By: Bohumil Kaspar

Having a 30-second ad spot in the Super Bowl costs companies more money every year. Back in 1971, such a spot would have cost $72,000. In 2009, a spot of equivalent length cost companies $3,000,000. The interesting thing is that when a company purchases an advertising spot during the Super Bowl, it is not simply going to use the same kind of commercial it uses the rest of the year. Companies make special commercials that are usually designed to be funny or provocative. Thus, the Super Bowl commercial has grown into a show of its own, a show that keeps those of us who do not care about football entertained during the many Super Bowl parties scattered throughout the nation.

If you look through the list of advertisers that are expected to participate in creating an advertisement for the Super Bowl, you aren't going to find any small companies. What you find is the likes of Coca-Cola, Audi and Go-Daddy.com. This is because small companies cannot afford the large sum of money required to participate. So it is rather interesting that these companies spend so much money on a time slot for their commercial — and yet they release the commercials online before the event. 

The fact that companies release the commercials ahead of time suggests just how relevant the Super Bowl commercial has become. When one says "Super Bowl commercial," it no longer signifies a commercial that runs during the Super Bowl, as much as a commercial that fits the entertaining criteria expected of commercials usually played during that event. Merging entertainment with advertising seems like a great idea, and we often find commercials that are humorous or scandalous played during the rest of the year. Yet these commercials are usually outnumbered by a large number of dull commercials. Even if you are trying to watch a Super Bowl commercial on YouTube, you will often find yourself having to sit though a preliminary commercial before you are allowed to watch the actual commercial you want to see. Note your annoyance as you wait for the preliminary commercial to finish.

The question must then be asked: Why aren't all commercials entertaining? If all commercials were done with entertainment, would we see a rise of commercial-only television stations? Maybe even a retro-commercial station? One possible answer is that if all commercials were done with entertainment in mind, we would get desensitized to them and no longer take as much notice. This implies that horrible ads are a necessary annoyance that are given to us on purpose. 

Whatever the case may be, one major negative effect of pre-releasing the commercials through the Internet is that ratings for the Super Bowl may go down. Those who care more for the commercials than the game will have less reason to watch the event (being able to watch them ahead of time). On the other hand, if the commercials are good enough, you will see links to the commercials passed through links in social media, not to mention polls and discussions about the best commercials all over the Internet. The Internet buzz may end up creating a longer-lasting buzz in society (and in cyberspace) than simply airing the commercials during the event. What the companies are really paying for is the privilege of having their commercial identified as a Super Bowl Commercial, knowing that that in itself will generate interest in whatever commercial they decide to create.

Do you have an opinion on this topic?  Make sure you are logged in to Facebook and a box will appear below where you can let us know your thoughts on this topic. 

Article sources: 

http://www.trendski.com/2011/01/super-bowl-advertising-statistics.htm