theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
How naive. Did you expect the NRSC to issue this statement?
Well, yes, I do. If you're going to accuse somebody of something, then I certainly do expect to see evidence to support that accusation.
If you say that the NRSC "dissed" somebody, then I expect to see statements from the NRSC, "dissing" somebody, not statements from a subcontractor of a subcontractor, "dissing" somebody.
There's no reason to expect that the client of an ad agency would get involved in the specific wording of a casting call. To do specialized work in their field of expertise. Even if the client said explicitly that they wanted a "hicky" look, the casting agency might very well word the casting call quite differently, to ensure getting the necessary results for their client.
In the event, though, the evidence points to the opposite occurring: The NRSC worded their requirements quite differently, and the casting agency said explicitly that they wanted a "hicky" look.
So, yes: I expect claims made about the NRSC's statements to match the the NRSC's statements on record. Here in the real world, the OP doesn't do that.