There was a lot slapstick violence used as the punch line in a number of Super Bowl commercials. There was the guy who got wiped out by a meteor, the rock-paper-scissors match, a series of face slaps, even a jungle/office war.
The New York Times theorized that all the violence was the result of the war in Iraq. I'm serious. They printed this (at least online). Not that they offered any proof or experts who agreed, but hey, it's only the Times. It's not like it's supposed to be a serious newspaper or anything.
Now, this is not designed to make any statement on the war, but I'm guessing the trend in eye-gouging and shin kicking was probably just the work of unimaginative ad execs trying to appeal to young men.
But hey, what do I know? I'm now rattled at the idea there is a subliminal message to the Three Stooges episode I watched Saturday.
Take your pick: completely insane or completely biased. It cannot be anything else.
Linking violence in Super Bowl ads to the War in Iraq, and thus Bush, is more proof than any critic of the MSM needs to feel vindicated for their claims of biased reporting.
Edited By GORDON on 1183573109
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
By this same logic, the Super Bowls ratings were up because the war in Iraq has upped peoples violent tendencies expressed vicariously while watching football.
Sure as hell wasn't Prince's half time show. What a piece of shit!