What's the message of this ad? "Say yes to more debt- and respond to the extension of credit by doing a stupid dance as if you've just won something valuable!"
Some people wear their hearts on their sleeves. The actors in NetCredit commercials wear their FICA scores on their t-shirts. And those scores are not Exceptional. They are in the "Fair" range. If they are being approved for loans, those interest rates are high- but let's ignore that, because all that really matters is that NetCredit is going to let you spend some more. In real life, this is not good news. In NetCredit ads, the actors celebrate because they have the opportunity to dig that debt hole just a little bit deeper.
Isn't that a baby stroller? That kid is in trouble. He chose his parents wrong. His parents are frivolous morons.
And I'm not even talking about the AI-generated "actors" being used to sell this life-ruining addiction. I'm talking about the actual concept of "Futures Markets."
What's fake? The idea that gambling is the road to financial security, let alone "innocent fun" that adds "adventure" to watching sports. Unless financial stress is fun. Unless being suddenly unable to pay bills is fun. Unless being addicted to constant doses of dopamine generated by taking one stupid risk after another is fun.
None of this is real, but all of it is currently dominating commercial television, especially during any sports coverage. ESPN's funding is coming almost exclusively from gambling (and yes, "futures markets" is GAMBLING.) At this point, I'm not even sure that sports coverage would even exist without the billions of dollars in ad revenue from online gambling. Pre-game shows certainly would not exist; they are nothing more than long-form commercials for gambling apps.
Some of you are in big trouble, and I really hope that you manage to see that 1-800-Gambling notice on your screens and use it to get help. Because none of this is real, and all of it is dangerous.
A group of old, rugged veteran fishermen are entertaining themselves with stories of conquests on the sea when they are interrupted by a twerp who regales them with the tale of how he made a lot of money sitting on his ass, staring at his phone. The fishermen were out in nature's fury, risking the elements. The twerp was sitting at a bar, risking his rent money.
And he won so much, he's treating the entire place to breakfast. Well, that's something, I guess. It still doesn't dissuade me from my belief that society has gone to hell in a handbasket and there's no bringing it back.
You know, I imagine winning a lot of money on a bet is probably pretty "thrilling." Of course, as in every case where the possibility of a thrill is involved, a required ingredient is the possibility of massive, horrific failure. Overcoming the odds, surviving the danger- that's where the thrill comes from, or it doesn't exist.
For every gambler who enjoys the thrill of winning money, a hundred experience the other emotion- depression and guilt at once again giving in to an addiction and throwing away money they simply could not afford to lose. (And don't come at me with "most people only gamble money they can afford to lose, and FanDuel, etc. actually provide public service blurbs in tiny handwriting reminding people only to gamble what they can afford to lose. Gambling money that doesn't mean anything to you is like experiencing the kiddie ride at your local amusement park. No risk felt= no chance for a thrill. You can't have it both ways.)
And by using the nonsense phrase "Thrillionaire," FanDuel is trying to sell the idea that you can actually become quite rich with this Just for Fun Harmless Amusement involving risking your hard-earned money (but only an amount you can afford to lose, not that you'll lose because come on don't you believe in yourself and your destiny to be a Thrillionaire?) They give us a goofy scene where people are being goofy and which resembles that forementioned amusement park because look a guy is riding around in a bumper car. He's just being a kid playing a game- a game that involves risk, and that feeds a life-destroying addiction, but take a chill pill look how much fun he's having!
I'll continue to pass. I work too hard and, oddly enough, I manage to enjoy sports even without putting cash at risk. I'm weird that way.
It was during my first year as a scorer of APUSH essays in 2008 that I really fell in love with Minor League Baseball. That year- and for seven more years afterwards- the scoring was in the Kentucky Convention Center in Louisville, and at least three evenings during the week of grading I would wander down the River Walk and drop $5 to watch a few innings of the Bats v. the Lehigh Valley Iron Pigs, the Toledo Mud Hens, the Pawtucket Red Sox, etc. The atmosphere was (almost) always great and they even welcomed us Readers on the scoreboard. Perfect way to unwind after eight hours of scoring essays.
But every once in a while, one of those beautiful nights at Bats Stadium included the unctuous "Bark at the Park" ritual. Not being a dog owner, I'm never going to appreciate the attraction of taking a dog to a baseball game. And it didn't help that the food special was $1 hot dogs because they were (yuck) boiled, which should be a war crime.
