Offending PlayStation 3 Ads Aren't PlayStation 3 Ads

Illustration for article titled Offending PlayStation 3 Ads Aren't PlayStation 3 Ads

Man. Remember those PlayStation 3 print ads created by Chilean design agency BBDO Chile? Remember how questionable they were, somewhere between tasteless and bewildering? Well, turns out they weren't actually PlayStation 3 ads, according to Sony.


Sony Computer Entertainment America says the pair of Chilean promos were "totally fake." And so does the president of BBDO Chile, who said in a statement that the spots, one featuring Nazi imagery and the other a heart transplant from Joan of Arc, were "never approved" by Sony. Oh, and he has a public apology to go along with it.

This creative design did not involve and was never approved by Sony Computer Entertainment or Sony. This "mock campaign" was developed by BBDO Chile staff and was submitted to various creative competitions/festivals without prior notification or approval from SCE/Sony, and it is not representative of the views or advertising policies of SCE/Sony. BBDO Chile apologizes for using this creative concept without authorization or prior approval, and for its misrepresentation of the PlayStation brand and its values.

Cristián Lehuedé B.
Presidente Ejecutivo
BBDO Chile

Apology accepted! After the PlayStation thumb dick ad from last year, we can understand how BBDO Chile might think that all bets are off.



This isn't related to Kotaku but current journalism in general. What ever happened to fact checking? The fact that the president of this company admitted that Sony didn't approve these ads meant that a small bit of research could have figured this out. Instead, every blog (including legit news outlets) see the ad and run it as breaking news. I'm getting really tired of the idea of reporting rumors and THEN doing the fact checking. Are we that desperate to break news first? Does it even matter? I saw this article on 5 different sites (including engadget, which is only transiently related to PS coverage). I don't even know who broke the news first. I feel like it would have been so much more impacting if a site had confirmed that everyone else jumped the gun and was wrong instead of following suit and having to print a retraction.