Commercials That Annoy, Irritate or Outright Enrage

[susannah]

4 hours ago, sempervivum said:

Holey moley, I just saw that Colace ad for the first time. The comparisons-'passing a pineapple', etc. !

Luckily I have no need for this product, but if I did, I would pick any other brand (assuming they don't all jump on the 'gross ads' bandwagon).

I have been lucky enough not to see that particular one so far but that is beyond disgusting! So gross, and the red bears make me sick. Definitely not wanting to rush out and buy the products, EVER.

[susannah]

6 hours ago, Yeah No said:

In fact, in NY and CT the vaccine was prioritized for minority communities and great lengths were taken to get it to them.  My late father's caregiver, who is AA and lives in the South Bronx had her vaccine before anyone I know, way back in like the first week they were available (I believe she is 75).  I just can't get over that.  Meanwhile all my friends down in NY were going nuts trying to get vaccine appointments when their age groups opened up and some had to wait weeks and months before they could get one despite constant trying on hotlines and online.   So I kind of don't buy the insinuation of blame in Spike's commercial based on personal experience.

My father, a 92 year old white man lived in the Bronx and likely because of that died last April of Covid.  So I take umbrage at anything making even a subtle accusation that there is any kind of blame to be directed at anyone based on race for this situation or the vaccine distribution situation.  I for one was shocked at how Spike's commercial came off, at least the second one I saw.  I was not expecting that nor wanting to see that insinuation, but I can't deny how it made me feel.

I agree, and I am so sorry about your father.

[Yeah No]

44 minutes ago, susannah said:

I agree, and I am so sorry about your father.

Thank you!  By the way he hated those Charmin commercials with the bears too.  Sometimes I think the main goal of commercials today is to shock and annoy us.  Anything to get our attention away from our computers and cell phones.  Even negative attention is better than no attention. 

[Bruinsfan]

That's the only explanation for Skittles' entire marketing plan.

[eel21788]

2 hours ago, Yeah No said:

Thank you!  By the way he hated those Charmin commercials with the bears too.  Sometimes I think the main goal of commercials today is to shock and annoy us.  Anything to get our attention away from our computers and cell phones.  Even negative attention is better than no attention. 

I have a cousin who works in advertising, and she is pretty annoying, irritating and obnoxious herself. She always wants to be the center of attention. Maybe it's just the kind of people who are drawn to work in the business.

[susannah]

28 minutes ago, Bruinsfan said:

That's the only explanation for Skittles' entire marketing plan.

OMG, the one where the Skittles were stuck on the guy's face like chicken pox and the girl picked one off and ate it is nauseating.

[Gramto6]

OK for the last couple of days I have been seeing a Hanes ad for men's underwear that totally grosses me out. The guy is touting the underwear that separates and supports basically "his balls" he poses and spreads his legs, rides a bull to show how everything is "contained". They are called "Balance" but pronounce it more like "Ball ance" egad! 

I don't want to see that any more than the women walking around the house in their "period panties". All I can think of with those is how do you clean them??? I'm not putting panties in my washer that are full of blood with my other clothes! I'd rather have the "waste of the wrapping" thrown along with the pad in my garbage...not that I even worry about that at my age! Too yukky to even think about!

These are ideas that should have ended up on the floor/garbage in the design room!!

Edited May 19, 2021 by Gramto6

[susannah]

2 hours ago, Yeah No said:

Thank you!  By the way he hated those Charmin commercials with the bears too.  Sometimes I think the main goal of commercials today is to shock and annoy us.  Anything to get our attention away from our computers and cell phones.  Even negative attention is better than no attention. 

You are probably right. Also I think it is a current trend, on tv and in movies, to be as crude as possible, in the name of "humor." The 12 year olds that are writing those are now writing the ads!

[susannah]

1 minute ago, Gramto6 said:

OK for the last couple of days I have been seeing a Hanes ad for men's underwear that totally grosses me out. The guy is touting the underwear that separates and supports basically "his balls" he poses and spreads his legs, rides a bull to show how everything is "contained". They are called "Ballance" but pronounce it more like "Ball ance" egad! 

Egad, I don't want to see that any more than the women walking around the house in their "period panties". All I can think of with those is how do you clean them??? I'm not putting panties in my washer that are full of blood with my other clothes! I'd rather have the "waste of the wrapping" thrown along with the pad in my garbage... Too yukky to even think about!

