The Dictatorship
This Super Bowl commercial might’ve made you feel old, but nostalgia marketing works
Hellmann’s big Super Bowl ad this year stars Me ryan and Billy Crystal reunited at New York City’s iconic Katz’s Deli to re-enact their famous scene from the 1989 Nora Ephron romantic comedy “When Harry Met Sally.” In case you somehow don’t know what I’m referring to, the scene involves Meg Ryan loudly faking an orgasm while eating a sandwich.
“I’ll have what she’s having,” the older woman at the next table tells the waiter.
The 30-second Hellmann’s ad, created by the agency VML New Yorkfeatures both actors reprising their roles from 36 years ago. Billy Crystal once again dons his famous aran sweater.
“I can’t believe they let us back in this place,” he says.
Meg Ryan squeezes some Hellmann’s mayonnaise on her sandwich, then proceeds to moan and yell all over again. Sydney Sweeney, seated at a table nearby, delivers the punchline: “I’ll have what she’s having.”
Nostalgia marketing — in the form of pandering advertisements, as well as in fashion trends, original media, and “retro” products — works in approximately 20 to 30 year cycles.
Nostalgic Super Bowl ads are nothing new. As far back as 1979, Miller ran a commercial called “Famous Ex-Quarterbacks,” featuring three NFL players whose careers had peaked a decade or two before. In 1989, a Sears ad featured the 1970 song “Our House” by Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young. A 1992 spot for Hyundai is scored to the 1961 Ben E. King hit “Stand By Me.” In 1999, a commercial for Progressive Insurance featured ET, a nod to the 1982 blockbuster. The next year, in 2000, Oldsmobile had a Super Bowl spot that showed a group of young, hip people singing the 1979 new wave song “Cars” by Gary Numan. At the height of the recession in 2009, cashforgold.com cast MC Hammer — famous for his 1990 single “U Can’t Touch This” and his subsequent bankruptcy — in an ad that poked fun at said bankruptcy. A 2013 Beck’s Sapphire Beer ad featured a goldfish singing the 1996 R&B hit “No Diggity” by Blackstreet. By 2019, Sarah Jessica Parker was reprising her role as the Y2K-era Carrie Bradshaw for a Stella Artois commercial. That same year, the Backstreet Boys starred alongside Chance the Rapper to promote Doritos, performing their 1999 song “I Want it That Way.”
If you look closely at this timeline — the ads and their nostalgic inspirations — a pattern starts to emerge. The featured song, film or celebrity is a touchstone from roughly 20 to 30 years in the past. And as we move through time, the nostalgic touchstones get more recent.
There is a reason for this. Nostalgia marketing — in the form of pandering advertisements, as well as in fashion trends, original media and “retro” products — works in approximately 20- to 30-year cycles. This is how long it takes for kids who experienced culture the first time around to grow up and start making culture of their own. Also, it’s how long it takes for those kids to become adults with disposable income and a yearning for the good old days of their childhood and adolescence.
Nostalgia is a powerful emotion, and it can provide real gains for the companies that tap into it. One 2014 study found that nostalgia makes consumers more willing to spend their money. In a famous scene from the hit Netflix series “Mad Men,” the advertising executive Don Draper explains in a pitch meeting that “nostalgia means the pain from an old wound … a twinge in your heart far more powerful than memory alone.” Nostalgia can even distort our views of the past; one YouGov survey found that people are most likely to say that the best time in America was whatever year they happened to be 11 years old.
Humans have always reminisced about how great things were when they were young. But mass media and mass consumer capitalism are much newer phenomena in human history.
Humans have always reminisced about how great things were when they were young. But mass media and mass consumer capitalism are much newer phenomena in human history. It wasn’t until the ’70s when that 20- to 30-year nostalgia cycle really formed. In that decade — which came on the heels of multiple high-level political assassinations, massive social upheaval, an unpopular war and a near-miss of nuclear annihilation — there was a profusion of nostalgia for the 1950s and early 1960s. In 1973, George Lucas’ film “American Graffiti” came out, featuring the doo-wop and roadsters of a pre-countercultural California. The next year, the 1950s-themed sitcom “Happy Days” aired on ABC. It ran until 1984, becoming one of the most successful sitcoms of all time. In the 1980s, 1950s diners began to open, with jukeboxes, chrome seats, shimmery formica countertops, waitstaff in poodle skirts, and Googie-inspired neon lighting.
