I can actually understand not wanting corporations showing support for either Israel or Palestine in their ads. I am thinking about it politically, but not for the reasons you alude to. I'm also thinking about it from the perspecrive of American politics, where corporations have and are wreaking havoc on the vote process. It could be an exercise in corruption, in other words.

That's, of course, speaking in generalities and excluding the time factor point about when the ads were made vs when they aired.

Though to that point, it's not like those xompanies couldn't have gone in after the dilminy and cha he's the color of the hats and eyeshadow to avoid the appearance of choosing sides, had they so chose. Probably that wasn't nefarious intent and they didn't think about it but also, somebody in PR is getting paid to think of studf like that and they dropped the ball.

Say what you want about free speech. Fair enough. In the end, busnesses are in business to make money and Christmas is when they do so for.thr most part. It was a bad move for branding and to make the most of a highest sales period of the year.

Somebody should have thought of that. If a business doesn't want to be seen as being politocalnor making political statements, then that business needs to be mindful of avoiding political symbols, even in eyeshadow. It's no different that using color or phrasing to evoke sentiment or emotion to encourage a sale. They do that scrupulously. Knowing thatz why should they get a pass on stoking political sentiment, even if accidentally?