Wow, a few years ago StarKist showed Charlie, their inept tuna mascot, being the chef who prepares their new stuff. I called foul, pointing out that Charlie was an incompetent scam artist with the extremely specific death wish of wanting to be killed, packaged, sold and served as StarKist tuna, but that they could have said in that ad campaign that Charlie was tired of always being a loser, so he went to culinary school and is now a master chef. But they didn’t do that.
Instead, they did this: they went back to showing Charlie as a loser con man. And just when I thought maybe Charlie had gotten his life together and become somebody! Oh, well: I guess I was right the first time: he was just impersonating a chef like he always used to impersonate other types of people all the time to try to get caught, killed, filleted, canned, packaged, sold and served as StarKist. (I knew it all the time that he was not a real chef! Shame on them for trying to trick us!)
Here’s the new ad that uses the old campaign, finally admitting I was right about Charlie posing as a fake chef in their recent ad campaign:
And these are my previous posts about Charlie’s chef ad campaign:
BTW: I don’t mean to give them a hard time, but all they had to do was say he got tired of being a loser, so he went to culinary school, and Charlie as a chef would have worked. But they did not bother to do that, and now that he’s back as his usual old scammer self, it completely makes a joke of their previous attempts to say he was a chef. Or maybe nobody remembers just a few short years back?
So what is it: Charlie is a master chef responsible for StarKist cuisine, or he’s a con man reprobate trying to get himself killed so he can be in StarKist tuna.
Hey, maybe they could say Charlie is still the con man, but he had a son, and he’s the chef… That would clear things up for us.
Or maybe I’m the only one who wants advertising to make sense.