I was born in 1988. When I was a teen in the Y2K era, the nostalgia cycle was stuck in the 1960s and ’70s, marketing to baby boomers who were all now firmly in middle age, as well as their bell-bottom-curious millennial kids. This latter marketing concept, it’s worth noting, is called Nowstalgia: the marketing of the past to people who didn’t experience it the first time. Flared jeans and peasant tops were in fashion, and every week I’d tune into “That ’70s Show,” more or less a modern update of “Happy Days.”
I remember watching the Super Bowl with my dad in 2002. That year, Led Zeppelin — who had refused to license their music to advertisers for decades — brokered a deal with Cadillac. The American luxury automaker used the band’s 1971 song “Rock and Roll” in a campaign titled “Break Through,” produced by the agency D’Arcy Masius Benton & Bowles. The ad debuted at the Super Bowl that year, and my dad, who was born in 1954, was flabbergasted.
“Boomers must be getting old,” he said to me.
Currently, we’re in the cultural grip of Y2K nostalgia. Ad campaigns featuring fads and celebrities from the late ’90s through the mid-2000s are everywhere. Ludacris is the face of State Farm, and the Backstreet Boys, in addition to selling Doritos, star in a Downey ad. Kids are wearing cargo pants and baby tees. I imagine that Super Bowl ads will continue to mine from my pop cultural memories for a while, and that they will continue to use touchstones from the ’90s, ’80s and ’70s as long as there are significant cohorts that remember each of these decades.
Eventually, though, the window will shift. It seems like there has been a decrease in ’50s nostalgia in contemporary popular culture, for the simple reason that the ’50s is moving further and further into the past, and there are fewer people around with fond memories of it than in, say, the ’70s and ’80s. And the nostalgia window will almost certainly move beyond Y2K nostalgia, to the trends and stars important to Gen Z and, eventually, Gen Alpha.
But what will that look like? There has been some speculation that the internet has brought about the death of monoculture (widely shared pop cultural touchstones), and has arrested the introduction of new trends in favor of constantly remixed “cores” and “aesthetics” that mine the past for their inspiration. As the theorist Mark Fisher observed as early as 2009, pop culture seems to be stuck in the past, unable to move forward with truly unique trends and products. What would Super Bowl ads nostalgic for the 2010s or the 2020s look like? Would there even be a unique popular culture to reference?
Maybe the nostalgia marketing cycle does end in the Y2K era. But maybe that’s just a cope by a woman on the cusp of middle age. Twenty years from now (assuming the Super Bowl still exists), I’ll probably be watching aging influencers bringing back their broccoli hairstyles and talking about how some new erectile dysfunction drug will give you skibidi rizz. My adult niece and nephew will complain that this means they’re getting old. I will have no idea what is going on, because I’ll be outside that marketing demographic.
Colette Shade is the author of “Y2K: How The 2000’s Became Everything (Essays on the Future That Never Was)”. The book is history-in-essays of the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, and was released by Dey Street, an imprint of HarperCollins, in January 2025.
The Dictatorship
Justice Jackson chides ‘oblivious’ Supreme Court conservatives…
WASHINGTON (AP) — Supreme CourtJustice Ketanji Brown Jackson has delivered a sustained attack on her conservative colleagues’ use of emergency orders to benefit the Trump administration, calling the orders “scratch-paper musings” that can “seem oblivious and thus ring hollow.”
The court’s newest justice, Jackson delivered a lengthy assessment of roughly two dozen court orders issued last year that allowed President Donald Trump to put in place controversial policies on immigration, steep federal funding cuts and other topics, after lower courts found they were likely illegal.
While designed to be short-term, those orders have largely allowed Trump to move ahead — for now — with key parts of his sweeping agenda.
Jackson spoke for nearly an hour on Monday at Yale Law School, which posted a video of the event on Wednesday.
Last week, Justice Sonia Sotomayor similarly talked about emergency orders in an event Tuesday at the University of Alabama that also took issue with the conservatives’ approach.
