Comments on: Billboards of Hate

By: Dr. Jim

Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:56:34 +0000

I say #3 is the worst. It really is a terribly unethical business to insult a previous customer whose “controversial” message Kegerreis was paid to advertise, and to use the controversy for their own self-righteous gain. The FFRF should sue their butts off. I think one can simply assume that an advertising company need not agree with every message or claim an advertiser makes. Yet, to call attention to the disagreement and then use it to advance your own business is really a bit of a sucker punch.

]]>

By: Colin

Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:32:10 +0000

I find the topmost one REALLY offensive!

It appears to be a rhetorical question, but is crazy! Do American’s really buy this shit? Are you all so lazy and spoon-fed by the media that you would believe in this? Still – I guess that the country professes to believe in a bunch of other made-up stories…

As to the last one of the three… I would digress from JamesBellthefirst – are Kegerreis really saying that they accepted the ad, took the money and then bowed to the money/pressure of a few zealots, then put up an even more offensive poster in it’s place? Did they refund the FFRF?? or COMPENSATE for DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER??? I think that it’s Kegerreis & ‘InGodWeTrust’ (I mean… please!!) who are clearly UNAMERICAN and breaking the constitution here!

]]>

By: jamesbellthefirst

Mon, 11 Feb 2008 04:18:26 +0000

The first one is pretty stupid. Actually, really, really stupid.
But the last one I think is entirely appropriate. If the company doesn’t want to support certain causes, then it’s entirely within their rights to do so.

]]>