These are ideas that should have ended up on the floor/garbage in the design room!!

I may have misinterpreted that ad but I thought the period panties were for extra protection, in addition to tampon or pad, to protect your clothes, not in place of. Everyone has had a period leak at one time or another. I had a bad one while wearing white jeans once...at work.. I would have given ANYTHING for protective underwear.

[susannah]

4 minutes ago, susannah said:

I may have misinterpreted that ad but I thought the period panties were for extra protection, in addition to tampon or pad, to protect your clothes, not in place of. Everyone has had a period leak at one time or another. I had a bad one while wearing white jeans once...at work.. I would have given ANYTHING for protective underwear.

I don't know how to edit these so want to add that I said the wrong thing, the leak that I had was the period unexpectedly starting. But I did have one on a long train trip...again, where were the protective underwear!

[CrazyInAlabama]

I searched it, and period panties are a replacement for tampons, or pads.  In fact, the pads aren't supposed to be used with the panties.       

[Gramto6]

6 minutes ago, susannah said:

I may have misinterpreted that ad but I thought the period panties were for extra protection, in addition to tampon or pad, to protect your clothes, not in place of. Everyone has had a period leak at one time or another. I had a bad one while wearing white jeans once...at work.. I would have given ANYTHING for protective underwear.

My interpretation was they were showing the garbage with plastic wrappers etc. and saying with these machine washable panties you don't need to have all that extra waste materials. I'll pay more attention next time I see it. No fricking way in heck I would put  those panties in my wash! When I did have periods they were very heavy. What is the greater pollution, some pads and plastic wraps in the garbage or running the washing machine for 3-5 pairs of panties...Someone didn't think this through all the way...

[susannah]

4 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I searched it, and period panties are a replacement for tampons, or pads.  In fact, the pads aren't supposed to be used with the panties.       

🤢

[Gramto6]

1 minute ago, susannah said:

🤢

Yeah, with you on this one!!🤢 Very bad idea!

[Giuseppe]

On 5/16/2021 at 10:33 PM, Stacey1014 said:

No matter how many times I see it, I will never understand that Oscar Mayer “Yum” commercial with the choir. 

I don't get it, either. I mean, I can't believe Oscar Mayer really hired a bunch of people to put on choir robes and sing the word "yum" over and over again, lol.

[iHateAmpersands]

It's a commercial that's been out a while, but that RestoraLAX commercial where the "cranky-pated" woman does that cutesy pigeon-toed thing with her feet in the bathroom stall then sashays out the restroom like she's hot shit (no pun intended) really grinds my gears.

[TattleTeeny]

You’re supposed to rinse the period underwear separately first and then wash them. At the risk of TMI, they work well (and should for what they cost!). I was hesitant at first but some allergy issues where no one wants allergy issues kind of got me past that! Can bring a chick never be simple, man?!

[susannah]

2 minutes ago, TattleTeeny said:

You’re supposed to rinse the period underwear separately first and then wash them. At the risk of TMI, they work well (and should for what they cost!). I was hesitant at first but some allergy issues where no one wants allergy issues kind of got me past that! Can bring a chick never be simple, man?!

The thought of having allergy reaction where no one wants one is just, YIKES!

[TattleTeeny]

Haha, I am one of those fun people who gets new skin allergies out of nowhere! So far, so good lately, but who knows what’s next?

[Gramto6]

1 hour ago, TattleTeeny said:

You’re supposed to rinse the period underwear separately first and then wash them. At the risk of TMI, they work well (and should for what they cost!). I was hesitant at first but some allergy issues where no one wants allergy issues kind of got me past that! Can bring a chick never be simple, man?!

Yeah, not being a chick is never easy and that sounds like something that I really never want to say. Sorry , I'd rather throw a pad/tampon in the trash with its wrapper. Haven't had a period since my hysterectomy in 1995.  Sorry, not sorry but these panties just gross me out...

Edited May 19, 2021 by Gramto6

[Bastet]

I don't know why the underwear would be gross if a pad is not.  (I don't like pads, so I'm not interested in the panties, but I sure like the reducing waste idea).

If it's the Thinx commercial I've seen that's being discussed, I like it.  It's long past time we stopped playing coy and cutesy in advertising such products.