Jackson has previously criticized the emergency orders both in dissenting opinions and in an unusual appearance with Justice Brett Kavanaugh last month. But her talk at Yale, addressing the public rather than the other eight justices, was notable.
She referred to orders, which often are issued with little or no explanation as “back-of-the-envelope, first-blush impressions of the merits of the legal issue.”
Worse still, she said, was that the court then insists that “those scratch-paper musings” be applied by lower courts in other cases.
The orders suffer from an additional problem, she said, a failure to acknowledge that real people are involved, making them “seem oblivious and thus ring hollow.”
She also pushed back on the court’s assessment that preventing the president from putting his policy in place also is a harm that often outweighs what the challengers to a policy might face.
“The president of the United States, though he may be harmed in an abstract way, he certainly isn’t harmed if what he wants to do is illegal,” Jackson said during a question-and-answer session with law school dean Cristina Rodriguez.
The court used to be reluctant to step into cases early in the legal process, she said. “There is value in avoiding having the court continually touching the third rail of every divisive policy issue in American life,” Jackson said.
While she said she couldn’t explain the change, “in recent years, the Supreme Court has taken a decidedly different approach to addressing emergency stay applications. It has been noticeably less restrained, especially with respect to pending cases that involve controversial matters.”
Sign up for Morning Wire: Our flagship newsletter breaks down the biggest headlines of the day.
Jackson, often joined by Sotomayor and Justice Elena Kagan, has frequently dissented.
There have been conversations about emergency orders among the justices, Jackson said, but she decided to speak publicly with the goal of being “a catalyst for change.”
Also on Wednesday, Sotomayor issued a rare public apology to another justice, Kavanaugh, for what she termed “hurtful comments” she made last week during an appearance at the University of Kansas law school.
Referencing an opinion Kavanaugh wrote in an immigration case where the court granted an emergency order sought by the administration, Sotomayor said her colleague “probably doesn’t really know any person who works by the hour.” Her remarks were reported by Bloomberg Law.
The Dictatorship
Trump threatens to fire Powell if the Fed Chair remains with central bank after his term ends
WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal prosecutors made an unannounced visit this week to a construction site at Federal Reserve headquarters that is the focus of an investigation into a $2.5 billion renovation projectaccording to two people familiar with the visit.
Two prosecutors and an investigator from U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office were turned away on Tuesday by a building contractor and referred to Fed attorneys, one of the people said. The two people familiar with the visit spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to publicly discuss an ongoing investigation.
The visit underscores that the Trump administration is not backing down from its investigation of the Fed and its chair, Jerome Powell, even though the probe has delayed the confirmation of a new chair nominated by President Donald Trump. The investigation is focused on cost overruns and brief testimony about the project last summer by Powell. Trump confirmed in an interview that aired Wednesday on Fox Business that he wants to continue the probe.
Last month, during a closed-door hearing before a federal judge, a top deputy from Pirro’s office conceded that they hadn’t found any evidence of a crime in their investigation of the headquarters project.
Robert Hur, an attorney for the Federal Reserve board of governors, sent an email to Pirro’s prosecutors about their visit and their request for a “tour” to “check on progress” at the construction site. Hur’s email, which The Associated Press has viewed, noted that U.S. District Judge James Boasberg concluded that their interest in the Federal Reserve’s renovation project was “pretextual.”
AP AUDIO: Prosecutors sought access to Federal Reserve building as Trump threatens to fire Powell
AP Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports on more drama surrounding a federal probe of a massive construction project at the Federal Reserve’s headquarters.
“Should you wish to challenge that finding, the courts provide an avenue for you; it is not appropriate for you to try to circumvent it,” Hur wrote.
Republican Tillis is key vote
Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who is a key member of the Senate Banking Committee, has vowed to vote against Kevin WarshTrump’s nominee to replace Powell as Fed chair, until the investigation is dropped. With the committee closely divided on partisan lines, Tillis’ opposition is enough to block Warsh from receiving the committee’s approval.
Tillis on Wednesday criticized the investigation as “bogus, ill-timed, ill-informed” and repeated that seven Republican members of the banking panel have said they do not believe Powell committed a crime when he testified last June.
