Navigate --

Open Chat Board

Old Rants --


Blogs --

Websites --

Michael Savage
Michael Medved
Stick Page
Heir to the Throne - Online Game

Bloggers for Mike McGavick for Senate 2006!

Members --


We Eat Liberals for breakfast, lunch AND dinner. Don't like it? Email us


Yeah, this is late...So what??

 - James

As long as we're talking about the Super Bowl and football and things of that ilk...
I really have very little use for sports, and no, I didn't watch the Super Bowl this year (or last year...or the year before...), but I did find this interesting: Apparently, some big cheeses in the advertising industry were discussing the ads of Super Bowl XXXIX on the news last Monday. They were saying that the ads that came with this year's Super Bowl weren't as good as last years'; they weren't as funny, as interesting, as effective in selling their products, etc. And, according to them, there is a reason for this (ya think??).

The FCC has cracked down this year, on, this year's Super Bowl commercials. Well, obviously. After dear ol' Janet's "wardrobe malfunction" *snigger*, what else would you expect? Right. Anyway, the advertising folks were whining about how the family values people, the religious right, and miscellaneous other offended groups influenced the FCC into cracking down on the raunchiness in this year's ads, and therefore, the ads were lousy.

It's kinda funny, though. In saying this, the advertisers are basically saying that they can't sell their products without sex. That they can't sell their products without raunchiness, bad taste, or whatever you wanna call it. That doesn't seem like it would go over well with people. And it's also really stupid. You can make a good, entertaining commercial without relying on the audience's hormones to sell your product. Commercials can be funny, too, without relying on crude, unintelligent, American Pie-ish jokes. Anyway, I've made my point. G'night, all...


Free Domain Forwarding

add text << # St. Blog's Parish ? >>

Humor & fun cool stuff