[susannah]

46 minutes ago, Bastet said:

I don't know why the underwear would be gross if a pad is not.  (I don't like pads, so I'm not interested in the panties, but I sure like the reducing waste idea).

For me, it is because you don't wash disposable pads. Plus if you have to change the panties every couple of hours as needed, you would have to have alot of them, and what would you do if you were away from home or at work or something and had to change, would you have to carry the used pair around?

[Yeah No]

12 hours ago, Gramto6 said:

OK for the last couple of days I have been seeing a Hanes ad for men's underwear that totally grosses me out. The guy is touting the underwear that separates and supports basically "his balls" he poses and spreads his legs, rides a bull to show how everything is "contained". They are called "Balance" but pronounce it more like "Ball ance" egad! 

I just saw that commercial yesterday and was going to post about it, LOL.  Just gross.  I really think they're intentionally trying to gross people out.

12 hours ago, Gramto6 said:

My interpretation was they were showing the garbage with plastic wrappers etc. and saying with these machine washable panties you don't need to have all that extra waste materials. I'll pay more attention next time I see it. No fricking way in heck I would put  those panties in my wash! When I did have periods they were very heavy. What is the greater pollution, some pads and plastic wraps in the garbage or running the washing machine for 3-5 pairs of panties...Someone didn't think this through all the way...

Yes, I saw that commercial, I thought that was what they were saying too.  The panties themselves are the pad and the pad is not removable, you just wash the panties to reuse them. 

"Aunt Flo" was heavy for me too, especially in the last decade of it so just no to that.  Not even after rinsing them out.  What about the blood mixing in with the rest of the laundry?  Uh-uh, would never do that.  And doing a bunch of them separately would mean waiting a week or so and having heavily soiled, wet from rinsing panties hanging around somewhere (where would you put them?).   And rinsing them out where?  In a slop sink?  I don't have one and I wouldn't use my bathroom sink or especially not the kitchen sink for that purpose.  It was bad enough having to do it for the occasional leaks but an entire soiled panty?  Ugh.  Plus I can't believe that they are constructed to prevent leaks from getting on your clothing.  It just looks like the crotch area of the panty is a little thicker but there's a reason period pads are shaped and contoured - to prevent leaks.  But they bank on people not thinking that far and ordering them anyway.  Obviously someone must think this is a good idea or they would never be able to afford a commercial like that.

Of course they didn't think this out, but this is the kind of ridiculous idea that passes today.  I don't know what that says about our society, but it's not good.  If this is the kind of "great" idea or "improvement" that people think they're contributing to society, we're in trouble.  Yes, it looks like it saves energy, but in the long run, how much?  That's a lot of rinsing and extra laundry done.  Plus more cleaning if you have to handle bloody panties in a sink.  Plus a lot of extra work for women who don't need more work.  I still say that if men had periods tampons and pads would be tax deductible.  

Edited May 19, 2021 by Yeah No

[TattleTeeny]

That was the mindset that convinced me, @Bastet—both methods are...”collecting the evidence”! And ultimately, the former felt “cleaner” during the day than the latter. That said, I’ve always been a “low volume” kind of girl, so I’m not sure how secure I’d feel if that wasn’t the case (I’m trying not to get graphic here—though I’m not sure why! We say all sorts of things here). Either way, I am glad I tried them!

[Yeah No]

20 minutes ago, TattleTeeny said:

That was the mindset that convinced me, @Bastet—both methods are...”collecting the evidence”! And ultimately, the former felt “cleaner” during the day than the latter. That said, I’ve always been a “low volume” kind of girl, so I’m not sure how secure I’d feel if that wasn’t the case (I’m trying not to get graphic here—though I’m not sure why! We say all sorts of things here). Either way, I am glad I tried them!

I think they might not be so bad for women with lighter periods or on light days but not other than that (trying not to be graphic either).

[susannah]

3 hours ago, Yeah No said:

I just saw that commercial yesterday and was going to post about it, LOL.  Just gross.  I really think they're intentionally trying to gross people out.

Yes, I saw that commercial, I thought that was what they were saying too.  The panties themselves are the pad and the pad is not removable, you just wash the panties to reuse them. 

