How low, foul and disgusting does a commercial have to be for it to be banned during the Superbowl? It would have to be pretty bad, right? I mean they show barely-clad women in sexually provocative poses. They show ultra-violent movie trailers. They feature halftime shows with vulgar and sexually suggestive language and dancing. In fact, the NFL and the major networks will cross the line on just about every major culturally conservative taboo they can, because they think it will make them money.
But every now and again they ban commercials deemed “too controversial” for the average viewer. Well the latest commercial turned down by the powers that be has some people scratching their heads. I’ll let you watch it so you can judge the controversial ad for yourself…
Yep. That’s it.
That commercial was judged too controversial for the NFL.
Sex? It’s ok. Drugs, alcohol, tobacco? It’s cool. Violence? Please, we’re the NFL – our entire game is basically predicated on violence.
But don’t you dare talk about protecting your family, you disgusting mysoginist.
Apparently a commercial with no sex, no vulgarity, no violence is not permissible. Why? Because the husband/father figure would dare to suggest that he has the right and responsibility to protect his own family?
This is the definition of absurdity.
However, Mr. Colion Noir says it much better than I do. Watch his response to the banning of the Daniel Defense Ad below. Noir’s response picks up at about 1:30 into the video.
You tell ‘em, Colion!