TV Viewers Find Condom Ads Inoffensive, Incomprehensible
NEW YORK– Despite a ban by three major networks—ABC, the WB, and UPN—condom ads have become more acceptable to U.S. TV viewers, according to a Social Policy Research Institute study.
   “The data suggests that the average person considers condom ads neither positive nor negative,” said Susan Kannel, a senior analyst for the Institute.  “But don't forget, the average person is remarkably ignorant.”
   Viewers watched a sitcom interrupted by a variety of ads, one for condoms.  The ad implied that the product ensured safe sex, but it did not show an image of the condom, in use nor in package.
   “I didn't get the commercial they asked me about, because they didn't really say what the product was,” said one female subject, who failed to realize that the Trojan spots advertise a device designed to prevent semen propelled from a man's penis from entering a woman's vagina or landing on bed sheets.  “I just wanted to see the rest of ‘Dharma and Greg.’”
   Analysts believe this lack of comprehension is the reason behind the neutral reactions.
   “It appears that people simply don't understand that the subtle ads support the sheathing of the penis during  ejaculation within the vagina,” said Kannel.  “This is why they are not offended.  I suppose that if it's not spelled out, it's over their heads.”
   Many experts believe the ban on condom ads should be lifted, primarily because the ads are so vague and therefore harmless.
   “We show ads for Summer's Eve, but never say that it reduces vaginal funk,” said Dr. Thomas J. Coates, director of the Center for AIDS Prevention Studies at UCSF.  “So why can't we show insinuative condom ads that don't mention vaginal penetration and homosexual anal penetration by the penis?”
   Coates also mentioned the fact that Viagra ads don't even mention typical patients—pathetic men who can't get erections.