"Aunt Flo" was heavy for me too, especially in the last decade of it so just no to that.  Not even after rinsing them out.  What about the blood mixing in with the rest of the laundry?  Uh-uh, would never do that.  And doing a bunch of them separately would mean waiting a week or so and having heavily soiled, wet from rinsing panties hanging around somewhere (where would you put them?).   And rinsing them out where?  In a slop sink?  I don't have one and I wouldn't use my bathroom sink or especially not the kitchen sink for that purpose.  It was bad enough having to do it for the occasional leaks but an entire soiled panty?  Ugh.  Plus I can't believe that they are constructed to prevent leaks from getting on your clothing.  It just looks like the crotch area of the panty is a little thicker but there's a reason period pads are shaped and contoured - to prevent leaks.  But they bank on people not thinking that far and ordering them anyway.  Obviously someone must think this is a good idea or they would never be able to afford a commercial like that.

Of course they didn't think this out, but this is the kind of ridiculous idea that passes today.  I don't know what that says about our society, but it's not good.  If this is the kind of "great" idea or "improvement" that people think they're contributing to society, we're in trouble.  Yes, it looks like it saves energy, but in the long run, how much?  That's a lot of rinsing and extra laundry done.  Plus more cleaning if you have to handle bloody panties in a sink.  Plus a lot of extra work for women who don't need more work.  I still say that if men had periods tampons and pads would be tax deductible.  

This, x100!  Very well said. Plus, besides all the reasons you mentioned, you'd have to have a bunch of pairs and I don't even know how much that would cost, I haven't seen the ad, but it would be an extra expense for people who don't need an extra expense. I don't know why they can't make a panty made of some kind of leakproof fiber that women could wear just with whatever product they use or even over their regular underwear if they wanted to, washable but not like this product, just to have peace of mind during periods that clothes and sheets are protected. It doesn't exist because it is not men's problem?

3 hours ago, TattleTeeny said:

That was the mindset that convinced me, @Bastet—both methods are...”collecting the evidence”! And ultimately, the former felt “cleaner” during the day than the latter. That said, I’ve always been a “low volume” kind of girl, so I’m not sure how secure I’d feel if that wasn’t the case (I’m trying not to get graphic here—though I’m not sure why! We say all sorts of things here). Either way, I am glad I tried them!

Are they expensive, and how do they do different sizes? I haven't seen them.

[TattleTeeny]

30 minutes ago, susannah said:

This, x100!  Very well said. Plus, besides all the reasons you mentioned, you'd have to have a bunch of pairs and I don't even know how much that would cost, I haven't seen the ad, but it would be an extra expense for people who don't need an extra expense. I don't know why they can't make a panty made of some kind of leakproof fiber that women could wear just with whatever product they use or even over their regular underwear if they wanted to, washable but not like this product, just to have peace of mind during periods that clothes and sheets are protected. It doesn't exist because it is not men's problem?

Are they expensive, and how do they do different sizes? I haven't seen them.

It's all on the Thinx website. But a warning--once that company has your email, oh my goodness, they will communicate like madmen (though not as bad as some of the online glasses places; like how often do you think I need new glasses anyway?!). It's too much, haha!

I did not find there to be more laundry than usual; why would there be, unless one wore underwear only during that time of the month? And even so, would a bunch of underwear make that much of a difference per laundry load? I mean, everyone's gotta do what they gotta do, but I find this method way less "gross" than a trash can full of blood, ahahhahaaa!

Edited May 19, 2021 by TattleTeeny

[Ohiopirate02]

On 5/16/2021 at 1:18 PM, CrystalBlue said:

Speaking of termite inspections, I've been seeing a new Jake from State Farm ad where our intrepid agent is camping out with some guy named Russell who wood carved Jake's head into a knob of wood, snaps it off and gives it to him.

I hate that commercial.  If you cannot get Nick Offerman to reprise his role of Ron Swanson, please do not create a substitute.  Russell even talks like Ron.  

[proserpina65]

16 hours ago, susannah said:

I may have misinterpreted that ad but I thought the period panties were for extra protection, in addition to tampon or pad, to protect your clothes, not in place of.

According to their website, the underwear is intended to be used as a substitute for pads, etc., but I've read that they don't work as well as the company claims so a lot of women who use them do use them as extra protection.

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I searched it, and period panties are a replacement for tampons, or pads.  In fact, the pads aren't supposed to be used with the panties.       

