Plus, they dropped Callaway Golf after their horrific ad depicting violence against women.
Wait… What?
The golf club company ran an ad where a woman went to touch a golf club and her man pushed her down and threatened her for her transgression.
Costco stopped carrying their clubs in response
To be fair, it wasn’t Callaway directly. It was Good Good Golf, a golf youtube channel, that aired the ad. Callaway had a partnership with them to cobrand the golf club, but dropped Good Good immediately after the ad and canceled the branded club.
Callaway still deserves the backlash from associating with them though and apparently someone giving the ok for the ad.
Thank you for the added context. It is slightly less worse, but still bad.
Kinda, callaway approved the ad, os maybe they all just suck
Does the US not have some kind of advertising standards board that you have to get adverts approved before you’re allowed to publicly post them?
We don’t have standards keeping the ass parasites out of the lettuce, take a second and ponder
That sounds like it would go against the First Amendment.
Nope. Free speech.
Free speech just protect you from the government, gone out of the window anyway as of late.
But even when free speech wasn’t forced it wouldn’t force channels to carry your advertisement.
No, the First Amendment only protects you from the government. “Free speech” is a philosophical principle which has nothing to do with governments directly.
However, an “advertising standards board” that decides what can and cannot be posted publicly sounds pretty governmental to me.
But even when free speech wasn’t forced it wouldn’t force channels to carry your advertisement.
Of course, but that still isn’t any kind of universal standards board, that’s individual channels deciding independently.
No one is boycotting the companies which showed the ad.
That’s not what free speech is. Free speech doesn’t let you say whatever you want to anyone, it’s intention is to protect you while speaking out against government officials and offices. Last I checked Callaway wasn’t the 4th branch of the government, let’s not give turkey neck any ideas.
The FCC should be regulating ads like this, but this is a clown country and capitalism says domestic violence is a viable commodity to sell.
While the topic was abhorrent and in bad taste, I don’t think there was ever a time when the FCC banned jokes about spouse/family abuse.
The Honeymooners regularly joked about the husband finally breaking and beating his wife. I Love Lucy had an episode where Lucy tried to get a sunburn so Ricky wouldn’t beat her as hard for buying an expensive dress. The Simpsons had Homer choking Bart as a running gag. All these shows were on Broadcast TV.
The FCC being useless and bought off still doesn’t mean that Callaway gets special first amendment protections. They’re a corporation, they aren’t protected from consumers and retailers dropping their products for promoting crimes, or from potential lawsuits as a result of harmful marketing.
Again, this topic has nothing to do with free speech.
I bring it up because companies which broadcast and publish material are generally given greater deference by the public for showing material they disagree with. As long as the standards are adhered to evenly, the broadcaster isn’t going to be boycotted for an ad. No one is boycotting the television stations and streamers for airing this ad; all the attention is going to Calloway.
The consequences of free speech are felt by those paying for it in public opinion, not those serving it.
Free speech doesn’t let you say whatever you want to anyone, it’s intention is to protect you while speaking out against government officials and offices.
It sounds like you’re getting freedom of speech mixed up with the First Amendment. They aren’t the same thing. The First Amendment’s intention is to protect your freedom of speech from the government. If you want your freedom of speech protected from other things (such as your employer), the First Amendment won’t protect you.
free speach is to protect your right to tell the world how politicians wronged you and how you hate all minorities
It’s such a gross concept. Wild anyone thought this was a funny, gotta be pretty deep in bro to not see red flags.
Even if it was a guy pushing another guy I don’t see how that would’ve ever been a funny spoof skit.
There was no way to salvage this.
Say the guy had just grabbed the woman’s arm or put his arm in front of her to stop her instead. You still have that threat he makes towards her.
Even if that threat was changed to “no one touches my club except me”, you still have that underlying implication of a threat.
There’s no universe that could’ve salvaged this.
So if you walk into an electronics lab and see a piece of equipment with squee 😍 all these cool dials! 😍 and 🥰 🥰 lights!!! 🥰 🥰 and a threatening 😠 sign that says “don’t touch,” and you turn a dial just a little, but you totally didn’t hurt anything, who was in the wrong now that the equipment isn’t calibrated? The person for making the threatening sign? The person for leaving their equipment where any toddler could get to it? Or the the toddler for not having agency enough to know not to touch something that doesn’t belong to them? Are you going to pay for the engineering time it took a team to calibrate the equipment for a First Article Test the next week? You’re going to pay for the customers to fly back home after flying in on a Sunday for a Monday/Tuesday test that now can’t happen?
Just because you don’t assign a value to a golf club doesn’t mean it doesn’t have a value to the person who bought it, trained with it, and went through the effort to carry it somewhere to play golf. And golf clubs or engineering labs aside, you don’t seem like you’ve ever had something broken by someone else before you even got a chance to use it. Are you going to refund the guy’s once in a lifetime golf vacation because you don’t know what forces a graphite shaft can/can’t withstand? Are you going to replace his grandpa’s headcover that he uses because it reminds him of his deceased grandpa teaching him golf?
The engineering lab would obviously have access controls because of people who don’t understand what they’re doing. Someone’s golf clubs on a golf course, within sight of the owner and within asking distance to see if it’s OK to look at one can usually rely on common sense and etiquette. Usually…
So you agree with the ad’s message then? That violently shoving people to the ground if they reach for your golf clubs without asking is okay?
Again, you’re assigning a value of zero to someone else’s property.
