Every year, the Super Bowl delivers more than just gridiron drama and halftime spectacles—it also serves as America’s most-watched advertising showcase, where brands gamble millions for a shot at viral fame. But sometimes, the playbook goes awry, and instead of applause, brands are met with outrage, confusion, or even condemnation. As the nation gears up for Super Bowl LX on February 8, 2026, with sports fans eager to see whether New England Patriots’ sophomore quarterback Drake Maye can topple the Seattle Seahawks and music lovers anticipating Bad Bunny’s halftime show, another crowd is waiting—the viewers who tune in just for the commercials. And what a history those commercials have.
According to a recent roundup by TIME and Looper, the annals of Super Bowl advertising are littered with ads that crossed lines, provoked debate, or flat-out shocked the public. From tone-deaf humor to brazen exploitation, these commercials have become infamous, sometimes doing more harm than good to the brands they were meant to elevate. Here’s a look at some of the most controversial Super Bowl ads of all time—and the firestorms they ignited.
One of the earliest—and still one of the most jaw-dropping—missteps came in 1997 with Holiday Inn’s “Class Reunion” spot. The ad featured a trans woman attending a high school reunion, with a voiceover tallying up the costs of her various surgeries. The big reveal? She’s a former male classmate. The ad’s punchline, "It’s amazing what changes you can make for a few thousand dollars. Imagine what Holiday Inns will look like when we spend a billion," was meant to tout hotel renovations. Instead, it offended just about everyone—trans advocates, religious leaders, and even cisgender women—prompting the company to pull the ad. As Looper noted, the execution was so tone-deaf that it’s astonishing it ever aired.
Fast forward to 2007, and General Motors’ “Robot” commercial aired during Super Bowl XLI. The ad followed a factory robot fired for making a mistake, who then tried—and failed—at a series of odd jobs before ultimately rolling off a bridge in apparent suicide. Set to Eric Carmen’s “All by Myself,” the spot was intended as dark humor but struck a nerve with viewers and mental health organizations. The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention condemned the ad as "inappropriate," and the National Alliance on Mental Illness called it “recklessly irresponsible.” According to TIME, over 250 people contacted the foundation to complain after seeing it air. GM was forced to defend and eventually pull the ad, learning the hard way that suicide is no laughing matter.
Sexual innuendo has long been a go-to for Super Bowl advertisers, but it’s a risky bet. Carl’s Jr.’s “All-Natural” ad in 2015, featuring Charlotte McKinney strutting through a market in skimpy attire, was slammed as sexist. Critics argued that it “set feminism back four decades,” as one Twitter user put it. The backlash didn’t stop Carl’s Jr. from trying a similar approach a decade later, swapping McKinney for TikTok star Alix Earle but keeping the bikini. Meanwhile, PETA’s 2016 “Last Longer” spot, which compared the sexual stamina of vegan and meat-eating couples in a steamy split-screen montage, was deemed too risqué for CBS, which refused to air it on Super Bowl Sunday.
Homophobia and racism have also found their way into Super Bowl advertising, sometimes with stunning obliviousness. The 2007 Snickers “Kiss” ad depicted two mechanics accidentally locking lips while eating a candy bar—then recoiling in horror and overcompensating with "manly" acts. The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) and the Human Rights Campaign both condemned the ad for promoting casual homophobia in sports, prompting Snickers to pull the spot despite initially defending it. In 2008, Salesgenie’s “Pandas” ad featured cartoon bears speaking in exaggerated “Chinese accents,” reinforcing racial stereotypes. The ad was quickly pulled after public outcry, with InfoUSA’s Vinod Gupta telling The New York Times, “We never thought anyone would be offended. The pandas are Chinese. They don't speak German.”
Sometimes, the controversy is less about sex or stereotypes and more about tone-deaf exploitation of serious issues. Groupon’s 2011 “Tibet” commercial, starring Timothy Hutton, started as a somber PSA about the plight of Tibet before abruptly pivoting to a joke about getting a discount on fish curry. The backlash was swift, with viewers and advocacy groups accusing Groupon of trivializing a humanitarian crisis for laughs. The company attempted damage control by involving non-profits and encouraging donations, but eventually pulled the campaign entirely.
Religion and politics have also stirred the Super Bowl ad pot. In 2010, Focus on the Family aired “Celebrate Family,” featuring Pam Tebow, mother of quarterback Tim Tebow, sharing how she refused doctors’ advice to terminate her pregnancy—implying a pro-life message. The ad was subtle on the surface, but as Looper points out, viewers who visited the Focus on the Family website learned the full story. CBS aired the commercial despite protests from the National Organization for Women and the Feminist Majority, igniting debate about the place of religious and political messaging in sports advertising. Planned Parenthood responded with its own ad, emphasizing the importance of a woman’s right to make her own medical decisions.
Sometimes, controversy arises from unexpected places. SodaStream’s 2014 “Sorry” ad, featuring Scarlett Johansson, was banned not for its playful sex appeal but for a single jab at Coke and Pepsi—two of the Super Bowl’s biggest advertisers. Fox refused to air the spot with Johansson’s line, “Sorry, Coke and Pepsi.” The controversy didn’t hurt SodaStream; if anything, the banned version generated more buzz. However, Johansson herself faced backlash for her association with a company operating in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, leading her to cut ties with Oxfam.
Even in 2026, the tradition continues. This year, Anthropic’s “AI vs ChatGPT” commercial for its Claude Opus 4.6 tool took a swipe at rival OpenAI, lampooning ChatGPT’s new ad-laden interface with a tongue-in-cheek personal trainer skit. The ad sparked debate over fair play in tech advertising, with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman calling it “funny” but “dishonest.” The spot’s success? Well, it’s already got people talking—and that, in Super Bowl advertising, is half the battle.
Of course, some misfires have been so egregious they’ve nearly sunk their brands. Just for Feet’s 1999 “Kenyan Runner” ad, for instance, depicted white “hunters” tracking a barefoot Kenyan runner, ultimately drugging him and forcing sneakers onto his feet. The ad was widely condemned as racist, and the company filed for bankruptcy less than a year later.
What makes a Super Bowl ad controversial? Sometimes it’s a matter of taste, sometimes timing, and sometimes a total lack of self-awareness. But as history shows, the most infamous ads are the ones that push boundaries—often too far. Whether they’re pulled immediately or live on in infamy, these commercials remind us that in the high-stakes world of Super Bowl advertising, the line between bold and blunder is razor-thin.