It's definitely not a truthful retrospective of a failed ad (I would be shocked to hear that they were actually going out of business), but it is made to follow the style of one. However, it's simply using that form as a vehicle, not mocking or shaming the subjects of the imitation, so I wouldn't describe it as satire. Perhaps irony, verging on sarcasm?

The ad and the article are part of a single, original marketing campaign, done very much in their style: part spectacular and part absurd.

It's a bit a both, although probably best termed 'art'.

It's satire by proxy in the sense that nearly all 'projects' Cards Against Humanity and the ad in question were, and the prose mirrors the structure of similar post-mortems undertaken by legitimate companies in similar situations. It may have elements of truth (although hard to confirm at this point), but the purpose is to hook the ad (which was context-free) to the cause, and thus generate buzz, speculation, and more analysis. In other words, a publicity ploy intermixed with a pick-your-own-layers of social commentary.

These are the same people that dug The Hole. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/28/cards-aga...

Anyone who watched the super bowl, did they actually air that 30 second ad or not?

I didn't see the ad, but a look at Twitter suggests it was actually broadcast (almough it appears to have been pre-game and quite possibly only in certain markets)

Didn't see it either, my guess is they aired it only local market somewhere.

I'm an American and I have no idea.

It's clearly satire

The article is clearly satire. But it's unclear if the ad actually aired or not.

It aired during the pregame show. Just a potato with the word "ADVERTISEMENT" on it for 30 seconds. There is a chance they only bought slots for Chicago, as a lot of the twitter feeds mentioning it are located in that area.

Had the same doubts... although the ad obviously makes no sense with no company/product name being shown.

Pretty sure it's satire, but as a non-american I don't understand it either.

I don't think it's American-ness that dictates whether or not you get it, but rather your familiarity with cards against humanity, their product, and their marketing style.

Definitely satire, although I was surprised they mentioned a well-known ad agency by name. Just check their past marketing efforts (and the general idea of Cards Against Humanity.)

They're giving props to W+K in a backhanded way: "They wasted over six months of our precious time pitching concepts like people laughing while playing the game, and amusing card combinations coming to life on screen." That "conventional thinking" likely would have worked well and made the ad successful in conventional terms. So I don't think they're dissing the agency (maybe that's not what you implied), but rather saying W+K does well at a different kind of advertising. Non-potato advertising, say.

It's satire.