*As I prepare for a third straight year in Kansas City- where, again, the Royals will be on the road and there is no minor league team available to spend an evening enjoying- ChatGBT is giving me a glimmer of hope, predicting that after a decade of exile we APUSH Readers may well be welcomed back to Louisville in 2027. If that's really a possibility, I take back anything bad I've ever said about Bark at the Park. I'll put up with the dogs if I can get the Bats back.
I have one goal in life, and it's to be half as happy about anything as this woman is about carrying frozen desserts fifteen feet to place in front of customers too damn lazy and entitled to just pick it up themselves despite the booth being managed by exactly one person.
Seriously, I can't be the only person who wants to slap that stupid grin off that stupid face. Get over yourself, lady. You're a grown woman serving flavored ice at a swimming pool. There's no way you thought that this is what you were going to be doing ten years ago, when you were a Medieval Art Major at State University.
Know how sometimes you can just read the thumbnail and accurately predict what the majority of comments will focus on? That never works better than with with videos listing banned toys.
Every single time I check out one of these videos listing toys that were briefly popular in the 1960s and 70s but were finally banned because they maimed or murdered children, I know I can scroll down through the comments and read an endless barrage of "I had one of these and turned out fine," "Stupid kids ruined this for everyone," and "woke helicopter parents raise soft kids today" rants. One Boomer after another waxing poetic about how he used to throw Lawn Jarts, have BB-gun wars with neighbors, set off M-80s to add a little adventure to his Green Army Men battles and- of course- drink out of the garden hose because that's what Every Single Person Above the Age of 60 Remembers Better Than Anything Else.
And of course they did all this with No Parental Supervision Whatsoever- hell, most of them grew up with out parents at all. They walked miles to school every day and were never accosted, molested, or otherwise bothered by passing strangers because they didn't exist. They rode bikes without helmets because helmets are Totally Woke and crashed all the time and as previously mentioned, they turned out Just Fine.* And I strongly suspect that they lament the days before seatbelts ruined the traveling experience and turned the Later, Lesser Generations into Pathetic Crystal Snowflakes who Demand Participation Trophies.
If these posters were honest, they'd admit that they don't really miss those stupid dangerous toys (some of which I actually possessed at some point- I especially remember my Creepy Thing Maker and burning my fingers on the hot wax from time to time.) They just miss being young- so much so that they fail to notice- or are unwilling to concede- that kids today are far better off living in a society that doesn't pitch dangerous "fun" activities to parents. Seatbelts, bike helmets, and toys that don't send spikes into our heads or missiles into our mouth don't diminish childhood. The cartoons are infinitely better too- people my age grew up with characters who seemed more interested in inflicting pain on each other- Tom and Jerry, Bugs and Daffy, Sylvester and Tweety, Road Runner and Coyote- than having fun. Today's kids have Bluey, Paw Patrol, Big City Greens, Spidey and Friends, Pupstruction, etc. etc. etc.- each of which tell good stories with healthy, positive messages (which these Boomers, I'm sure, consider both Woke and Gay.)
*did they really grow up "just fine?" I mean, they are constantly ranting about kids today growing up encased in bubble-wrap and pumping their chests about how much Tougher today's older people are because they were "allowed" to grow up feral and basically raise themselves. I don't think there's anything particularly healthy about people my age complaining that kids aren't getting hurt as much today as they did Back in the Good Old Days.
It's downright frightening to think that, considering an Uber One subscription costs $10 a month, there are people out there who actually use Uber and Uber Eats so often that it may actually pay for itself. Personally- and being someone who actually lives within his means- I find Uber Eats to be the most shocking opportunity to burn money since someone decided to invent Bottled Water.
But there's something even scarier about Uber One (yes, even scarier than the concept of paying $120 per year for small discounts on cold meals already marked up to the stratosphere.) And that is the $5 per month "student option." Because if anyone needs a cold hamburger and fries delivered to their front door for $25 more than I do, it's a student, right?
And I'm not even going to get into the comments under this video. Enough Scary for one day.