That would never have worked when I was still having periods.  I had some days/nights when it was like Niagara Falls and those underwear would not have prevented leaks.  It's a nice idea but the execution is lacking.  As for washing them, I guess you can rinse them out before putting them in the washer, but given that it's not just blood, that's a big NO for me.  The commercials are not offensive to me, but I'd rather not see them and avoid them when I can.

12 hours ago, Bastet said:

I don't know why the underwear would be gross if a pad is not. 

For me, it's because I just wrapped the pads up and tossed them.  Having to mess around with rinsing bloody underwear was simply something I'd never have done.  So glad I don't have to worry about it anymore, because yes, being a woman is never simple.

That Colace commercial is indeed awful.  I don't really need constipation explained to me quite that graphically, thank you very much.

[TattleTeeny]

I have no dog in this game — and ladies need to do what they need to do, especially when dealing with periods — but I can attest to the easiness of cleaning and the lack of leaks and various other discomforts associated with traditional methods. And had there been a need to switch ‘em out throughout a typical workday (back when I went to an office, that is), it would have been a hearty hell no from me from the get-go! Oy vey, that would be where I drew the line!

[PrincessPurrsALot]

Folks, We are yet again wandering far from commercials.  Please take any further talk about periods and assessment of feminine hygiene products to Small Talk.  The talk really flows in Small Talk.  

[Kemper]

I just saw that underwear commercial with Kim Kardashian.  After all the “feminine products” ads that have been on; the tastelessness, sexism and crassness of so many regular commercials...I didn’t think any commercial would have the ability to actually offend or anger me.  But here we are.  Her snapping at the “waistline” of the panties..the practiced pout...the just plain overt, practiced sexiness.  I can see men loving this.  But they are not the ones buying this underwear...so other than shock value, how effective are the K sister ads in relation to product sales? This goes for the sister who does the sexy, pouty migraine prescription ads.  

 

[peacheslatour]

11 minutes ago, Kemper said:

I just saw that underwear commercial with Kim Kardashian.  After all the “feminine products” ads that have been on; the tastelessness, sexism and crassness of so many regular commercials...I didn’t think any commercial would have the ability to actually offend or anger me.  But here we are.  Her snapping at the “waistline” of the panties..the practiced pout...the just plain overt, practiced sexiness.  I can see men loving this.  But they are not the ones buying this underwear...so other than shock value, how effective are the K sister ads in relation to product sales? This goes for the sister who does the sexy, pouty migraine prescription ads.  

 

I hate what no talent "famous for being famous" type people are doing to the collective intellect of this country.

[dleighg]

17 minutes ago, Kemper said:

just saw that underwear commercial with Kim Kardashian.

I looked it up. I for one do not believe she "never wore underwear." Isn't that the whole point of push-up bras etc? And personally, not wearing underwear is, ick.

[Yeah No]

On 5/19/2021 at 1:12 PM, proserpina65 said:

According to their website, the underwear is intended to be used as a substitute for pads, etc., but I've read that they don't work as well as the company claims so a lot of women who use them do use them as extra protection.

This is the problem I have with such commercials.  Claims that don't match up to reality.  At least they should specify that it may not work all by itself for some women who might need more protection, but no of course they wouldn't do that.  I wouldn't mind using them as a backup with extra protection but not all by themselves so why can't they just say that it can be used that way if necessary?  I think it would make a few women who are hesitant about the product see another way it can be useful for them.

Speaking of claims that don't match up to reality, I am currently cheesed off about a Special K Red Berries commercial that shows the bowl bursting with strawberries, meanwhile the last two boxes I have purchased have had maybe 2 strawberries per bowl in them.  And that's no exaggeration.  I hadn't bought the product in a few years until a month ago.  I gave it some slack when my first box  had very few strawberries in it, figuring I may have just gotten a bad box.  But it's the exact same thing with my second box.  They used to give you more.  And it's misleading advertising.  I am going to send the company a note about that.  What is happening to quality control lately?  This is far from the first time I've had similar quality issues with products since the pandemic.  Like Baked Ruffles with no ridges at all, just very faint lines you can't even feel.  The company actually thanked me for letting them know about the issue and is going to send me some coupons, LOL.  I guess I'm becoming that cranky old "Karen" or whatever, LOL.  🙄

 

 

Edited May 20, 2021 by Yeah No

[friendperidot]

I'm thoroughly annoyed at any of the K peoples ads. I agree with annoyance at famous for being famous, that's as bad as "influencers". Which, come to think of it, they are probably the first influencers. It's such a stupid concept and word.

