Greenpeace Asks Who's Boning Mom on Earth Day


We pride ourselves on our unsurpassed potty-mouthage, so we feel a little outdone by this new Earth Day campaign that's kind of sponsored by Greenpeace.

The naughty prints are only "kind of" sponsored by Greenpeace because Exit3a copywriter Tom Mullen admits to AdCritic they haven't told the organization about the print series yet. "It's probably not legal, but there's too much paperwork, meetings and phone calls involved to get the campaign approved in time for Earth Day," he explains. "I figure Greenpeace is too busy getting sued by conglomerates to bother suing a few people who are trying to promote the cause. They can always officially deny the vulgarity."

If fortune favours the brave, perhaps that grace extends to those disinclined to ask permission for slapping mom-fucking ads out into the open and signing it Greenpeace.

We call this the conjure-bonds-by-insulting-the-source technique. This strategy occurs on the playground all the time, except it's done in crayon and usually ends in tears or angry phone calls. We have a feeling Greenpeace will be getting a few of the latter.

by Angela Natividad    Feb-19-07   Click to Comment   
Topic: Agencies, Brands, Magazine, Social   

Enjoy what you've read? Subscribe to Adrants Daily and receive the daily contents of this site each day along with free whitepapers.



Hmmmm. Think he's more likely to get sued for using a terrible rendition of the Greenpeace logo. He could have gotten a decent one here:

Posted by: MademeLaugh on February 20, 2007 1:52 AM

I'm not sure this guy is doing Greenpeace any favors. The rabid right can use this as an excuse to knock Greenpeace for "lowering the discourse."

Posted by: Tom Siebert on February 20, 2007 11:05 AM

This is a great ad. It calls attention to the damage done by oil companies. The F word isn�t used in a sexual sense but rather a visceral, angry sense. If you�re honest with yourself, that�s how you feel about our earth being damaged. I don�t see how this is a gratuitous use of the F word. I see it as cutting to the bone of an important issue that affects everyone, not about boning.

Posted by: greenie on February 20, 2007 12:32 PM

I think the image is great--the monster plunging in and out of the earth, repeatedly, tirelessly, relentlessly raping her.

It would make a good video.

I'm wondering if having "MOTHER" be right side up, with "FUCKER" upside down under it would increase or lessen the impact?

Posted by: Dan Jerrems on February 20, 2007 1:39 PM

"I think the image is great--the monster plunging in and out of the earth, repeatedly, tirelessly, relentlessly raping her."

Which is a metaphor directly lifted from the Grapes of Wrath. The guy could have at least been original...

Posted by: Eric on February 20, 2007 5:11 PM

a wise man once told me that creativity isn't about originality, it's the obscurity of your sources.

it's a comment on a blog. who gives a crap about originality?

Posted by: wrapes of grath on February 20, 2007 5:35 PM

I like it. I used to live in Dallas and I even have stock in oil companies.

Posted by: JR on February 20, 2007 5:45 PM

Earth = the original MILF.

Posted by: King Abdullah on February 20, 2007 5:53 PM

"it's a comment on a blog. who gives a crap about originality?"

The ads, not the guys comment...

Posted by: Eric on February 20, 2007 6:13 PM

What the hell does The Grapes of Wrath have to do with this ad? Who cares if Steinbeck used the metaphor of oil rigs pumping the ground to symbolize a man and woman pumping each other. The idea of oil rigs screwing mother earth is just that: oil rigs screwing the earth. I suppose the Apple 1984 ad is not original because it was a scene from George Orwells book. Hell, that Orwellian scene was a direct lift while this ad has nothing whatsoever to do with the Grapes of Wrath. What planet are you on?

Posted by: wine on February 20, 2007 7:36 PM

XQUZYPHYR puts it well:

"Oh goody, a real-world self-linker. "Greenpeace can just delete it if it breaks the rules!"

Jesus, does this dumbfuck have any idea what "protection of trademark" means? They *have* to sue him for using their trademarks or there's precedent to lose future lawsuits.

What a stupid, lazy piece of shit. Congratulations, shitstain, you just blew thousands of Greenpeace's dollars for your lazy self-promotional attempt to "advance the cause." Jackass."

Posted by: Aphex on February 20, 2007 7:59 PM

"What planet are you on?"

One where people don't create terrible advertising schemes for lobbying groups that dilute their real message?

Wait, crap, I'm not. Well that sucks.

Posted by: Eric on February 20, 2007 8:09 PM

It took balls to make this ad. I wish more advertising people had balls. Environmentalists should be laughing. Anybody with a sense of humor should be laughing. Hahahahahahahaahaa

Posted by: Dr. Dew L. Ittle on February 20, 2007 9:40 PM

What's wrong with oil?

Posted by: Jethro on February 20, 2007 9:47 PM

I'm with Jethro... Look at the gays faux raping the chick in the D&G ad, Where the fuck do you think all that oil comes from? If you want a shiny bod when you're pretending to rape an 80 pound six foot six model, you have to rape the ground first to get the stuff needed to make your six pack pop. Fuck, everyone knows that.
Way to go Jethro.

Posted by: George Parker on February 20, 2007 11:14 PM

Grammatically speaking, there should not be a comma after Mother. (See headline: Whos Fucking Your Mother, Today?) Nevertheless, the copywriter said he used the comma to illicit a pause. (See AdCritic article: ) Okay. Ill buy that. Advertising breaks grammatical rule all of the time. Not that this is right, but it happens. And, if you read the headline without the comma, it does lose some impact. By inserting the comma after Mother, the headline implies that other companies were fucking her yesterday and other companies will be fucking her tomorrow. The headline begs the question: Who is fucking her today.

Posted by: Comma Cop on February 21, 2007 9:19 AM

Hey Comma Cop...
What has grammar got to do with the price of fish? How are we going to get fish and chips if we have no oil? The raping of the ground must continue. I'm with Jethro, Steve and Angela on this one. God bless Exxon/Mobil.

Posted by: George Parker on February 21, 2007 10:00 AM

Right on! I dig this ad. (Not in the oil drilling sense of the word dig)

Posted by: hippie on February 22, 2007 12:36 PM