This post is part of our Ads Gone Bad series. Share your thoughts and memories of this ad in the comments, and be sure to check out our other posts on marketing gone wrong.

Mars Inc., has made not just one, but two ad campaigns for its popular Snickers bar seem to sneer at gays. Mars, one of the biggest privately held, family-owned companies, makes many of the world's most popular candies: Snickers, M&Ms, Twix, Starburst (along with Uncle Ben's Rice and pet food like Whiskas), but both of the ads gay rights groups found offensive were for the Snickers bar.

The first gay-themed Snickers ad made a big splash in Super Bowl XLI in 2007. Two mechanics get so wrapped up in eating the opposite ends of Snickers bar that their lips touch, prompting them to decide to "do something manly" lest they accidentally catch gayness -- so they pull their chest hair out.

Whatever other problems it has, Nike Inc. (NYSE: NKE) has, historically, been on the side of the gay community. From sponsoring athletes at the Gay Games to offering domestic partnership benefits to its gay and lesbian employees, there is little fault for a gay rights activist to find with Nike.

But that didn't stop some people from making up fake controversies. The company's ads for its Hyperdunk basketball shoes feature competing basketball players in photos with heads in each other's crotches, hands on butts, etc. -- stuff that happens all the time during basketball games.

Now, in response to the criticism, the company is pulling the ads, citing its desire "to underline our ongoing commitment to supporting diversity in sport and the workplace."

The ads are funny and they're not homophobic -- Nike's track record on these issues demonstrates that. LGBT activists who make an issue out of stuff like this marginalize the real issues, by making it look like there aren't bigger battles to fight. With one presidential candidate who just learned what "LGBT" means, there clearly are. But silly stuff like this will turn people off and prevent those issues from being taken seriously.

Conservative social and political groups are vowing to fight the recent California ruling in which a republican-dominated court declared that sexual preference should not bar couples from legal marriage. In an Associated Press article, the court opinion is quoted as stating that "domestic partnerships that provide many of the rights and benefits of matrimony are not enough."

In pursuance of equal footing, gay, lesbian, and bisexual investors have been seeking and "outing" corporations with gay-friendly policies and have been backing those companies in a show of financial clout. An example of the application of this forward social dynamic would be Trillium Asset Management, which has at least once scored a "perfect 10" on the Gay and Lesbian Values Index (glvindex). With an investment focus called Socially Responsible Investing (SRI), this company seeks to provide investment returns in keeping with industry standards, while at the same time maintaining "unique focus on social research and advocacy."

Corporations that have taken careful strides to bring their standards up to date with regard to societal equality appear to be gaining in popularity with gay and gay-friendly investors, as evidenced by their placement on and recognition of the glvindex. SC Johnson acknowledged it's high ranking on the glvindex in a company press release that stated in part: "To us, diversity is about building the best, most talented workforce that mirrors the marketplace, and motivating them with an environment that enables people to be themselves and contribute freely and effectively."

According to The Wall Street Journal, "Major properties on the Las Vegas Strip are now offering lavish commitment ceremonies to same-sex couples (though same-sex marriage is illegal in Nevada), as well as special hotel and entertainment packages geared specifically toward gay and lesbian travelers. Some resorts have mandated sensitivity programs to teach employees how to make gay and lesbian travelers feel welcome."

It's hard to imagine what took them so long. By ignoring the gay market, Las Vegas casino operators were failing to capitalize on their perfect market: Single people who like to have fun and, because they tend not to have families to support, have more disposable income. Research also shows that gay men spend 30% more than straight men. If Las Vegas wants to remake itself into a world of pricey cuisine and luxury shopping, this is the market to target -- not coupon-clipping senior citizens.

But why is this just starting to happen now, as most experts say it is? Fear that Bible-trumping prudes would be offended if gay couples were part target market of Las Vegas promoters? If so, that could be the reason for the city's decline in glamor, and utter loss of cultural relevance.

Perhaps targeting the gay community is the beginning of Las Vegas' rebirth.

There are some stories that are so bizarre that they defy comment. All we can do is report the facts and you can draw your own conclusions. According to the Associated Press, "Air New Zealand is delving into the gay and lesbian market with a special themed flight that will feature drag queens, pink cocktails and a cabaret performed by the flight crew."

Hmm. The 14-hour flight from San Fransisco to Sydney will coincide with the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras, and will feature gay-themed movies and a special "Get-onboard-girlfriend" going away party for travelers. Flyers will pay an average of $1,000 round-trip.

It sounds campy and perhaps a bit dated, but it should generate tons of publicity -- good and bad -- for Air New Zealand. Absolut Vodka became an extremely valuable brand, in large part because of its focus on targeting the relatively-affluent LGBT community.

It remains to be seen whether an American airline will take on something this ambitious -- and potentially controversial. But if Air New Zealand has success -- which it will -- it's something that will have to be considered.

PlanetOut (NASDAQ: LGBT)'s short history as a public company has been nothing short of a miserable failure. After going public at $10 per share in late 2004, the company's stock will, barring bad news, hit a new 52-week high sometime around October 1. The problem is that that will only be because of a 1-10 reverse split announced today. The stock is currently trading at $1.42.

PlanetOut is a media company focused exclusively on the lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgendered market, with such notable properties as The Advocate, Out, Gay.com, and RSVP Vacations. The company took on far too much debt to build its empire, and shareholders recently found themselves badly diluted when the company had to raise money through a private placement with investors including a hedge fund controlled by Bill Gates.

