In its first-ever Super Bowl ad, The Washington Post extols a vibrant free press

On social media, many applauded the message of the minute-long spot. Others questioned the wisdom of spending $5 million on a commercial amid industrywide staff cuts.

WaPo Super Bowl ad

It’s an ad for an industry, a life’s purpose, rather than for an individual business.

Fittingly, it drew favorable and unfavorable responses from an array of sources.

The Washington Post produced its first-ever Super Bowl commercial, costing a reported $5.2 million and running one minute. The ad features the voice of actor Tom Hanks and images of iconic moments in U.S. history—along with the faces of journalists who have died for their work.

Mashable reported:

The moving spot begins with shots of memorable news events — the March on Selma, the moon landing, the Oklahoma City bombing — but then shifts to paying tribute to journalists who have been captured or killed.

Among those the ad memorializes is Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, whose murder was reportedly ordered by Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman. Following Khashoggi’s death in October 2018, Trump has so far refused to hold Saudi Arabia accountable for the killing.

The Post‘s ad follows a similar spot aired by the New York Times during the 2017 Academy Awards, which drew attention to the power in journalism during a time of great turmoil and relentless criticism of the media by President Trump.

[FREE DOWNLOAD: 10 punctuation essentials]

The ad was a last-minute effort, according to the paper’s leaders.

AdWeek reported:

The spot, announced late on Friday, was pulled together in less than a week, Fred Ryan, publisher and CEO of The Washington Post, said in a statement.

“We feel that this is the right moment, at the right venue, to present this important message to the large audience of Americans and international viewers that watch the Super Bowl,” Ryan said.

The ad highlighting the work of reporters was a timely one, especially given the conversation President Trump had with The New York Times over what NYT publisher A. G. Sulzberger referred to as “anti-press rhetoric.”

The paper’s owner, Jeff Bezos, also shared the spot on Twitter:

Not everyone was thrilled with the decision to run such an expensive advertisement. Union leaders slammed the paper for spending money on ads instead of salaries.

USA Today reported:

The Washington Post will have a 60-second ad during the Super Bowl, which means it is likely paying somewhere in a neighborhood north of $10 million for the airtime.

That doesn’t sit well with Fredrick Kunkle, the co-chair of the Washington-Baltimore News Guild’s bargaining unit at The Post.

And he thinks even if the cause trumpeted by the ad is right and just, the money would be better spent on the company’s employees.

“The Post is now paying, say, $5M/30 seconds to tout journalistic freedom during one of the glitziest and — given the NFL’s knee-taking protests and concussions — more controversial sports events in our country,” Kunkle tweeted over the weekend.

Others on Twitter were excited by the move—and the ad generated plenty of buzz:

The ad’s catch phrase, “Democracy dies in darkness,” which is also WaPo’s slogan, became a trending topic on Twitter.

Some on that platform said the money could have been better spent elsewhere:

What do you think of The Washington Post’s ad buy, Ragan/PR Daily readers?

COMMENT Daily Headlines

Sign up to receive the latest articles from directly in your inbox.