Tillis also said there aren’t enough votes on the committee or in the broader Senate to do an end-run around the committee and get Warsh confirmed some other way.
“There really is no path,” he told reporters, adding that Pirro and her aides were “asleep at the switch” because the investigation has essentially delayed Powell’s departure from the Fed, despite Trump’s obsessive criticism of the Fed chair. Powell has now said he won’t leave until the investigation is resolved.
Sign up for Morning Wire: Our flagship newsletter breaks down the biggest headlines of the day.
Tillis suggested Pirro blindsided the White House with her investigation. “They should have consulted with the White House, because I’m sure if they would have, (the White House) would have said, ‘no, we can wait,’” until Powell steps down.
But Kevin Hassett, the Trump administration’s top economist, said Wednesday that the Justice Department got involved because “the president wanted to investigate the cost overrun,” Axios reported.
The Banking panel said Tuesday that it will hold a hearing on Warsh’s nomination April 21. Powell’s term as Fed chair ends May 15, but Powell said last month he would remain as chair until a replacement is named.
Powell is serving a separate term as a member of the Fed’s governing board that lasts until January 2028. Chairs typically leave the board when their terms as chair end, but they can remain on the board if they choose. Powell has said he won’t leave until the investigation is resolved. If he remains it would deny Trump the opportunity to appoint someone else to the seven-member board.
Late Tuesday Tillis posted a link on social media to The Wall Street Journal’s article on the visit below an image of the Three Stooges and wrote, “The U.S. Attorney’s Office for D.C. at the crime scene.”
Investigation centers on building renovations
The investigation centers on an appearance by Powell before the Banking Committee last June, when he was asked about cost overruns on the renovations. The most recent estimates from the Fed suggest the current estimated cost of $2.5 billion is about $600 million higher than a 2022 estimate of $1.9 billion.
“It is probably corrupt, but what it really is, is incompetent,” Trump said. “Don’t you think we have to find out what happened there?”
The president’s support for the investigation threatens a timeframe set out by Sen. Tim Scott, a South Carolina Republican who chairs the Banking Committee. Scott said Tuesday on Fox Business that he believed the investigation would be “wrapped up in the next few weeks,” allowing Warsh to be confirmed soon after.
Threat to fire Powell
News of the unannounced visit by prosecutors comes as Trump has again threatened to fire Powell, if the Federal Reserve Chair decides to stay on the central bank’s governing board after his term as chair expires next month.
“Well then I’ll have to fire him, OK?” Trump said.
Trump has for months wanted to remove Powell, saying he has been too slow in orchestrating interest rate cuts that would give the U.S. economy a quick boost. Powell has said the investigation is a pretext to undermine the Fed’s independence to set rates.
Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, said Trump can only fire Powell “for cause,” meaning some kind of misconduct, “so that’s a pretty tall order.”
Supreme Court weighing another Trump removal
Trump’s threat to fire Powell comes as the Supreme Court is weighing the president’s effort to remove another central bank governor, Lisa Cook. Lower courts have so far allowed Cook to remain in her job while her legal challenge to the firing continues. The Supreme Court also seemed likely to keep her on the Fed when the court heard arguments in January. A decision could come any time.
The issue in Cook’s case is whether allegations of mortgage fraud, which she has denied, is a sufficient reason to fire her or a mere pretext masking Trump’s desire to exert more control over U.S. interest rate policy.
The Supreme Court has allowed the firings of the heads of other governmental agencies at the president’s discretion, with no claim that they did anything wrong, while also signaling that it is approaching the independence of the nation’s central bank more cautiouslycalling the Fed “a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity.”
___
AP Writers Seung Min Kim, Mark Sherman, Paul Wiseman, Alanna Durkin Richer, and video journalist Nathan Ellgren contributed to this report.
The Dictatorship
The Latest: US blockade of Iranian ports ‘fully implemented’ as Trump says war is near end
SnoCountry Mountain Reports
Sports Betting Line
Pacific Northwest Sportswatch Daily Listings
Gulf States Sportswatch Daily Listings
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
The Dictatorship7 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show1 year agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?






