that common and mya coke ad

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Anybody else catch this half way, assume it was a crappy new track off "Electric Circus" about cred, only to discover it's actually an AD???? I mean, what to the fuck?

I would argue this is by far the most punkass offensively pissing-on-ethics ad ever. Common is now officially a cockfarmer. I have no problem with somebody hawking a product, but to hawk a product like this...

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 02:05 (twenty-three years ago)

Is that the one in the club where it's all (paraphrasing here) "everything in this world is material, be true to yourself, you gotta see through it all to find out what's real"? Then it shows someone cracking open a Coca-Cola?

― gazuga (gazuga), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 02:30 (twenty-three years ago)

THAT'S the one. is it a new brand or something? A realer one?

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 02:39 (twenty-three years ago)

Should't the Cult of Real be rendered (even more) laughable (than before) in this ad's wake?

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 02:50 (twenty-three years ago)

actually, yeah. Wow. Silver lining...thanks Alex!

nonetheless, I'm still pissed off that this exists. the cult of real needed to chill out, not be raped defenselessly by Coke.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 02:53 (twenty-three years ago)

If it makes people see thru common's act I'm happy about it. I love the tame faux-boheme backpackcessories in the tv spot.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 03:29 (twenty-three years ago)

I don't understand the fuss. Perhaps Common really does enjoy the taste of an ice cold Coca-Cola. I'm not being sarcastic. Have you tried the drink before? It's actually very refreshing. I'M NOT BEING SARCASTIC.

― Famous Athlete, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 03:33 (twenty-three years ago)

I love coke too. But the song is awful.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 03:38 (twenty-three years ago)

It's incredibly less offensive than "London Calling" selling Lexus.

― Famous Athlete, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 03:42 (twenty-three years ago)

...excuse me, Jaguar. Even more luxurious/ridiculous.

― Famous Athlete, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 03:44 (twenty-three years ago)

Hey! I'd be all about Common rapping about the glory of Coke. I definitely prefer it to Pepsi, but this ad ain't that.

ick. The jaguar ad sounds pretty sick, but did the ad emphasize the lyrics only to fling a car at you in the last shot?

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 03:45 (twenty-three years ago)

From what I can remember (and believe you me I've tried my damnedest to repress the memory) it was a brief ad with a brief snippet of the song near the end. It simply showed a shiny new Jaguar rolling down a cobblestone street in some European village. It's just amazing that it happened at all.

The new tagline for Coke, now, is simply "REAL." In bold letters, too, just like that. That's what's baffling to me, not that Common might offer his endorsement for the beverage but rather that they would pitch it to people as the drink of choice for those who like their soda to be actual. It just makes no sense.

― Famous Athlete, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 04:06 (twenty-three years ago)

I think Common is the next Marvin Gaye. He has the smooth-with-the-womyn thing, plus his heavily afro-centric politiking, and now, in Mya, perhaps he's found his Tammy Terell... hopefully both will go on without tragic circumstances surrounding their deaths. All he needs is his What's Goin' On and we're all set.

― jm (jtm), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 04:42 (twenty-three years ago)

jm aren't you forgetting that common is awful?

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 04:43 (twenty-three years ago)

comparing mya to tammi terrell is quasi-blasphemous, comparing common to marvin gaye is blashphemous

― James Blount (James Blount), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 05:34 (twenty-three years ago)

Huh? The "London Calling" ad I saw was just a Jag speeding purposefully down a highway while the song played. Now if I'm ever pedal-to-the-metal in a Jaguar on any sort of important secret mission I will definitely play "London Calling" along the way, though I suspect the mood will be well spoiled by "Rudy Can't Fail."

― nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 06:26 (twenty-three years ago)

The jm/Sterling exchange just now is my favorite critical writing of 2003 so far.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 06:58 (twenty-three years ago)

Damn, Common makes a commercial, and he still gets flack from ILM? The poor guy will never get your endorsement, it seems...

― Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 11:28 (twenty-three years ago)

I suddenly realized last week that The Electric Circus has a grand total of four songs I actually like. Just as an aside there.

― Nate Patrin (Nate Patrin), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 11:38 (twenty-three years ago)

Lemme guess:

That one with the weirdly-tempoed Jay Dee beat, the Stereolab one, the Prince one and, uh...