But don't worry too much. The company's insiders have still gotten rich, even if they've wiped out somewhere around $150 million of shareholder value. The insider transactions (very few lately... mostly when the stock was trading over $8 per share) tell the story.

Given the demographic trends that should be so favorable for an LGBT media company, there's only really one explanation for such weak performance: mismanagement. The company's CEO, Karen Magee, said as much on a recent conference call. And no, she won't be returning any of the money she's made.

But everything will be OK. Even if they can't make the company profitable, PlanetOut's management can slice the pie in different ways to raise the share price. What PlanetOut needs is not a stock-split. It needs new management.

One step forward, two steps back. That seems to be the story of Wal-Mart's (NYSE: WMT) efforts to spruce up its image. For every new environmental initiative, there's a Julie Roehm-type story. Now the latest bit of bad news: The Bentonville retailer has decided to stop donating money to gay and lesbian groups after conservative Christian groups threatened a boycott.

The company, which has a reputation for being conservative, has made an effort to reach out to the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered) community of late, by joining the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, selling gay-themed jewelry, and other initiatives.

The company is quick to point out that it still supports its gay employees through the Wal-Mart Pride group, and will continue to support diversity initiatives: It just won't be donating money to outside gay groups.

Some gay and lesbian groups have accepted Wal-Mart's explanation, and understand the pressure that the right has put on the company. I would be a lot happier if Wal-Mart would stand up and say "We support many groups including some Christian groups, and we also support LGBT groups. Deal with it."

But more importantly, I would like to see Wal-Mart join the more than half of Fortune 500 companies providing health care benefits to the domestic partners of its LGBT employees. If they do that, I'll forgive them.

On another note, it's a sign of how far society has come that Wal-Mart was donating money to gay groups, and their continued initiatives to become more gay friendly are indicative of progress.

On the ABC show Brothers and Sisters, one of the main characters (a brother) is gay, and currently dating a soap star. The soap star is keeping his yen for a boyfriend a secret at all costs as he's sure his fans will revolt if he's exposed. I keep wondering if the plotline is a serious examination of daytime television fans and their bigotry or the writers are just poking fun at the ridiculousness of any star in today's climate hiding homosexuality. It seems that many stars have increased their bankability by coming out, from Ellen DeGeneres to her gorgeous girlfriend, Portia de Rossi.

And today, the news that Cyndi Lauper is launching her 'True Colors Music Tour' to support gay and lesbian equality appeared in my inbox and I have to wonder, is Cyndi Lauper gay? (As far as I know, she's not; she's been married to a man for years and they appear happily heterosexual.) Or is her association with the gay audience simply a marketing tool?

Let me start out by saying that (a) I support GBLT rights and only got the news because I had clicked to back gay marriage and (b) I really, really want to go to Cyndi Lauper's tour. But the point is that I've been beginning to wonder if being gay has gone from anachrony to characteristic, and an attractive characteristic at that, kind of like being from a small town in Oklahoma, or being connected in the tabloids with the hottest, youngest actor of the moment.

"Quick, do something manly!" one of the actors in the Snickers ad exclaimed, after kissing his male counterpart.

Too late. The male-kissing-male ad, which was featured during Super Bowl XLI on Sunday, will not air again after complaints from the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation and the Human Rights Campaign.

Maybe it was the wrong tactic -- this year's Super Bowl was kicked off by Cirque de Soleil and featured Prince at half time. Maybe they should have gone for a more metrosexual look. After all, a Chevrolet ad featuring topless men (including the Naked Cowboy) was one of the more highly rated ads of this year's Super Bowl.

But personally, if I had to choose an ad not to see again, it would be the General Motors (NYSE: GM) ad with the robot worker committing suicide. Did it not occur to the company, which is in the process of major downsizing, that that ad may just hit a little too close to home?

Eric Buscemi is an editor at Theflyonthewall.com.

ExxonMobil, says the Human Rights Campaign, is a big zero. A new report out from HRC, the nation's largest lesbian and gay political organization, scores American companies on how well they are reaching out to their gay and lesbian workforce, and ExxonMobil finds itself at the bottom of the list.

According to the report from HRC, companies are scored in handful of areas. For a company to receive a perfect score they must demonstrate that they have policies in place for banning discrimination based on sexual orientation, they must provide partner benefits, offer diversity training, and advertise to the gay community. Several companies that we follow closely on BloggingStocks scored perfect 100's in the report. They include Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F), Apple Computer Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) and Dell Inc. (NASDAQ:DELL). Time Warner Inc. (NYSE:TWX) came in with an 85 score.

As For ExxonMobil Corp. (NYSE: XOM)... well, the picture isn't so pretty. Exxon managed to be one of only three companies in the report that came in with a score of zero. Why the poor score? The company did not even offer minimal benefits or workplace protection for gay employees. When asked about the report ExxonMobil spokesman Russ Roberts stated that Exxon relied on used the "definition of spouse used in federal legislation, which has the effect of limiting coverage to heterosexual couples," but also added that XOM had in place "written policies [that] prohibit discrimination or harassment for any reason, including sexual orientation." Apparently that wasn't enough to give them any points for good measure. Only two other companies came in with zero scores: Midwestern retailer Meijer Inc. and Plano, Texas-based Perot Systems technology consultants.