people with food allergies.
Fuck people with peanut allergies. Because of you, I don’t get peanuts on an airplane anymore.
Do you actually fly anywhere, or is this just trolling…? I’ve never not gotten peanuts. All of the major airlines in the USA still serve them as snacks. If you have an allergy, you’re supposed to ask for an alternative snack. But the “default” is still to offer and serve peanuts to everybody else. You’re not a victim, and there’s nothing for you to whine about.
Wrong. Every airline serves pretzels now. You clearly haven’t flown in the last 20 years.
That’s not true at all. Have flown many times in the past years (American) and the snack is always pretzels/cookies.
Trolling. Even if it’s sincere, anyone who won’t accept a substitute for peanuts is trolling their entire life.
You still get complimentary snacks on flights? Granted, I only fly a few times a year but haven’t had a bag of peanuts (or anything) offered for at least half a decade.
Bring your own, dummy.
That’s not the point, dummy.
You don’t have a point, other than being annoyed about no free peanuts. You’re not getting booted off a plane for bringing your own, so if you’re unwilling to do that, go fuck yourself.
Examine your life. You’re truly awful for no reason.
I have my reasons.
They’re not worth it. Do better.
I hope you choke to death on a peanut.
Delete your account. Get professional help.
No, you get almonds now, which are way better.
Where???
Porter. It’s a Canadian airline. I’m trying to remember if Air Canada does too. I thought they did?
Thanks for the info. I’ll try to plan my next trip accordingly.
Your first sentence contradicts your whole agenda.
Damnit!
Is that Adam Lustick from the severely underrated ‘Corporate’ as the peanut butter guy?
I don’t know the reference but I looked at some side-by-side photos and it sure looks like him. The upper front teeth are identical.And now I’m sort of wishing that commercials rolled credits like films/shows do and wondering whether or not the public would be outraged. Probably.
Weird timing for me, as I watched Freaks & Geeks for the first time just recently, including the one where the bully almost kills Bill by lacing his sandwich with peanuts.I’ve been trying to put myself in the headspace of late 90s/early 2000s views on peanut allergies, and why they’re out that in their about 1980 high school, but I can’t really remember. Was that maybe the very earliest that peanut concerns started going mainstream?
I don’t have an answer to your question, but this did remind me that we used to have restaurants where a major draw was being able to just throw food waste on the floor and nobody would even bother to sweep it up. Also the giant anaphylactic incubation room aspect, but really just the whole idea. History is wild in that even a few years out things can seem really weird, but one day people will learn about our era with all the fascination and horror of learning of why chainsaws were originally invented.
I’m honestly not one to say “what a bunch of snowflakes” but holy shit, we as a society really need to sack the fuck up.
The outrage is kind of dumb, but also“some random actor eating peanut butter because he forgot it contained the tiny legumes that could send him into potentially deadly anaphylactic shock.”That would literally never happen lol, also the proliferation of allergies or intolerances is kind of strange. Like I100% get a lot of people have legit allergies to all kinds of things, but there is also a big section of the population that claim allergies or intolerances to stuff because it’s trendy.
Like I 100% get a lot of people have legit allergies to all kinds of things, but there is also a big section of the population that claim allergies or intolerances to stuff because it’s trendy.Maybe, but there has also been a drastic increase in childhood allergies to peanuts and some other foods over the last few decades. What’s causing this increase is unknown, although there are several hypotheses.
Oh I know there are a lot of people with legit, and life threatening allergies. But like suddenly there were a TON of people who had gluten intolerance, when no they didn’t but it was trendy. Now my 2 unscientific thoughts on the rise of childhood allergies, kids are to clean. Exposure to allergens, bacteria and the like can be good, in small doses. At the end of the day an allergic reaction is your body over reacting to an allergen. There have been studies done over the years, for instance about peanut allergies. For example Israel has the lowest rate of peanut allergies, I think in the world, the working theory is that there is a very popular candy given to very young children that is peanut based. So they think that exposing very young kids to peanuts results in a lower rate of allergies. Also there was a study in the EU, also dealing with peanut allergies, they took people and exposed them to VERY VERY small amounts. And over time they very slowly increased the amount of the allergen, they found that by slowly increasing the “dose” over time they could lessen the severity of the allergic reaction, possible even cure it.
Of course not, maybe, but maybe, if touching nuts kills you, you’re suppose to die.
No you’re just stupid
Of course…but maybe…
Louis CK – Nut Allergy (youtube.com)
I didn’t see this commercial (I did look up once and see Jennifer Aniston and David Schwimmer on screen but I wasn’t paying attention). Maybe it was better in execution but the entire premise sounds stupid and not funny. I have no opinion on the allergy part.
Well, looks like Jennifer Aniston’s finally hit the tipping point on the plastic surgery. It was a great, 30-year run.