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 14:28 (twenty-three years ago)

How exactly is Coke "real"? I mean....y'know, it's not "natural." It's a lab-concocted beverage. Yes, it's refreshing (tho' I prefer Dr.Pepper), but it's not "real."

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:11 (twenty-three years ago)

Yes, Alex, very true. Coke is not real.

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:16 (twenty-three years ago)

Thanks, Mark.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:17 (twenty-three years ago)

Coke is not "real", yet it's tagline is "REAL".

I can't think of a more appropriate hawker for such a substance than Common.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:31 (twenty-three years ago)

If "real" meant "natural" we wouldn't need both words.

Where in the lyrics of London Calling does it say you shouldn't buy a Jag? This is a genuine qn - lots of people got cross over that ad, not just because it was The Clash (which I understand - brand images clashing and all that) but because it was THAT song which always struck me as a cool-sounding apocalypse-fantasy with minimal political content.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:35 (twenty-three years ago)

all artists should sell their songs to ads. that way more people can hear the songs, and the artist gets more money, the money they dont get from you anymore now that you are downloading their songs for nothing on soulseek yet are still trying to hold them up to accountability...

...in fact they should right songs specifically for clients and adverts ahead of time (although sticking ORANGE into a song didnt come off for BOC)

― gareth (gareth), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:39 (twenty-three years ago)

"Where in the lyrics of London Calling does it say you shouldn't buy a Jag?"

Yeah, but where in the lyrics does it suggest that you *SHOULD*? I think you have to take a step back and look at the concept of using *ANY* song by the Clash to hawk Jaguars. That's where the vulgarity creeps in.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:40 (twenty-three years ago)

but jaguars are better than the clash. if i was a jaguar owner i would be offended

― gareth (gareth), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:43 (twenty-three years ago)

Alex thats what Im saying - people werent just "oh its by the clash" they were getting specifically pissed off about that song, well some of them were anyway.

The Clash had sold stuff before anyway - I dont think they have control over their back cat.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:43 (twenty-three years ago)

Has anyone pointed out how Jaguars AREN'T actually jaguars, but rather cars? Zealots.

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:44 (twenty-three years ago)

But volvos are safer than BOTH!

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:44 (twenty-three years ago)

Um, just let me check -
Imagine: something by Crass used to sell Volvos - would that be something other than 'brand images' clashing?

― Snowy Mann (rdmanston), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 15:53 (twenty-three years ago)

Snowy there's nothing that says a brand image doesn't or needn't reflect underlying realities or values, in fact that's the whole point of them. A brand image which doesn't reflect an aspect of the branded object is a liability.

Jaguar's brand image is flashiness, priciness, cool; The Clash's brand image is political rock'n'roll gang - my guess is Jaguar is banking on a linkup of "flashiness"/"cool" and "rock'n'roll gang" and assuming most of the audience will forget the "political" bit.

Crass on the other hand weren't cool - they were old and ugly and difficult and so nobody is going to use them in adverts. The absolute no.1 thing you have to do if you want to avoid your image being co-opted is not be cool.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 16:02 (twenty-three years ago)

Doesn't Ford own Volvo? Maybe Jaguar, too?

Coke : Real :: Budweiser : True

Coke would be more "real" if there was still, um, coke in it.

― hstencil, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 17:53 (twenty-three years ago)

The real tragedy of the coke campaign is that they are useing Eugene McDaniel's "Comapred To What", which is one of the greatest protest songs ever written. This is a travesty on par with Radio Shack using "What's Goin' On" in their ad campaigns and Wrangler using "Fortunate Son" [fading before the "It Ain't Me" rant, thereby leaving "some folks were born made to raise the flag"

I have no real problem with song use in general, but when they start to use the songs that philosophically counter the meaning of the original song... well, it makes me sick to my stomach. When i saw the coke ad, it literally brought tears to my eyes. It's a real shame.

Indeed:

"The President, he's got his war
Folks don't know just what it's for
Nobody gives us a rhyme or reason
Have one doubt, they call it treason
With chicken feathers all with out one nut

Goddamn it!
Tryin' to make it real compared to what!"

still rings true. always will.

― david day (winslow), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:10 (twenty-three years ago)

These coke ads sound atrocious - but surely anything that gets people listening to the protest song, especially now, can't be bad?

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:16 (twenty-three years ago)

linky.

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:21 (twenty-three years ago)

I love this ad. I like Common's voice and his flow and Mya's singing is completely on point.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:23 (twenty-three years ago)

but surely anything that gets people listening to the protest song, especially now, can't be bad?

