Commercials aired during the Super Bowl have long been considered “the best of the best.” Reaching millions of viewers (and costing millions of dollars), these ads are companies’ time to shine – or fail miserably. So what did the Costa DeVault team think of this year’s offering? See our highlights reel below.

I loved HomeAway’s Super Bowl commercial featuring Chevy Chase and Beverly D’Angelo from the National Lampoon’s Vacation franchise because it was nostalgic. My favorite line was when Chase thought that the hotel water he was getting was complimentary. And the hotel clerk responded, “No, sir. It’s complementary water – with an “e.” Meaning it complements the room and isn’t free.” -Doreen

I liked the Denny’s Chickens Across America commercial advertising the free Grand Slam breakfast. Any commercial that’s funny – and genuinely makes me laugh out loud – is considered a win in my book, and Denny’s had me at chicken astronaut trying to scream in space. While you won’t find me waiting in line for my free Grand Slam, I will remember the ad. However, this also begs the question, last year people waited for hours to receive a free Grand Slam breakfast without the Super Bowl ad, or really any advertising at all. Were three runs at upwards of $3 million a pop (estimated cost) really necessary? Or were the ads just meant to increase brand awareness?  -Brooke

Although the screaming chickens for Denny’s commercials made me chuckle, my favorite Super Bowl commercial goes to the Doritos “House Rules” commercial. There was a literal “LOL” moment. Doritos had the second most commercial spots, behind Budweiser so the odds were good. Doritos never disappoints! -Ashley

My favorite Super Bowl commercials are usually from Budweiser and while this year’s Clydesdale vs. a bull race didn’t disappoint, as a dog lover, my vote goes to Doritos. I’m referring to the commercial featuring a guy taunting a dog (wearing a bark collar) to bark for a chip. Who wouldn’t enjoy watching the dog get revenge by removing the collar and putting it on the guy, then stealing the bag of Doritos and barking every few seconds to shock him? So funny! -Kelly

Although the Doritos commercials made me laugh the most, I found the contrast between job search competitors Monster and CareerBuilder interesting. While CareerBuilder reused their usual theme of employees disliking their jobs and wanting a new one (i.e., 2009, 2008, 2007), Monster went a different route with their fiddling beaver commercial. During a time when many are unemployed, I think Monster made the viewers smile, whereas CareerBuilder may not have connected with as many people. Plus, past Super Bowl favorites have shown us that you can never go wrong with animals. –Jenni

My favorite was probably the E*Trade commercial about the girlfriend – especially when Lindsey comes on the screen at the end and says, “Milk-a-what?” I laughed out loud. I am a total sucker for the E*Trade baby commercials, every year.

The only one I re-watched right after it finished was Audi’s “Green Police” video. I didn’t particularly like the commercial … but they had an anteater on a leash at: 41. Watching it again was obligatory. -Alexis

Very rarely does an ad generate editorial media coverage. Generally, advertising is confined to its paid space – until the ad itself becomes the news. This is what’s happened for one controversial Super Bowl commercial: gay dating site ManCrunch.com. The ad depicts two men kissing and was denied by CBS.

Since the rejection, the company has received an enormous amount of publicity. Stories in news outlets, blogs, television and radio have created discussions in numerous public forums. This just adds value to the nearly $3 million price tag CBS is charging for a 30-second spot.

But why the uproar? Controversial subject matter always strikes a chord and advocates on both sides of an issue will make their voices heard. In fact, it was reported that CBS believed ManCrunch submitted an ad they knew would be rejected in an effort to generate free publicity. ManCruch denies the accusation.

And while ManCrunch is receiving a fair amount of free publicity, are they better off? As of today, the ManCrunch commercial on YouTube.com has been viewed more than 400,000 times. Last year, Wikipedia reported that the Super Bowl was watched by 93.2 million people. Would the aired ManCrunch television commercial create the same level of conversation? Would the controversy have as much value without social media?

The Wall Street Journal recently launched a multimedia branding campaign titled “Live in the Know.” The campaign stresses the value of the in-depth research that the paper brings that goes beyond chatter and sound bites. In a time where major newspapers are fighting to keep their readership, I thought the campaign was an interesting approach.

We live in a time-shifted world. RSS feeds deliver news to us. DVRs allow us to watch our favorite television shows when whenever we choose. We can listen to audio programs on the go thanks to podcasts. Today’s consumers expect to have access to content when they want it … where they want it.

Businesses need to understand and adjust to this new way of living. (Don’t believe us? Failure to adapt to a time-shifted world contributed to the newspaper industry’s recent struggles.) This isn’t just an operations or management issue. PR/marketing folks need to put their “time-shifting” hats on as well.

• Customer service can’t be a 9-5 task if it really is the new PR. In a time-shifted world, people expect access to good customer service all the time – at their convenience … not yours. That means having an employee monitor and respond to the company’s Twitter account after hours, making “live chat” available even after the close of business, offering extended call center hours. These may not sound ultra-innovative — but your customers will notice, and appreciate, the extra effort.
• Press conferences don’t happen nearly as frequently as they used to; however they’re not extinct. Even so, reporters have less time to attend events — press conferences or otherwise. If you’re a PR professional, are you giving reporters the tools to get the information on their terms — or are you making their job more difficult? (And, for the record, just e-mailing a press release with a post-event photo doesn’t cut it.) Provide reporters with audio or video to incorporate into their reports. Create a Flickr page with high-res photos. Livestream events and post relevant clips online.
• How often are desk-side meetings taking place nowadays? Hardly at all – unless you have a very high-profile client or a major news story. But, that doesn’t mean you can’t get your CEO in front of the reporter. More and more interviews are happening via e-mail — even with major, national newspapers. Know why? Because the reporter can review the answers when they have time. With that in mind, why not conduct “mock interviews” and distribute the responses to targeted media? You know what questions a reporter will ask, so ask them. (But, don’t just serve up “softballs” and provide a reporter with fluffy answers. They’ll ignore you.) Go the extra step and provide the files in a format that can be viewed or listened to on an mp3 player. The idea is simple: Give them the information without requiring them to conduct a time-intensive interview.
• Much has been written about the diminishing ROI of traditional advertising. But, it’s not dead … not by a longshot. That said, advertisers need to adjust. A recent study found that 85% of respondents (~1,000 people) used their DVR to skip at least three-quarters of all commercials. If you’re producing commercials that only communicate verbally – your message isn’t being heard. Smarter commercials get the message across even while being fast forwarded. (One example: Apple’s Macbook commercials.) 

How is “time shifting” impacting your business? And, what innovative ideas can you offer to thrive in this new paradigm?