I went through this - well, I can only describe it as an "Ordeal"- three times in an attempt to understand the point of it all, and I just get more confused with each viewing:
At first, I thought that this woman is just doing what so many women in fabric softener/detergent/air freshener commercials do: Celebrating the absolute joy that comes with using a product that results in soft clothes and (especially) a fresh scent. I think it's been a theme of detergent ads since the 1950s that it's possible to fall madly in love with clean, soft clothes to the point where it's the highlight of any suburban prince or princess's day to jam one's nose into the laundry.
This theory seemed to be confirmed by Dad's "your mother really loves Downy" remark to Son. Both members of the house are taking this in stride; while they are watching tv or whatever mom is dancing about the house singing her own version of Total Eclipse of the Heart and having her own idea of a wild time. Whatever floats her boat and at least she's not complaining about doing laundry.
But then she throws dad's shorts into his face and tells him "honey, please do your own laundry..." um, say what? If that's their kid, these people have been together for quite some time. What is this guy doing with his shorts that convinced her to suddenly announce that she's no longer going to be doing the laundry we have to presume she's been doing for a decade or more? What else is she not going to be doing? Also, the indications were that she enjoyed doing laundry. What happened? Do I even want to know?
And how is Dad going to react to this? Certainly by this stage in the relationship, the family has settled into a routine and everyone knows what chores they are responsible for. Now mom has changed that up- again, WHY exactly? And what does "rinse it out" even mean? Is this an alternative to actually washing Dad's shorts? If so, where is he supposed to "rinse them out?"
Excuse me for saying so, but Dad should just toss the shorts back to his wife and reply "um, no. There's no 'my shorts,' 'your shorts' and 'the kids' shorts.' There's just OUR SHORTS- and OUR CLOTHES. When any item of clothing is in the hamper, just put it along with the rest of the clothes in the washing machine, please. And when it comes out of the dryer, feel free to do a little dance if that's what flips your skirt- but please don't throw clothes into my face and make demands in front of our kid again. I told our son that you love Downy, not that you're a lunatic I stay with because this is California and I don't want to lose half my income in a divorce settlement. You could at least reciprocate by not emasculating me in front of him."
Fact is, the "controversy" over an entirely AI-produced ad is of zero interest to me. I couldn't care less if the people peddling this awful gambling app loophole are actual sad examples of American Idiots or AI-generated ones.
The point is still the same: Kalshi is just gambling wearing regulation-proof clothing. "Futures Markets" have a certain level of legitimacy because they've been around forever (although, as I posted the last time I looked at Kalshi, the bucket shops they originated in were banned in New York more than a hundred years ago.) But whatever you call it, this is just making everything you can imagine an opportunity to lose your money to a life-destroying addiction. That's what we should be talking about here. Not AI. Don't give a damn about the AI.
Don't give a damn about Disney's role in this, either. The Mouse wrecked Star Wars, no real surprise it's in the process of helping to wreck the rest of society now.
"Whatever's under this sheet, we can be sure of one thing: It's not a part covered by Car Shield, so no matter how much the owner paid, this is not a covered repair."
"Ok, let's take a look at it anyway. We have to wrap this up so we can get our paychecks before Car Shield has to deal with another Class Action Lawsuit."
(quick peek)
"Oh my god! It's our CAREERS!"
"Um, you didn't know they were dead already? What the hell do you think we're doing in commercials for a scam car warranty company? You think Ernie Hudson and Danika Patrick are A-listers too?"
"I don't know. Are we done now? I have to return a call from my agent, something about an audition with the Medicare Coverage Helpline."
First, there's the quaint notion of a $149-per-month lease deal. Remember when those were a thing? The only time in my life I ever leased a car, from 2006 to 2009, I paid $350 a month. And that was for a 2-door Civic Coupe. Sure, there was virtually nothing to pay on it when I took ownership at the end of the lease, but still.
Second, there's the idea that all of these people are instantly smitten with the idea of leasing a freaking KIA for multiple years. I'll admit that the only way I'd ever drive a KIA is through a lease deal, because these things are nothing but headaches and they depreciate in value faster than- well, faster than an ice cream cone melts in the sun.
Third, this ad works a lot better if it ends with all of these zombies just following that truck off a damn cliff. I can't think of any more accurate way to describe the feeling of actually being stuck making payments on a (still, at $149 a month and $2 k down) overpriced piece of junk like a KIA Soul. Better than spending three years regularly being reminded that you are going to pay $7400 to drive around in a pile of crap you will just give back in 36 months because even you aren't dumb enough to hand over another $10k for a car with a Kelly Blue Book Value of maybe half that at the end of the term. Unless you really are an April (and every other month of the year) Fool.
