What Focus on the Family learned from the Tim Tebow Super Bowl ad uproar

Earlier this week, The Ticket wrote here about the terribly controversial Super Bowl commercial that had some women's groups very exercised and pressuring CBS to pull the ad sponsored by Focus on the Family of Colorado Springs, Colo. Even without actually seeing it.

The ad dealt obliquely with the decision by a woman named Pam Tebow years ago to reject doctors' advice and not terminate the pregnancy that ended up producing Tim Tebow, the healthy, happy 2007 Heisman Trophy winner from the University of Florida.

Viewers of the ad (see video below) are directed to a Focus website that tells the mother's story in more detail, which would probably leave many with the sense that choosing life over abortion was a wise choice for her.

Here's the actual Super Bowl pre-game ad, which left many of its critics slightly red-faced for causing such a commotion. As we warned earlier this week CAUTION is advised viewing this. The video contains graphic images and words of parental affection:

OK, now Focus on the Family has produced another video (see top of this page) with workers candidly discussing how the ad came to be, how the controversy accidentally but so helpfully came about boosting the ad's impact immensely and the lessons that the sometimes controversial family values organization has learned itself from the experience to apply to its future advocacy work.

Forget the subject, for students of public communication and how those messages are designed, released and spread, this two-man discussion provides interesting video insights into the inner dynamics of one recent popular culture controversy -- and the politics of it. You can draw your own lessons and conclusions.

-- Andrew Malcolm

Talk about success, openly click here to receive Twitter alerts of each new Ticket item all day every day. Or follow us @latimestot. You can also go to our Facebook FAN page to follow.

Comments

[Anne]

I want to praise Pam and Tim for their pro-life stand. You did what you could to help others see that people need to be aware that abortion is not the right choice. I pray for you daily. You are our earthly heroes in supporting this necessary cause. God Bless you and your family. I LOVED the commercial!

[FJ Harris]

I doubt that critics were red faced. I have been listening to leftist nags my whole life, well over 50 years, they have no shame. They will enter hell itself, talking - endlessly talking.

[Kathy]

I loved the ad and thought it was sweet and touching. The whole controversy really exposed the bias and ignorance of NOW and the various womans organizations that opposed the ad. In the end they were the ones with egg on their faces.

[JR]

The law of unintended consequences came into play here. NOW and other organizations like that went hyperbolic and hysterical. The ad, a blip on the radar screen. End result, NOW looks really stupid.

The time for hyperbole and women's issues was over with a long time ago. NOW comes off as an 80's dinosaur, a stereotypical joke about rabid feminism where there is an abuser under every rock.

Common sense ultimately ruled here with people's reactions and that is a good thing. NOW is just going to be remembered for jumping the shark.

[kdizzydaze]

The only choice groups such as NARAL and NOW and Planned Parenthood give a woman are when to have her abortion. There is absolutely zero discussion of "have you thought of adoption?" "Is there a possibility you might want to keep the baby?"
The minute a doctor calls "it" a baby, then the game would probably be over for NARAL and Planned Parenthood. Most of these women would opt to keep "it". Of course, that doctor would then get sued by those groups.
As for the so-called men that impregnate these women and aren't there in one form or another to support the woman they impregnated - they are an even bigger part of the problem.

[William Prueter]

The representative for NOW referred to the Tebow ad as anti-abortion. She referred to her group as pro-choice. What evidence does NOW have that there is encouragement not to have an abortion? Do they have at each clinic a priest or minister or someone who presents the case that there should not be an abortion and someone who takes the view that there should be an abortion? Do they have figures to publish showing that 121 women came to get an abortion and X number left deciding not to? When I hear pro-choice I assume that it refers to a group which promotes abortion. I do not envision a clinic where moral issues are wrestled with and full discussion is given to both sides. I envision a clinic where the doctors are there to perform the procedure.

[Dave]

It seems to me that the pro-choice side of the argument only is truly pro-choice if you choose to abort a pregnancy.

The uproar about an ad that features a woman who chose not to abort seems to prove my thought correct.

If folks were really pro-choice, they should at least respect the decision not to abort.

[Jan Kerr]

I personally have no problem with the ad. I think its great that it worked out so well for the Tebows. But I am sure there are other stories with less than stellar endings. If you believe that abortion is murder then you must follow your beliefs. Just don't force them on me.

[Anon 1:50]

I feel that the most repugnanat issue arising from this whole kerfuffle has nothing to do with the ad, the message or anything related to the whole life/choice debate.

It is the attempt to stifle discourse, restrict the open statement of opinion and otherwise violate the Right to Free Speech.

[Vivien]

I'm an atheist lesbian parent and Greenpeace member ... but I'm very anti-abortion. I personally saw nothing wrong with the ad and see it as a positive step for the anti-abortion movement. Stop getting in people's faces and spewing hate -- show the positive side of choosing life and people will respond. Next on our agenda should be offering people no-questions asked adoptions by our movement. Instead of shooting people like savage idiots or waving ridiculous signs, let's put our money and our time to work helping people who do have unintended pregnancies and need a more compassionate alternative to death.

[Josh Indiana]

The new video is too snarky to watch, much less learn from. Maybe Andrew Malcolm should have written what he felt he learned from it. I don't have 20 minutes to watch this ham-handed discussion.

[Andy Eppink]

Dang. Fairness, perception and accuracy coming from uberlib (not that he's in any way exceptional in the disgusting libmedia in that regard) Andrew Malcolm. What's the world coming to?

[MTinMO]

Most of the posters missed the point. The problem was primarily with CBS, who have consistently refused to commercials about contreversial subjects. Anti-choice people make this a contreversial matter. CBS agreed to run the ad. They wouldn't run an ad from a church a few years back promoting their acceptance of all who would like to attend, but they accept an ad from an anti-choice group. They wouldn't run an ad from a gay dating site but they run one from a group that has been particularly hateful towards anyone they don't approve of. They are homophobic purveyors of hate and CBS thinks they are appropriate to run an ad. Doesn't make CBS look very good in my book. As far as the ad, a grown man appearing to tackle his mom? Seemed rather brutal to me. Yeah Mom, I love you so much I'm going to take you down! The point about choice is you have one. Choosing to have a child when that is what you want is wonderful. Being forced to carry a pregnancy you aren't ready for or are unable to care for is not. Mrs. Tebow really didn't make a choice. She was informed the fetus may be harmed by her illness but she said it was never a choice, she and her husband fully intended to carry Tim no matter what. She was fortunate. Her child was born healthy. There have been many that were not and died and even caused the death of the mother. But if you are willing to risk your life because you want a child, then more power to you. Just don't try to dictate others choices. I have never understood that anyway. People who say they don't want the government telling them what to do but want to force the government to interfere in others choices. If it isn't your body, where do you get the right?