I'm aware. But symbols matter to some people, or more importantly the ideas so symbolized. It's the same reason people boycott teamakers and football teams for using images of Indians, why rightists get upset at flag-burners or leftists at those who show images of aborted fetuses during abortion clinic protests, etc.
Sure, not everyone who wears a keffiyeh is demonstrating their "solidarity" with Palestinian terrorists; I certainly don't think Rachel Ray was (I doubt she was even allowed to dress herself for that commercial). The point is, enough are that some will find efforts to mainstream it outrageous.
FYI, Malkin qualified her criticism of Dunkin's by pointing out how good they are about other conservative issues, like immigration enforcement, so it's hardly about the business or the product they're selling.
Many people reacted like you in that they failed to understand the basis of the lecture and the context within which he was making the lecture. The problem is that the archbishop is a highly intelligent man and the audience he was addressing were similarly inteligent people that understood the meaning and context. Unfortunately and to the detriment of their profession the reporters seemed unable to grasp the substance of what he was saying and accordingly mis-reported the whole thing. 