[chenoa333]

I'm sure this has been mentioned but I just have to vent my red hot hate for the Cox cable commercial. It's a women in her 50's(?) singing some stupid kids song:

"A Too de Ta A Too de Ta A Too de Ta ta" 

Once you hear this stupid "song" it sticks in your head so BEWARE

[susannah]

1 hour ago, Kemper said:

I just saw that underwear commercial with Kim Kardashian.  After all the “feminine products” ads that have been on; the tastelessness, sexism and crassness of so many regular commercials...I didn’t think any commercial would have the ability to actually offend or anger me.  But here we are.  Her snapping at the “waistline” of the panties..the practiced pout...the just plain overt, practiced sexiness.  I can see men loving this.  But they are not the ones buying this underwear...so other than shock value, how effective are the K sister ads in relation to product sales? This goes for the sister who does the sexy, pouty migraine prescription ads.  

 

I guess they would be for women who are deluded enough to think that they can be sexy like KK if they buy the product.

[Maverick]

2 hours ago, Kemper said:

I just saw that underwear commercial with Kim Kardashian.  After all the “feminine products” ads that have been on; the tastelessness, sexism and crassness of so many regular commercials...I didn’t think any commercial would have the ability to actually offend or anger me.  But here we are.  Her snapping at the “waistline” of the panties..the practiced pout...the just plain overt, practiced sexiness.  I can see men loving this.  But they are not the ones buying this underwear...so other than shock value, how effective are the K sister ads in relation to product sales? This goes for the sister who does the sexy, pouty migraine prescription ads.  

 

  I remember hearing that a large (if not the largest) portion of Victoria's Secret customer bases is men.   They buy it for their wives/girlfriends/mistresses/booty calls.   If you see a VS commercial about how comfortable their product is, it's for the women.  If you see one that is all about how hot the model looks it...it's for the boys.

 

1 hour ago, Yeah No said:

This is the problem I have with such commercials.  Claims that don't match up to reality.  At least they should specify that it may not work all by itself for some women who might need more protection, but no of course they wouldn't do that.  I wouldn't mind using them as a backup with extra protection but not all by themselves so why can't they just say that it can be used that way if necessary?  I think it would make a few women who are hesitant about the product see another way it can be useful for them.

Speaking of claims that don't match up to reality, I am currently cheesed off about a Special K Red Berries commercial that shows the bowl bursting with strawberries, meanwhile the last two boxes I have purchased have had maybe 2 strawberries per bowl in them.  And that's no exaggeration.  I hadn't bought the product in a few years until a month ago.  I gave it some slack when my first box  had very few strawberries in it, figuring I may have just gotten a bad box.  But it's the exact same thing with my second box.  They used to give you more.  And it's misleading advertising.  I am going to send the company a note about that.  What is happening to quality control lately?  This is far from the first time I've had similar quality issues with products since the pandemic.  Like Baked Ruffles with no ridges at all, just very faint lines you can't even feel.  The company actually thanked me for letting them know about the issue and is going to send me some coupons, LOL.  I guess I'm becoming that cranky old "Karen" or whatever, LOL.  🙄

 

 

 It's not quality control; it's that way by design.  Reducing higher value components, decreased quality, reducing the package size, inferior packaging.   It's all designed to shave a few fractions of a cent of each unit a little at a time.

53 minutes ago, friendperidot said:

I'm thoroughly annoyed at any of the K peoples ads. I agree with annoyance at famous for being famous, that's as bad as "influencers". Which, come to think of it, they are probably the first influencers. It's such a stupid concept and word.

 It is a stupid word, but it's not a new concept.  This used to be called being a "Trendsetter".  

[nokat]

On 5/19/2021 at 5:32 AM, Yeah No said:

I just saw that commercial yesterday and was going to post about it, LOL.  Just gross.  I really think they're intentionally trying to gross people out.

That reminds me of Kramer on Seinfeld getting told his swimmers would be better off if he wore boxers. He decided to not wear anything and Elaine and Jerry were cringing at only one layer of fabric between them and it.

