RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Musicmystery -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/29/2010 10:51:48 AM)

Nobody's going to say anything about tight ends?




Thadius -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/29/2010 10:55:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Nobody's going to say anything about tight ends?


Sorry Tim, I think the whole purpose is to help wide receivers. Then again, a couple of tight ends might be appreciated.




Musicmystery -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/29/2010 11:01:22 AM)

Ah. Either way...an opportunity for forward passes.




pahunkboy -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/29/2010 11:12:41 AM)

you guys are torchuring me. All this talk about hunks!   I haven't been laid in ages.   yikes.


Maybe I should go to that crunch site.




Jeffff -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/29/2010 11:22:44 AM)

Sorry PA.. the add will never run. Being gay  is evil. It's in the Bible!


Jeff
(consigning your soul to eternal damnation at no extra charge!)




pahunkboy -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/29/2010 11:29:37 AM)

what would it even attract?

The occasion male who is curious- tries it once or twice then is certain it is not for them.

That is pretty much what that is about.   Yeah a few might straggle in.   But it only opens up alot of problems.

One could get the same outcome at a park or rest stop.

The male that is motivated by gay sex does not need a TV commercial to inform then - that you can meet men online.

gay.com was the usual site- there you could meet the same old stale merchandise that floated around in the newspaper ads a few years prior.

The ad is a stunt.   




Jeffff -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/29/2010 11:31:53 AM)

Awwwwwwwwww  ruffles his hair.... you poor gay guy. Buck up little fella, it will all be ok.

Except the part about you burning in hell and all.... but hey....what are ya gonna do?..

[:D]




pahunkboy -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/29/2010 11:38:17 AM)

..it is lonely at the top- what can I say? lol




DomImus -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/29/2010 5:22:33 PM)

CBS nixed the ad.

Next!






pahunkboy -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/29/2010 5:28:21 PM)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/28/mancrunch-superbowl-ad-ga_n_440773.html

yup= end of the world for this ---  someone hold me and tell me it will be ok




Lucylastic -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/29/2010 7:06:46 PM)

Snorting wildly at Thadius and Music, thanks chaps
DomImus...not a big surprise to anyone I dont think




Termyn8or -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/29/2010 11:37:49 PM)

"So you're basically claiming homosexuals don't watch the Super Bowl"

Not really, but "by the numbers" is where it's at in advertising. Surely homosexuals do watch the superbowl, but in what numbers ? If I were the marketing guy, I would spend the money on ads on Springer, Maury, all those junk TV shows. It would be money better spent IMO. Not that I assert homesexuals watch them more, but of those who do, more might be receptive, if not more responsive. And the heterosexuals who watch that junk are receptive to almost anything. It would be less counterproductive.

It seems simple to me.

T




DomImus -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/30/2010 5:18:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

"So you're basically claiming homosexuals don't watch the Super Bowl"

Not really, but "by the numbers" is where it's at in advertising. Surely homosexuals do watch the superbowl, but in what numbers ? If I were the marketing guy, I would spend the money on ads on Springer, Maury, all those junk TV shows. It would be money better spent IMO. Not that I assert homesexuals watch them more, but of those who do, more might be receptive, if not more responsive. And the heterosexuals who watch that junk are receptive to almost anything. It would be less counterproductive.


There is merit to this premise if they ever actually intended to spend money on the ad and have it aired, which I suspect they did not. Look at all the press they got for their attempt to have this ad run during the Super Bowl. All without paying a penny. It's arguable that this was their plan all along. I'm sure in cases where they actually intend to pony up the ad dollars they choose the programming more carefully to get the most bang for their buck and not pay millions of dollars for a 30 second spot.






Termyn8or -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/30/2010 6:43:40 AM)

Funny, that just occurred to me as well. Look at all the news bits that are in reality ads but disguised. But that is actually paid for. This was free. It has already reached a better target market right here. Genius, or stupidity, it's one or the other. No gray area here.

T




housesub4you -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/31/2010 4:56:28 AM)

Not any more, they rejected the ad.but they are running a Pro-Life ad instead, thankfully though CBS says it is not taking sides, and the gay dating ad did not meet its standards

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/30/afa-super-bowl/






DomImus -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/31/2010 7:11:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: housesub4you
Not any more, they rejected the ad.but they are running a Pro-Life ad instead, thankfully though CBS says it is not taking sides, and the gay dating ad did not meet its standards

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/30/afa-super-bowl/


Now the burning question: Who is going to tune out the Super Bowl next Sunday (or maybe make it a sweeping gesture and never watch the CBS network again) because of the manner in which they choose advertisers?

I'll be watching and rooting for the Colts.






pahunkboy -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/31/2010 9:09:48 AM)

I would rather watch Jerry Springer.   Or better yet hang here.   hehe




DomImus -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/31/2010 9:34:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy
I would rather watch Jerry Springer.   Or better yet hang here.   hehe


An you'd be far more likely to see that ad there, too! Woo hoo!




cuckoldmepls -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/31/2010 9:52:41 AM)

Here's what's funny. All these liberals who think CBS should air the gay superbowl ad are the same people who oppose the latest Supreme Court decision declaring that Corporations can produce political movies and ads.

So in effect, they unknowingly are saying that corporations should not be able to be politically active, but large organizations such as the Gay Alliance should be. Ironically, these same people think it's fine for Michael Moore a movie producer to continue to show only one side, the socialist side.

I'm smart enough to realize that if corporations do well, then America does well and corporations provide jobs. So being anti corporation is the same as being anti American.  I want to know who the corporations trust to make sure they do well, and that doesn't mean who they trust to bail them out. It means providing a level playing field, by changing free trade agreements into fair trade agreements, eliminating outsourcing, and going after employers who try to undercut the competition by hiring Illegal Aliens.

If corporations go bankrupt so does America. By the way, corporations were not responsible for this latest mortgage meltdown. Congress was by forcing them to loan money to poor people at the drop of a hat without verifying their incomes with their latest tax returns. Congress is also responsible for placing the big 3 in unfair market conditions worldwide, where there is no possible way they can produce a car cheaper than a 3rd world country can.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, the democrats promised you a middle class tax cut so they could get elected, because they knew they would be able to get even more money out of you in the long run through a multitude of back door taxes. Anytime they put a tax, fee or penalty on any corporation, small business, financial institution or energy company, eventually they have no choice but to pass that cost on to you. So essentially, the democrats are passing back door taxes, and the liberals have fallen for it.

http://babelishere.webs.com/liberals.html





thompsonx -> RE: CBS considering GayDating Site ad for superbowl (1/31/2010 10:41:10 AM)

quote:

If corporations go bankrupt so does America. By the way, corporations were not responsible for this latest mortgage meltdown. Congress was by forcing them to loan money to poor people at the drop of a hat without verifying their incomes with their latest tax returns.

You should probably look up the difference between allow and force.


Congress is also responsible for placing the big 3 in unfair market conditions worldwide, where there is no possible way they can produce a car cheaper than a 3rd world country can.
Japan,Germany and Korea are third world countries? Please define 3rd world country.





Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125