Will they listen?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:24 (twenty-three years ago)

A percentage will. "What's that song in the new Coke ad?"

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:25 (twenty-three years ago)

It feels neccesary to mention that Common makes a point to brag about being "the only cat" who can "get props" in the ghetto wearing thrift shop clothes.

― thedore fogelsanger, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:27 (twenty-three years ago)

Can someone explain to me why Common is so disliked on this board? Just curious.

― Kerry (dymaxia), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:35 (twenty-three years ago)

I think it's a guilt by association thing (viz 'conscious' hip-hop -> undie hip-hop). Plus he's kinda fallen off...

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:37 (twenty-three years ago)

For me, the big reason was being bored senseless by Like Water For Chocolate, then seeing his ain't-I-a-cutie video set in Nellyville.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:38 (twenty-three years ago)

Question: are there varying degrees of complicity when it comes to artist/product tie-ins?

For example, all the reactions I read after RJD2 licensed his music to Saturn were approbative: 'way to get that paper RJ'. But, of course, the general consensus on Common's Coke thing (even from diehards) is that he's completely sold out.

RJ and Common probably aren't in the same income bracket, but surely they can't be THAT far apart either. So, assuming that the whole 'starving artists got a right' argument (which would favour RJ) is a moot point in this case, is it possible that the Common's being hated on more for his presence than his participation? And not for his intrinsic alliance with Coke but for the fact that he did it in such a way that made it hard to ignore or sweep under the rug? And finally, if so, is one really better than the other?

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:54 (twenty-three years ago)

Mark I've only heard about 3 common tracks but I think he's getting the mud slung because

- people dont like him anyway
- he is explicitly lyrically allying himself with the dubious message of the ad

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:56 (twenty-three years ago)

I'm TOTALLY ripping on Common more for his presence. The difference between your song showing up in a shitty movie or you playing the lead.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:56 (twenty-three years ago)

OPEN LETTER TO COMMON:

Please make as many ads as possible so that your presence is inescapable on American television.

Sincerely, Dan

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 18:58 (twenty-three years ago)

RJD2 doesn't take any political positions. Common does, quite loudly. So he's more open to charges of hypocrisy.

― Ben Williams, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:01 (twenty-three years ago)

PS Tome you are really stretching with regards to that other Coke ad.

― Ben Williams, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:03 (twenty-three years ago)

you must weigh the benefit of people having the foresight to find the protest song to those who will now associate the phrase "compared to what" with Coke. Considering the ad will be played over and over [and during the superbowl], methinks that ratio is tilted WAY towards the latter.

Consider the Wrangler example. I mean, "fortunate son" is the title of an unauthorized W. biography!

oh, and one more thing about W. and "Compared To What"

this lyric:

"Slaughter house is a-killin' hogs
Twisted children are killin' frogs"

and this anecdote:

In a May 21, 2000, New York Times' puff piece about the values Bush gained growing up in Midland, Texas, Nicholas D. Kristof quoted Bush's childhood friend Terry Throckmorton: "'We were terrible to animals,' recalled Mr. Throckmorton, laughing. A dip behind the Bush home turned into a small lake after a good rain, and thousands of frogs would come out. 'Everybody would get BB guns and shoot them,' Mr. Throckmorton said. 'Or we'd put firecrackers in the frogs and throw them and blow them up.'"

― david day (winslow), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:03 (twenty-three years ago)

Ben my qn wasn't entirely serious. Like I said, the ads sound awful. I still think it's as much an opportunity as a blasphemy though - "COKE AD SONG IS ANTI-WAR ANTHEM" yells angry tabloid?

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:13 (twenty-three years ago)

More like "MYA ANALLY-PREGNANT WITH COMMON'S CHILD!" Tom.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:15 (twenty-three years ago)

Thank you for that image.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:16 (twenty-three years ago)

Wow. Someone's boys can swim.

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:16 (twenty-three years ago)

COMMON ANALLY PREGNANT WITH MYA'S CHILD! HE GONNA POOP IT OUT! AND IT'S GARY COLEMAN BALD!

Just for you, Ned.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:17 (twenty-three years ago)

Also I guess I was probing towards the qn 'what are protest songs for?' - strikes me they exist for three reasons

- catharsis for the author
- rallying and comforting the people who agree
- surprising and alerting the people who might not yet

Use in an ad has no effect on the first, a negative effect on the second, but a potentially positive boost for the third, right?