Is it just me, or is there actual NEGATIVE chemistry between this woman, the adult male and the child in this ad? No matter how many times I've seen this commercial all the way through, all I see is a strange woman who decided to show up at a baseball game and latch herself to a noticeably single man and his son for the duration of the day.
I'm serious. This woman does NOT interact with the kid like she knows anything about him, but is trying very hard to cosplay (or audition for the role of) being his Mom. If possible, there is even less warmth between her and the guy. It looks for all the world like the guy and his son are just being polite to this sad woman who showed up at a ball game all by herself and decided to start hanging out with them- near the concessions, in the stands....maybe all the way out to the parking lot after the game...until finally dad- who had his finger on the Emergency Button of his phone for the walk from the bleachers to the car- was able to get his son buckled and himself in the car with the door locked before giving Crazy Woman a quick "well nice meeting you bye" and leaving the lot at the Fastest Speed Allowed by Decency and Safety Standards.
On the way home, Dad and Son have an awkward laugh about the experience and discuss whether Mom should be told about it when Dad drops Son off at Mom's house before 6 PM tonight, as stipulated by the court. And they agree that if Crazy Woman Shows up at the next game, Dad politely announces that he and the child will be Sitting Over There Now No Do Not Follow Us.
I get it. I've been through two colonoscopies. They are not pleasant experiences. I mean, the actual process is barely an experience at all. The prep is what is pretty much the opposite of pleasant.
Still, it's covered by health insurance and it's hard to exaggerate how important it is. That being said, I am plenty sick of these commercials featuring obviously well-off people with plenty of time on their hands being so damn comfortable cutting corners on a test that could literally add years to your life if it results in early detection.
You just know the target audience for Colon Guard are the same people who will think nothing of binge-watching Netflix or binge-scrolling Tiktok or dropping hundreds of dollars on a concert or trip to a local amusement park for the family.....but when it comes to doing a freaking cancer screening, NOW you're concerned about the cost in time and money? Please.
I bet you can get a deep discount on slightly-damaged parachutes, too. What the hell is going on here? When it's time for a colonoscopy GET IT DONE IN A SPECIALIST'S OFFICE YOU RIDICULOUS KNOBS. What's next, do-it-yourself dentistry? Wait...what? That's an actual thing too?
and I'm sure not sleeping like the way I did before
I think it's aaaaaaaaaaaaallergies
I hate these aaaaaaaaaaaalergies
these commercials make it look like magic's in the air
instead of pollen, grass and don't forget all that nasty old pet hair
I hate my aaaaaaaaaaaaaaalergies
G-d- these aaaaaaaaaaaaaalergies
Well it's not magic, you can't just pop one and then go about your day
the symptoms will continue till you think you'll go insane
because they're aaaaaaaaaalergies
we all hate aaaaaaaaaaaaaalergies
Ok, that's enough of that.
It's bad enough that all of these ads- for Claritin, Allegra, Benadryl, Nyquil, Dayquil, etc. all pitch the idea that you are one dose away from being completely free of symptoms and ready to tackle the world- or play with a puppy, though for the life of me I can't understand why anyone would want to do either. Here in the real world, medication is sold in multi-dose packages because it takes days of treatment to feel any relief at all. And if you're going to roll around on the grass and stick your nose into a damn puppy's fur, there's probably not enough dosage out there to really save you from yourself anyway. At least when I got my severe attack last weekend it was because it was 80 degrees and sunny and I took a walk. I didn't lick any trees or shove grass clippings up my nose, daring an immune response. Christ what is it with these people? We don't see people on insulin celebrating having their blood sugar under control by consuming entire sheet cakes. Why do we see allergy sufferers rolling around in pollen snorting puppies? Stupid. At least as stupid as my "song."
1. I can see why this woman wants to eat her cereal in the massive living room of her massive house and not the kitchen. But why did she bring the box in with her?
2. More, why did she bring a brand-new, unopened box in with her when there's already cereal in her bowl?
3. I get that the dialogue is supposed to (however clunkily) connect to the song, but who the hell "talks to their heart" about cereal? Is she "talking" to her heart by providing her body "heart-healthy" nutrients? I suppose, but if that's the case, I think the message she's sending is "I really care for you, heart, but not enough to avoid sugar and eat an actual breakfast that isn't basically candy."
