diehli Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/a..._bowl_ad_pulled See the ad here: http://www.big-boys.com/articles/superbowl7.html And the problem is? It's time for the American people to pull their collective head out of their ass before further brain damage occurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 the same idiots control the media that want to take away your guns...nuff said... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IPSCDRL Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 (quote from story) Brian McCarthy, a spokesman for the NFL said "We questioned why a spot of that nature was in the game," McCarthy said, noting its "inappropriateness" and the fact that it referred to last year's incident. (end quote) Well, you can't mention the elephant standing in the middle of the room....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFlowers Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 Besides being censorship, is this not breach of contract? I mean GoDaddy.Com paid good money for two SuperBowl ad spots and then a random decision is made to pull a paid for ad because some old foggie thinks its 'inappropriate' when the girl in the ad has on as much if not more clothing than the NFL cheerleaders shown during the game. Sounds like the NFL and Fox would be in breach of contract to GoDaddy.Com for failure to provide paid for services, though I am sure Fox has an escape clause in the contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 the same idiots control the media that want to take away your guns...nuff said... Looks more like it was the NFL than the socialists. "The irony is that a parody of censorship was itself censored," Adelman said. and more the pity. It was "just" a business decision. I'd expect that from a soccer mom but I am going to have a hard time getting used to an NFL nanny state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted February 8, 2005 Author Share Posted February 8, 2005 I am going to have a hard time getting used to an NFL nanny state. Especially with the shit those douche bags get away with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3quartertime Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 Good rant... Couldn't help but censor your title!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewRacer Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 But I thought I did see that ad during the game? I know I saw one similar if not that one....... (strap coming off) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 I thought the Ad looked great, especially on my 65" TV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 Well, I think that the NFL should #)@(&$% and then @_*&%&@#. If we keep our(*W$$E(*#$ then #$&&%$ is to #)%*&&% bad for us! The NFL broadcasts show players getting crippled, smashed, hit and carried off the field with gory detail - in slow motion - over and over and over.... Then someone flashes a little "teat" (per Go Rilla) and all hell breaks loose. Which is the more obscene. A player being smashed and crippled with 30 slow motion reruns or a womans bared breast? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 Amen to this whole thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IPSCDRL Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 I thought the Ad looked great, especially on my 65" TV Me too! Love that new screen! As for the Ad, yes we did see it once. It was supposed to air twice but the second showing of it was pulled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtr Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 I thought the Ad looked great, especially on my 65" TV Looked great on my 90" projector. I thought the ads overall this year weren't that great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiG Lady Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 "Especially with the shit those douche bags get away with. " Wow, that's straight outa Jon Stewart's monologue collection! ...love it... (The commercials this year were DECIDEDLY restrained and unpenetrating.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 (The commercials this year were DECIDEDLY restrained and unpenetrating.)[/color] Is she allowed to say 'penetrating'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted February 9, 2005 Author Share Posted February 9, 2005 She didn't say "penetrating," she said "unpenetrating." It's like the difference between "sexual" (bad) and "asexual" (neutral) or between "ass" (fine, when describing an animal) and "ass-hole" (bad because it hits too close to home for the poles). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 (The commercials this year were DECIDEDLY restrained and unpenetrating.)[/color] Is she allowed to say 'penetrating'? I think she just did!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Here's a link to Bob Parson's Blog: http://www.bobparsons.com/ Bob is the founder of Godaddy. I'm sure we will see some more entries on the Super Bowl commercial later. Check out his Feb 4th entry, talking about politically correct Marines, pretty good read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Boudrie Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 The location of "Salem, MA" for the committee hearings was a nice touch. GoDaddy definitely won - they get at least half the $$ back, get covered as a news event, and may even be able to sue for damages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiG Lady Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Just be glad I didn't say "PENETRATION"... as that might've fired up the troops in ways I might've, well... I just won't say here on this family forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMC Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 I don't mean to be rude but censorship is when the Government says you cannot show or say something. If a private entity like a broadcasting company or the NFL decide they do not want to run an ad because they think it will lead to them loosing money then they have a right to do it. If you say sensorship is you being denied to say anything anytime anywhere then I'd like to then demand that you advertise for my business on you car, clothes, and home and I don't want to hear you say no. If you do then your censoring me basedon your definition. When the government or anybody can force a private company to publish or broadcast anything even stuff that private entity disagrees with, then we have a real problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 I don't mean to be rude but censorship is when the Government says you cannot show or say something. If a private entity like a broadcasting company or the NFL decide they do not want to run an ad because they think it will lead to them loosing money then they have a right to do it. If you say sensorship is you being denied to say anything anytime anywhere then I'd like to then demand that you advertise for my business on you car, clothes, and home and I don't want to hear you say no. If you do then your censoring me basedon your definition. When the government or anybody can force a private company to publish or broadcast anything even stuff that private entity disagrees with, then we have a real problem. That folks is Thread Drift! Now, back to the previously scheduled "Penetration" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 I don't mean to be rude but censorship is when the Government says you cannot show or say something. If a private entity like a broadcasting company or the NFL decide they do not want to run an ad because they think it will lead to them loosing money then they have a right to do it. If you say sensorship is you being denied to say anything anytime anywhere then I'd like to then demand that you advertise for my business on you car, clothes, and home and I don't want to hear you say no. If you do then your censoring me basedon your definition. When the government or anybody can force a private company to publish or broadcast anything even stuff that private entity disagrees with, then we have a real problem. He's right, only the Fed's are prevented from restricting freedom of speech. Individuals can decide to show, or not show whatever they wish. However - it is through fines issued by the FCC that make many broadcasters jump (read: Clear Channel), which I think is inhibiting free speech Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Mainus Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 Go Daddy whatever is getting more mileage out of all the hub-bub, then if the add would have aired the second time. The young "actress" in the add is actually from Milwaukee WI. I live just south of Milwaukee. She has been on every radio station in town this week talking about the add. She is in her mid 20's and engaged to a 42 year old chiropractor from LA. The radio stations have also been getting e-mails from people she went to high school with and they say that she did not look like "that" in high school. I think the chiropractor knows some plastic surgeons. I guess she is also on one of the wrestling shows. WWE or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 I think the chiropractor knows some plastic surgeons. And what is wrong with Plastic Surgery? I personally am a fan! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now