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:18 (twenty-three years ago)

Sorry Tom, Dan said "anally pregnant" and then we all lost track.

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:19 (twenty-three years ago)

It could be a negative effect on the first, if the song is sold without the author's permission.

― hstencil, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:19 (twenty-three years ago)

Yeah but Tom haven't you also said in the past (and I'm paraphrasing largely here) that you didn't believe that effective political messages or protests (other than context-heavy vaguaries) lent well to the format of four minute pop song? What about a thirty second commercial?

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:21 (twenty-three years ago)

The curse of not checking the thread.

Yeah hstencil it could actually.

Mark P I do think that pretty much which is why my gut reaction is that it's not worth getting upset by the use of the song. Doesn't stop me exploring why it might be worth getting upset. Also I think it's political/philosophical arguments that cant easily be summarised in song - statements of position are much easier.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:23 (twenty-three years ago)

Did Fogerty sign off on that usage of "Fortunate Son," or did somebody else? It would be interesting to know...

― hstencil, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:25 (twenty-three years ago)

I think Fogerty lost control of his catalogue long ago - maybe that's someone else.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:25 (twenty-three years ago)

Yeah, he didn't have control over it, and was quite pissed about it.

― Kerry (dymaxia), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:31 (twenty-three years ago)

From what I understand, Fogerty has NEVER owned the rights to his own songs.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:31 (twenty-three years ago)

The difference between your song showing up in a shitty movie or you playing the lead

Yeah, but if you play the lead you could possibly upstage the product you're selling (although this doesn't seem to be the case with the Volkswagen ads). I'm not sure how I feel about what it means , probably because I'm not really sure what the significance of advertising is. I'm trying to figure out why I'm not terribly upset about it. This discussion is really interesting to me.

― Kerry (dymaxia), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:44 (twenty-three years ago)

I think for me it was also the shock of something that appeared to be a shitty video BECOMING an ad. Had I known it was an ad from the start I wouldn't have been sooo stunned.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 19:47 (twenty-three years ago)

But it totally looks like an ad. There's blatant Coke product placement all over it (plus the cinematography is very similar to the Garth Brooks and Wyclef Coke ads).

I'm more annoyed by MTV's new non-ad campaign.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 20:03 (twenty-three years ago)

"I'm more annoyed by MTV's new non-ad campaign."

I'll second that.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 20:28 (twenty-three years ago)

he used to love p.e.p.s.i

― zemko (bob), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 20:28 (twenty-three years ago)

haven't seen Garth or Wyclef's yet. And I'll certainly give you that there are more annoying ads out there.

Which why I watch VH1 classic during ad breaks (not that I rarely take it off that station anyhow). Cuz it's real.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 20:30 (twenty-three years ago)

If you don't watch TV, the problem is moot.

― hstencil, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 20:31 (twenty-three years ago)

but Fogerty loves blue jeans!

― James Blount (James Blount), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 20:31 (twenty-three years ago)

If you don't watch TV, the problem is moot.

Very.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 20:33 (twenty-three years ago)

Fogerty seems a Levi's man.

― hstencil, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 20:33 (twenty-three years ago)

haven't seen Garth or Wyclef's yet.

Both predate this one; I think the Wyclef ad is four years old or something like that.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 20:34 (twenty-three years ago)

I saw his Virgin mobile thing though. Jesus, when was the last time somebody bought something because Wyclef said to? I thought Lauryn was the one with the psycho followers.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 20:39 (twenty-three years ago)

I literally kicked my TV when I saw the "Compared to What" advert. I really honestly believe it was made with the intentions of destroying the song's intent...okay, well, part of me believes that, the other part is just really mad because that's a fuckin' phenomenal song that doesn't deserve such shoddy treatment.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 20:49 (twenty-three years ago)

The point is that coke's been selling itself as "american authentic" for longer than most of us have been alove and REDOUBLED that effort after the new coke fiasco and by that persistance actually situated itself as somehow more authentic to america than plenty of other things (baseball, for example, which I think is falling off on the "authetic america" tip to some degree). Common also trades in "authenticity" with about the same bombast as coke and LESS claim to it in that he hasn't successfully entrenched himself in a way which gives him that "voice of black america" thang he aspires to yet -- so the ad I think is pretty effective in making a bridge to the "urban" market for coke by crossing the coke "authenticity" (which is deeply family "good times" positivity oriented) with conscious rap's (which is equally "positive"). Like coke could never make a play like that with Busta Rhymes like 7-up did or etc.