4. Other than her heart, who is she talking to? The box? Oh my god- the bee? Does she actually see that bee? Come to think of it, does she actually hear that music? Or is she just a lunatic eating a toddler's breakfast and doing a weird sitting dance from her couch?
5. "We are powerful?" Who is "we?" Oh my god- she DOES see that bee. Her next lines- when she stops having a mild fit on the couch- are "we ARE sane, and we do NOT need to sign those Power of Attorney papers, and the kids do NOT have to see to our financial affairs."
I am a fan of the New England Patriots, the Boston Red Sox, the Maryland Terrapins, and the Catholic University Cardinals. All that being said, neither I nor anybody in my family would take offense if the fan of an opposing team showed up wearing the colors of that team.*
The people in this ad act like members of a cult, and the first thought that crossed my mind when watching it was why didn't the girl warn her boyfriend in advance that her entire family were a bunch of intolerant loons who had taken a blood pledge to a college in North Carolina? My second thought was, why didn't Allstate go all out and push the envelope, portraying
....the reaction of a Sunni family to the boyfriend showing up wearing a yarmulke? Or
....the reaction of a Jehovah's Witness family to the boyfriend showing up with a birthday cake? Or
....the reaction to a Sane, Tolerant family to the boyfriend showing up wearing a MAGA hat?
But I keep going back to my original question: Did the girlfriend not know that her boyfriend went to Duke? Wouldn't that come up in a conversation at some point? Is this a Montague-Capulet deal? Why was the guy blindsided like this?
Also, isn't the No-Longer-Potential-Life-Partner-Because-He-Went-To-The-Wrong-School-in-NC far better off? I thought the families in the Dr. Pepper Fansville commercials were nuts. Oh wait- is this a crossover?
*Unless they show up wearing a Yankees cap. I mean, we all have limits.
I mean, it does such a great job aping the Lexus December to Remember ads that it could pass as a Saturday Night Live skit. As in, "Look- here's a sort-of kind-of if-you-squint-and-ignore-pretty-much
-everything, this looks like a Lexus no really."
And I'm almost glad that I live in a universe where people who aren't hedge fund managers can aspire to own a car that at least pretends to provide a...um...."luxury" experience. All you have to do is sign here and spend the next four years pretending that isn't a KIA logo on the front chrome and the steering wheel (again, squint really hard and MAYBE you can make it look like it's a Lexus.) Just put a red ribbon on it and stick it in the driveway and hope beyond hope that when the significant other you bought it for looks at it, the scene doesn't turn into a replay of George Costanza's gifting of a cashmere sweater. As in "oh it's beautiful, it's gorgeous, how could you possibly afford.....ewww, what's that? A KIA logo? Ooooh....well....it's still beautiful, really, I mean, thanks very much....um....you got the warranty, right?"
...so my take on it will match it's imaginative energy, if not the energy of it's main character.
Seriously, though- I've never in my life been as excited about anything as much as this guy is at the prospect of eating a mid-priced steak dinner at a chain restaurant. After being turned down for a job, yet. This guy should have been hired for his enthusiasm alone, except that if he's this fixated on Yet Another Night at Outback I doubt he's got a lot left for whatever the job is.
That's all I've got, except that I continue to be impressed at how over-the-top the reaction to going to Outback is for this guy. Imagine if he won a gift card to Ruth's Chris. I think he'd explode.
First, is the second woman at this table such an addict that the connection between her brain and her muscles simply fails if her blood sugar drops below a certain level? She looks as though she has no idea what she did with that glass or why she did it. I would be thinking epilepsy, not "let's get you another quick sugar fix." Does her friend carry candy around in her purse specifically for occasions like this?
Second, the woman who just had what I'll charitably refer to as an "episode" needs something other than a sugar hit. She needs a roll of absorbent paper towels so she can clean up her mess. Because, you know, it's her responsibility and if she walks out without at least offering she ought to be banned from the place.
Third...seriously, Mars? We're still doing this "you're not yourself when you're hungry" bit? It's almost twenty years old now. And it never made any sense. Sugar doesn't satisfy hunger. It stimulates it- besides leading to a lot of other health issues that DON'T result from a balanced diet. And I don't see how this commercial sells your product anyway. Personality-changing addiction is funny? Since when?
