Take a look at the recent events over on Facebook where a whole slew of accounts were banned because they didn't comply with the "Real Name" policy. This happened because a large number of accounts were reported and Facebook had a strict line on "If the name for the account doesn't match the documentation provided". That was the level of "due dilligence". Facebook has since apologized, told people what happened and has made changes to try and stop something like that from happening in the future.

Now... Intel is a very large company and the person who made this decision likely saw the complaints and pulled the advertising without even looking at the controversy. That is how most marketing and business-intelligence people act. (in my experience, at least - it's always a 'react immediately, backtrack later' situation)

Not that I am condoning this method of action - companies like Intel have a lot of responsibility because their name is known worldwide and the way the public sees the company act will influence decisions. Whether it is to boycott Intel or to cheer them on - and whether the publics response is right or wrong - it will happen and have a much larger effect than if a smaller company did similar. This is one of the reasons that decisions like this should be made by upper-level management - or even the board of directors - and not the low-level management that likely chose the current course. Of course, as I've never taken a business course and have just based all of this off personal experience I could be totally wrong.