Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Charmin Bears

So there I am, hanging out on the couch with Rach, watching some TV just minding my own business, when one of those disgusting Charmin commercials comes on.


You know the commercial I'm talking about, the one with the cute little teddy bears, out in the woods with bits of toilet paper stuck in their butt hair?!!!

What the heck? Wha... who? Whekaeonaiodi ae!?!?!?

Ok... two questions:

What advertising agency said to some company exec, "So yeah, then we do a close up on the shredded bits of crusted nasty old toilet paper stuck in its butt hair."

And more importantly, what company exec said "Good idea! Here's thirty thousand dollars."

What the @#$%!! is Charmin thinking? Those commercials are probably the A-number-one-single-most disgusting things I have seen on TV. I'd rather watch a thousand condom, KY, tampon and douce commercials back to back than sit through one more Charmin commercial with a close up on the butt hair.



Tim 2 said...

No agency came up with this idea, it was someone at Procter and Gamble, guaranteed 100%.

Joshua said...

I guess you're right. No add agency in the world is that stupid.

Tim and Deane said...

Are these the same sons who made radio commercials with toilets flushing in hte background?

Anonymous said...

Ok...so I have to say that I think the commercials are Hilarious...gives a whole new meaning to the question..."does a bear Sh*t in the woods?"
C'mon folks, lets not be so up tight !

Anonymous said...

I wouldn't call it being uptight. ANYTHING with crap-encrusted toilet paper bits stuck to it's hind parts is pretty vile. Cute little cartoon bears included. I can't stand these commercials.

Jenn said...

I don't even BUY Charmin due to these commercials. I doubt I'm alone as they lately appear to be on sale at every store for the last year and a half....change the commercials and maybe get your customers back? Just an idea....

nikto said...

"Crap-encrusted toilet paper bits stuck to hind parts" are disgusting, even when just being alluded to.

Who could possibly disagree
with that?