July 13, 2018
From our Local Dailies DisADvantage desk
Who knew? It turns out the Olde Towne Team has an Official Red Wine, as readers of today’s Boston Globe discovered in this full-page ad.
Chateau Auguste certainly seems to be a hit with oenophiles: A quick check of the Googletron reveals that the 2017 Rosé featured in the ad rates from 3.4 to 4.5 stars; the 2015 Bordeaux in the background gets 4 stars. We’ll see how it plays at Fenway, though.
Two other things:
1) The ad got us to wondering who else might be an official sponsor of the Sox. We know – from all those delivery trucks – that W.B. Mason is the Official Office Products Supplier of the Boston Red Sox (and also sponsors the Philadelphia Phillies, New York Yankees, New York Mets, Cleveland Indians, Pittsburgh Pirates, Washington Nationals, and the Tampa Bay Rays, along with the NHL’s Boston Bruins).
But we had no idea that Cincinnati-based Cintas is the Official Restroom Sponsor of Fenway Park. That’s good to know. (There’s a bunch of others here.)
2) The Chateau Auguste ad did not run in the Boston Herald. That makes it the thirsty local tabloid times two.
February 4, 2018
As the hardreading staff thumbed through its Boston Sunday Globe this morning, we couldn’t help but notice this double-truck ad in a special section called The Greater Debate, subhead “Who’s more responsible for this Patriots dynasty: Brady or Belichick?”
Here’s the body copy:
Notice that nowhere in the ad do the words “Bill Belichick” appear. But he’s there in every line, right? (Clever, that “Foxborough-hole,” eh?)
Which got the headscratching staff to thinking – are they paying Belichick? Or is this just an end-around?
So we hied ourselves to the Googletron and learned that this campaign has been in the news for several days now, both the print campaign and this TV spot.
That ad will air just before kickoff tonight. As far as we can tell, Belichick is not being paid.
Is he happy about this? Is he upset? Is he amused at the creativity displayed by ad agency Wieden + Kennedy?
Would he like us to stop asking questions now?
Who cares? We want answers.
August 20, 2017
As the hardtsking staff has extensively noted, for several weeks the Boston Globe has let an outfit called Northeast Home & Energy run this ad suggesting the roofing company has some association with the New England Patriots.
Except it doesn’t – a fact that Emily Rooney at WGBH’s Beat the Press passed along on Friday’s edition (around 5:15 of clip).
The upshot: The Pats sent a cease-and-desist letter to the Roof Bros, and here’s what appeared in the Globe yesterday and today.
No Patriots jerseys. No football. No Gillette Stadium.
No consequences for the Roof Bros or the $tately local broadsheet?
August 18, 2017
As the hardtsking staff noted earlier this week, the Boston Globe has been running ads from an outfit called Northeast Home & Energy flaunting a nonexistent New England Patriots connection.
Yesterday, the Globeniks made patsies of the Pats for a third time.
The Roof Bros even have a special welcome on their website for Globe clickers.
Isn’t that special?
Apparently the $tately local broadsheet has no problem with paying customers hijacking a local sports team for fun and profit.
Rumor has it that the fine folks at WGBH’s Beat the Press will tackle this licensing end run on tonight’s episode.
Stay tuned for further details.
August 14, 2017
As the hardreading staff perused Saturday’s local dailies, we came across this ad on page 3 of the Boston Globe.
Upon closer inspection, we noted the wardrobe choices of the Roof Bros.
Except . . .
There’s nothing in the ad that indicates any affiliation between Northeast Home & Energy and the New England Patriots. Nor is there any mention of the Roof Bros when you plug NE Patriots Official Roofers into the Googletron.
It’s not like the Globe doesn’t know what’s kosher – this ad for an Officially Licensed Product ran in yesterday’s edition.
So . . .
What’s next, Globeniks?
Burlington Red Socks? Celtic sweaters? Bruin Brew?
Seriously, are you willing to let anyone with a certified check hijack the local sports teams?
P.S. The ad also appears in today’s Globe.
March 19, 2015
Unless the hardreading staff’s memory fails us, the Boston Herald (especially Tom Mashberg) did yeoman’s work in the wake of the Great Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum Robbery in 1990.
And unless our eyes fail us, the fartsy local tabloid has published exactly nothing about the 25th anniversary of The Big Snatch.
Plug Boston Herald Gardner Museum into the Googletron and you get one lame Associated Press piece.
Boston museum marks 25 years since infamous art theft
BOSTON — It’s been called the biggest art heist in U.S. history, perhaps the biggest in the world. But 25 years later, the theft of 13 works from Boston’s Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum remains unsolved.
The theft has spawned books, rumors and speculation about who was responsible — and multiple dead ends.
Yet authorities and museum officials remain hopeful, noting that stolen art almost always gets returned — it just sometimes takes a generation or so.
“Although a quarter-century has passed since the art was stolen, we have always been determined to recover it and we remain optimistic that we will,” said Anne Hawley, the Gardner’s director, who was in charge at the time of the theft.
Good for them. Meanwhile, the Boston Globe has been on the Gardner anniversary like Brown on Williamson.
Not to mention Bill McKeen’s review of Stephen Kurkjian’s Master Thieves: The Boston Gangsters Who Pulled Off the World’s Greatest Art Heist last weekend.
But . . . nothing in the Herald.
Paging Tom Mashberg. Paging Mr. Tom Mashberg.
P.S. Don’t bother linking – Mashberg’s pieces are all archived. Translation: Give the Herald $3.95 a pop.
That’s just wrong.
February 25, 2015
Half a century ago the New York Daily News had a regular feature called $5 for Your Most Embarrassing Moment. And about 90% of the entries included this phrase:
“Was my face red!”
Well, call us the hardredding staff.
The other day, we posted this in the wake of the Academy Awards broadcast:
Well the hardreading staff was leafing through the Boston Herald this morning, as is our wont, when we turned page 5 to discover this:
Wait – is that really an ad? And if so, why does it appear in the feisty local tabloid but not the Boston Globe? Or the New York Times? Or anywhere else, at least according to the Googletron.
It’s just kind of weird, isn’t it? Then again, maybe the Herald is Above All other papers.
Actually, not so weird, as it turns out.
From yesterday’s New York Times:
So the flighty local tabloid was, if not Above All, at least Before All.