You don't EVER spend millions, let alone hundreds of thousands of dollars on a campaign
First of all, you wrote that backwards.
Secondly, yes you do. You must not understand how corporations work. There is often little oversight and, when there is, it's often a bunch of people who don't care. Middle managers are worthless and they are the "oversight."
A lot of these things are hidden. A court document, a address to a doctor's office with a hilarious name, etc. These things wouldn't be caught by any sort of "oversight." Even when there is oversight, it's not a pixel by pixel analysis. It's a quick look over and a rubberstamp.
So you think they put a teddy bear in bondage gear, prominently displayed in an ad, because absolutely no one vetted it?
I can see your argument for something subtle, like obscure book titles, but how far does thay extend? We're talking about marketing, an art where the shade of a colour in a logo is debated due to how it could affect the human psyche, and then trademarked, but you think they just let ads through without a second glance?
Even if Hanlon's Razor applies here (and I'm not sure if it does), someone (probably someones) clearly put these subtle hints in there, and they all lead back to pedophiles.
It stands to reason that the gross, but obvious, shit was vetted. But the more subtle stuff could have been put in by one person and not directly approved.
Or it was directly approved... as a viral marketing campaign.
I'm not saying it's not evil and disgusting. I'm just saying it's probably not a global sex cabal deciding to come out of the closet to the world like you guys seem to believe.
Whoever made this ad is a massive lone troll. Or this is an intentional viral marketing campaign.
I don't buy that the company put this in there in order to send a message to their fellow cult members or whatever you guys think.
First of all, you wrote that backwards.
Secondly, yes you do. You must not understand how corporations work. There is often little oversight and, when there is, it's often a bunch of people who don't care. Middle managers are worthless and they are the "oversight."
A lot of these things are hidden. A court document, a address to a doctor's office with a hilarious name, etc. These things wouldn't be caught by any sort of "oversight." Even when there is oversight, it's not a pixel by pixel analysis. It's a quick look over and a rubberstamp.
So you think they put a teddy bear in bondage gear, prominently displayed in an ad, because absolutely no one vetted it?
I can see your argument for something subtle, like obscure book titles, but how far does thay extend? We're talking about marketing, an art where the shade of a colour in a logo is debated due to how it could affect the human psyche, and then trademarked, but you think they just let ads through without a second glance?
Even if Hanlon's Razor applies here (and I'm not sure if it does), someone (probably someones) clearly put these subtle hints in there, and they all lead back to pedophiles.
Why is that?
It seems like a viral marketing campaign to me.
It stands to reason that the gross, but obvious, shit was vetted. But the more subtle stuff could have been put in by one person and not directly approved.
Or it was directly approved... as a viral marketing campaign.
I'm not saying it's not evil and disgusting. I'm just saying it's probably not a global sex cabal deciding to come out of the closet to the world like you guys seem to believe.