If you’re on your way to your landlord with $500 to make rent for the month and get mugged it’s a lot different if you’ve got plenty of money in the bank and need to make another trip to retreive more versus if it’s the last $500 you had to your name and you get evicted for not making rent.
To prove my point, kindly take your most prized possession and destroy it. Post pictures here when you’re done for verification and open another thread moaning about how your stuff is broken and there’s nothing you could’ve done to stop it from happening.
So you agree with the ad’s message then?
I never said that and you shouldn’t put words in my mouth. I didn’t think people being secure in their property was such a debatable topic, but at least I understand now why invite-only, membership-required golf courses exist.
Again, you’re assigning a value of zero to someone else’s property.
So, speaking of putting words in people’s mouths, I never said that.
What I am saying is, if you see someone about to touch your stuff without asking, then the usual, sensible action is to say something along the lines of ‘hey, stop!’ Not tackle them to the ground like a linebacker.
Yes, golf clubs are expensive. I have friends who golf, and one of the things that has convinced me I don’t want to is them talking about the price of their clubs.
However, I have never yet seen a golf club that is so fragile that it will shatter into pieces when touched (and if you watch the ad, all she’s doing is reaching out to touch them). Nor do they electrocute anyone who touches them. Therefore there is absolutely no fucking reason to assult someone for touching them without asking. Yell at them, maybe. Actually attack them, no.
Like what is the point they are trying to make even?
Is the club so fragile that it’ll break if touched?
Golfers are seriously superstitious?
Women suck and can’t golf?
If anything it would have been a better commercial to do the opposite, hand the club out to literally everyone that’s playing and they all hit better.
“Our golf clubs are so good, it’ll make you want to beat a woman.” Callaway Golf Clubs
They claim they were trying to riff on the movie obsession.
A joke ad that was blown way out of proportion by a bunch of people saying it promoted women’s violence. An overreaction.
A woman reaches for his club and he violently SHOVES her to the ground. How is that in any way not violence against a woman.
It was the guys IRL girlfriend and it was an obvious joke commercial. It could have easily been the same commercial with the girlfriend shoving the guy if they were her clubs or a guy shoving his brother and no one would have batted an eye.
Also, you say “violently shoves” and that’s what it was supposed to be made to look like, but if you actually look at the commercial he barely pushes her at all. It had nothing to do with being sexist or promoting violence against women. It was a funny lil “don’t touch my golf club” commercial that had nothing to do with promoting violence.
But he didn’t depict the other way around, they depicted a man shoving a woman down on the ground over a golf club. Nothing is funny about that and perpetuates the idea that this is ok for younger generations
Anyone who would actually believe it’s acceptable to shove tackle anyone down from touching a golf club is an idiot. The fact that you’re harping over an ad where it was a guy doing it to a woman is just the proof of that. Sounds like you’re sexist.
You keep saying “joke commercial”. What was the joke?
That someone would violently guard against having their golf club touched.
Costco is a good, socially responsible corporation, most aren’t.
can’t tell if you and this oop is serious lol
Fun US-Canada trade Trump demand. Canada should not be allowed to inspect US milk to detect if it is cancer milk instead of organic. I doubt Americans will be allowed to know if they are buying US prime or mystery meat pretending to be prime either.
Just don’t eat meat, it’s better for everyone that way.
This is the ethically and factually correct approach.
Yes, but i honestly can’t stop myself
Have you heard of the idea of vegan plus bacon? Something like someone said i would go vegan but i just love bacon. And the response was, ok, go vegan plus bacon.
Basically don’t think of it as all or nothing. Being as vegan as you possibly can is better than not trying. Imperfect veganism still makes a difference.
I am working out a diet that is primarily vegan but get to keep chicken for now. Until i figure out something else to replace it. Also sometimes pork, but only sometimes.
If everyone did it there would be far less need for factory farming, harmful inhumane killing of animals and damage to the environment as we would all be eating sustainable and environmentally friendlier foods. Just with some bacon.
This mentality has me and my family eating dramatically less meat than we otherwise would and I hope to continue that slide, I think it’s a great strategy most folks who want to try can use to get started.
As an ethical vegan, I both love and hate this.
I get it. In the end it’s a half measure that allows lots of suffering and may keep folks comfortable with that in a way that a stricter commitment doesn’t risk.
For me it kind of “unlocked” a focus toward harm reduction rather than promises to try hard someday, and allowed us to begin on the path. I’m not sure where we will stop, but we weren’t on it before.
I hope you know I’m not blaming you. I went from “I think vegetarians have a point” to “well, I guess I’m vegetarian now” to “fuck being given dairy at every event, I’ll be vegan now”, so I can’t fault your for reducing over time.
(I could say I then went to “burn-the-abattoirs vegan”, but in truth, burning the slaughterhouses seemed like the obvious moral position once you see what they do in them.)
Anyway, I support your efforts to reduce the pain and suffering.
lol @ pushing ethical consumerism in 2026. let me just shop at the place that isn’t actively trying to kill everyone!!!
that’ll make a real difference!!!
What is the alternative ethical option?
Starve, I guess
Yeah not sure how Costco is supposed to be a good choice.
It’s a less bad choice. That’s the best option most people will have.
I don’t even think that’s true in most cases.
Most people don’t live near a place that sells ethically sourced food.
any good brands that make sure to enslave their farmers?
If one lives near a Costco, then there are almost certainly more ethical options in the same area.
What are some examples? I’d genuinely like to know.
Entirely depends on the local area. I have two Costcos in my area. I also have several farmers’ markets, a co-op, and several grocers that sell fair trade and local products.
