If you don't read the links, how or why would you know what they say? That doesn't make sense. Like I said, two of those are immediately discounted (by your standards) because they're written by a basement blogger, or a place that shouldn't be judging tv commercials. One of them gives ZERO opinion on the commercial, just pretty much states what the commercial was, and the last one calls it insane and says it was enjoyable only because of the music. So again, you're not exactly proving your point.
And how are you biased? Easy. When I posted my links you discounted them for silly reasons like "the author is an idiot", "the author is a basement blogger", and "redmondpie shouldn't be judging tv commercials", yet when someone else posted links, you not only didn't even bother to read them, but you also ignored the fact that three out of 4 of them should be discounted because by your own standards they should not be writing about tv commercials or are not credible sources.
I have no problem admitting my bias toward a commercial that I think sucked, what's the difficult in admitting yours?
----------