Which then opens a number of possibilities -- coke wins[grabs marketshare], common loses[backlash]; common wins [crossover exposure], coke loses [Bill O'Reilly goes after them for promoting violence -- which is unlikely given that it's common and thus why he's a good choice for them]; both win; both lose.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 22:22 (twenty-three years ago)

Most African Americans I know drink Pepsi, anyways.

― hstencil, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 22:23 (twenty-three years ago)

Real playas swig Mr.Pibb

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 22:31 (twenty-three years ago)

Two things:

There was recently an article in the SF Chronicle about Fogerty and the use of "Fortunate Son". He's long since lost the rights to all his songs (thanks to Fantasy-fuckwad-owner Saul Zaentz) and he sounded incredibly bitter and depressed that the song had been sold in that way. As I recall, he even said it brought him to tears.

"Compared to What" is a FANTASTIC song, beautiful beautiful. The use of it in the ad is appalling. Les McCann's version of it at the Montreaux Festival in '73 is a barnburner.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 22 January 2003 22:50 (twenty-three years ago)

(BTW despite my general ad-sympathy (more like ad-apathy) I have total total sympathy for anyone who has seen their own creative work abused because of losing rights to it (especially after what happened with freakytrigger.com) - it's rotten and I quite understand that Fogerty was very upset.)

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 23:03 (twenty-three years ago)

(mine was more concise)

― zemko (bob), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 23:19 (twenty-three years ago)

for longer than most of us have been alove

Sterling has coined my new favorite word.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 22 January 2003 23:31 (twenty-three years ago)

it betrays the actual content of "brand new cadillac" that it has NOT been used to cadillac to sell cadillacs to women of independent demeanour

(and this is why clashfans are so annoyed abt london calling and jaguar: hovering just a segue away in their unconscious is the hard proof that the clash were always deep in their bones pro advert-culture not anti it)

i tried to find the lyrics to "fast cars" on the net, but they weren't anywhere: "sooner or lader y'll listen to ralph nay-dah!!"

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 23 January 2003 00:55 (twenty-three years ago)

I s'pose I should pay more attention to a thread when I make heretical comments.

― jm (jtm), Thursday, 23 January 2003 01:06 (twenty-three years ago)

Real Real Real. Let's make it really real.

― Stuart, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 16:33 (twenty-three years ago)

Oh, it's "Real Real Yeah"... my memory of it was realer than it was. My bad.

― Stuart, Tuesday, 28 January 2003 16:35 (twenty-three years ago)

Common's first line in the ad is "Real can't be bought or sold..."

Irony is dead, didn't Coke get the MEMO?

And I stand by my point that the more people associate Compared To What with Coke, the less powerful the song becomes.

Chronicle's Fogerty article:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/11/01/DD223445.DTL

great lead:
"Put yourself in John Fogerty's shoes and see if you don't feel like slapping somebody."

― david day (winslow), Tuesday, 28 January 2003 16:50 (twenty-three years ago)

BTW, the Clash willingly sold "London Calling," "Rock the Casbah," "Should I Stay Or Should I Go," etc. As I said before: He who joins the church will later fuck little boys.

Now why hasn't Coke bought "Koka Kola" and "Straight to Hell"?

― Pete Scholtes, Wednesday, 29 January 2003 16:11 (twenty-three years ago)

Every time I see the Coke commercial, I like it more.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 29 January 2003 16:12 (twenty-three years ago)

Ah! But ironically or for REAL?

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 29 January 2003 17:56 (twenty-three years ago)

In a sugary-sweet sense.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 29 January 2003 18:03 (twenty-three years ago)

Absolutely for real. The music appeals more and more every time I see it, and remembering this thread and how upset people are over it makes me laugh.

I'm having a similar reaction to the nonsensical Levi's buffalo-stampede ad.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 29 January 2003 18:22 (twenty-three years ago)

I haven't caught it in awhile. It plays mutely before some shockwave online video games though. I'd probably prefer it to the "Come Clean (I Need Love, Part 143)" video. Cuz while I don't know if its real, Coke definitely Is It!

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Wednesday, 29 January 2003 18:28 (twenty-three years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.