[chenoa333]

2 hours ago, susannah said:

I guess they would be for women who are deluded enough to think that they can be sexy like KK if they buy the product.

Do those KK underwear have extra room for a large caboose? 

[susannah]

1 minute ago, chenoa333 said:

Do those KK underwear have extra room for a large caboose? 

I should have made clear that I do NOT think any Kardashian/Jenner or anyone that they associate with is sexy!

[shapeshifter]

I really hate this commercial with the singing hood ornament that claims switching to a less expensive car insurance is going to “make lots of money.”

I hate it because even though I assume the singing hood ornament was a COVID work around, it’s one of those bad ideas that should never have become part of an expensive commercial, IMO.

And I hate it because “saving” money is not the same as “making” money. But maybe I’m just being cranky because of the singing hood ornament.

Oh. And BTW, in an accident in a convertible, no insurance is going to save your life.

 

[Haleth]

She (the hood ornament*) is actually growing on my despite seeing that commercial for months.  She's so joyful in her singing and certainly is enjoying the trip.  She still looks like an alien though.

(*Just wanted to make sure it was understood I was talking about the hood ornament and not any Kardashian, although they can be mistaken for aliens at times too.)

[susannah]

2 minutes ago, Haleth said:

She (the hood ornament*) is actually growing on my despite seeing that commercial for months.  She's so joyful in her singing and certainly is enjoying the trip.  She still looks like an alien though.

(*Just wanted to make sure it was understood I was talking about the hood ornament and not any Kardashian, although they can be mistaken for aliens at times too.)

I was just thinking tonight after seeing the ad again that the hood ornament creeps me out, plus, a female as an ornament on a guy's car? Also really don't like the one with the guy chasing a woman around the house, is it a Kardashian? for eating his Cheetos!

[Yeah No]

12 hours ago, Maverick said:

 It's not quality control; it's that way by design.  Reducing higher value components, decreased quality, reducing the package size, inferior packaging.   It's all designed to shave a few fractions of a cent of each unit a little at a time.

The Ruffles people assured me that their product should have noticeable ridges when you eat them and told me they would pass my concern along to quality control.  Are they lying about that?  I don't know.  I can't imagine that in anyone's universe completely ridge-less Ruffles would be intentional, but in this upside down universe we're living in right now I guess it's possible.   I agree with you that a lot of this stuff is by design like the skimpy strawberries.  I haven't heard back from Kellogg's yet about that.  It should be interesting to see if they pass that off as a quality control issue.  It could be - things have been a little wonky with a lot of stuff since the pandemic so we'll see.

The downsizing issue has been one of my pet peeves for a long time, which is one of the reasons why I follow that blog I posted a couple of weeks ago called "Mouseprint".  Edgar Dworsky is a lawyer that posts about false claims in advertising every week and one of his twice yearly roundups involves the sneaky shrinking of products while keeping the price the same or actually increasing the price while claiming to give you more product!

[shapeshifter]

46 minutes ago, susannah said:

plus, a female as an ornament on a guy's car?

Yeah, that too. I just keep imagining the Zoom meeting where they discussed how to change the original concept of 2 people in the car sitting close together singing, and it seems like for what they got paid, they could have done better.

[peacheslatour]

2 hours ago, susannah said:

I was just thinking tonight after seeing the ad again that the hood ornament creeps me out, plus, a female as an ornament on a guy's car? Also really don't like the one with the guy chasing a woman around the house, is it a Kardashian? for eating his Cheetos!

It's Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis. They are married. They used to be on That Seventies Show. That's all I know.

[susannah]

6 minutes ago, peacheslatour said:

It's Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis. They are married. They used to be on That Seventies Show. That's all I know.

There must be more than one similar ad. The one I'm referring to has a black man and a black haired woman and she is hiding from him while eating Cheetos.

[rcc]

5 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

I really hate this commercial with the singing hood ornament that claims switching to a less expensive car insurance is going to “make lots of money.”

I hate it because even though I assume the singing hood ornament was a COVID work around, it’s one of those bad ideas that should never have become part of an expensive commercial, IMO.

And I hate it because “saving” money is not the same as “making” money. But maybe I’m just being cranky because of the singing hood ornament.

Oh. And BTW, in an accident in a convertible, no insurance is going to save your life.

 

So do I. I can't think of a commercial I hate more.