[Csch713]

I first posted this in the Lounge, and was told that it should be posted here instead, so here it is.

CBS won't air "controversial" ad
From http://www.punkvoter.com:
"Super Bowl Ads - The Controversy Is Over Free Speech!

Super Bowl, you'll see ads sponsored by beer companies, tobacco companies, and the Bush White House. But you won't see the winning ad in MoveOn.org Voter Fund's Bush in 30 Seconds ad contest. CBS refuses to air it. This is not a partisan issue. It's critical that our media institutions be fair and open to all speakers. CBS is setting a dangerous precedent, and unless we speak up, the pattern may continue. www.moveon.org/cbs/ad/"

CBS refuses to air an ad by MoveOn.org because it is "controversial."

Go to http://www.moveon.org/cbs/ad/ to see the ad that was just too controversian to air during the Super Bowl.

I am interested in seeing everybody's oppinion on this issue.

-Christian

 

[N8 v2.0]

*YAWN*

It ain't censorship... get over it.

 

[stevew]

I believe CNN ran it at half time. But then I didn't watch the Superbowl or watch CNN soooo......

 

[ummbikes]

Originally posted by N8
*YAWN*

It ain't censorship... get over it.

Exactly how is not censorship N8?

And don't give the "it's a private company they do what they want, b.s."

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by ummbikes
Exactly how is not censorship N8?

And don't give the "it's a private company they do what they want, b.s."

Actually, that was my argument. It is censorship (in that they chose not to air something), but CBS doesn't HAVE to accept any advertising it doesn't want to. It's their income to refuse. But they also can't claim to be unbiased or non-partisan. They probably will anyway, but the more people know about the ad, the less likely they are to believe CBS.

I happened to think it was a fantastic ad, but naming President Bush directly almost guaranteed it wouldn't see broadcast airtime.

 

[ummbikes]

Originally posted by ohio
Actually, that was my argument. It is censorship (in that they chose not to air something), but CBS doesn't HAVE to accept any advertising it doesn't want to. It's their income to refuse. But they also can't claim to be unbiased or non-partisan. They probably will anyway, but the more people know about the ad, the less likely they are to believe CBS.

I happened to think it was a fantastic ad, but naming President Bush directly almost guaranteed it wouldn't see broadcast airtime.

Dang it Ohio I was wanting N8 to try and 'splain himself!

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by ummbikes
Dang it Ohio I was wanting N8 to try and 'splain himself!

You ought to know by now he never does.

All you were going to get was either a snide off-hand comment, or a link to a semi-related news-pinion.

 

[Spud]

That is hilarious is that CBS proclaimed they didn’t want to become involved in advocacy or offensive advertisements etc. (Move On and PETA)

Then they proceed with the Filter ads attacking the Tobacco industry. Sounds like advocacy to me (regardless of if we agree with the message – it is an attack on a legally operating industry employing thousands of Americans and returning an investment in many of our retirement plans).

Consider have all the Budweiser commercials (complete with sophomoric groin biting and fart jokes) supporting a product that has wrecked uncountable American families (and prematurely started numerous American families :devil.

Plus the shocking halftime show that they knew nothing about.

CBS has hollow arguments – which would be O.K. if they weren’t operating on publicly owned airways. Censorship or abuse of publicly owned airways however they spin it.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by Spud
That is hilarious is that CBS proclaimed they didn’t want to become involved in advocacy or offensive advertisements etc.

Are you sure that's their claim?

I ask cuz I heard they didn't want to do campaign ads AND the ad "by" the White House IS NOT a campaign ad... it was an anti-drug ad which is close enough to Truth-type anti-smoking ads. So, that's consistent with no MoveOn.org ad.

As for PETA... that's so not their target audience. Who the heck thinks it's interesting or entertaining to suggest eating meat causes impotency. That ain't funny

I think Viagara should find everywhere that PETA ad will be a follow it with their own ad... "Go ahead, eat all the mean you want, then pop a blue one" :devil:

 

[Spud]

Yeah, that was their story last weeK: from the Seattle Times:

In a statement released Wednesday, the network said its policy against so-called advocacy advertising is "decades old."

and

Furthermore, said CBS, the policy "is designed to prevent those with means to produce and purchase network advertising from having undue influence on controversial issues of public importance."

Google News Search

For what it is worth - I served beef tongue at my superbowl party.

 

[LordOpie]

Ok, so what controversial issue did CBS allowed to be aired?

anti-smoking and anti-drug commercials aren't controverial. They're bad for you and the people who partake in them will admit it or are in denial. It would be a problem if someone made an anti-alcohol commercial and CBS refused to air it.

 

[Spud]

Depends on your definition of controversial (CBS was taking the advocacy approach, not controversy anyhow) – the shards-o-glass Popsicle company? That was some funny stuff and right on the mark IMHO. I’m sure a tobbaco farmer in Virginia wouldn’t have been amused though. A mother of 17 year old who died in a drunken car accident probably wouldn’t be real pleased with Budweiser commercials either.

Run the commercials and let the market decide.

 

[charmin]

Originally posted by Csch713
CBS won't air "controversial" ad
From http://www.punkvoter.com:
"Super Bowl Ads - The Controversy Is Over Free Speech!

But you won't see the winning ad in MoveOn.org Voter Fund's Bush in 30 Seconds ad contest. CBS refuses to air it.

Ok, can't confirm this -- but I heard the company didn't have the money to pay for the timeslot! That's right, they hoped that CBS would deny their request so that they could get all of this free advertising! I think it's hilarious. I hope it's true -- that some shoot from the hip marketer figured CBS wouldn't air it and they would get a ton of exposure.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by charmin
Ok, can't confirm this -- but I heard the company didn't have the money to pay for the timeslot! That's right, they hoped that CBS would deny their request so that they could get all of this free advertising! I think it's hilarious. I hope it's true -- that some shoot from the hip marketer figured CBS wouldn't air it and they would get a ton of exposure.

A lot of people are accusing PETA of the same thing, including CBS and CBS is not happy about it. PETA might be able to afford it, but they got far more exposure than just running the ad.

 

[charmin]

Originally posted by LordOpie
A lot of people are accusing PETA of the same thing, including CBS and CBS is not happy about it. PETA might be able to afford it, but they got far more exposure than just running the ad.

Hmmm, CBS shouldn't be mad about it -- are there any repercussions for CBS?

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by charmin
Hmmm, CBS shouldn't be mad about it -- are there any repercussions for CBS?

oh, they just feel like they were being used.

Just like Justin and Janet used CBS to boost their popularity... what a horrible half-time show.

 

[charmin]

Originally posted by LordOpie
oh, they just feel like they were being used.

Just like Justin and Janet used CBS to boost their popularity... what a horrible half-time show.

The game was great, but the entertainment was crappy. I don't care how horrible the acoustics are -- I think they should sing. You can tell when they're lip synching and it's not as much fun. And, I didn't get to see the whole disrobing thing because when Justin pretended to slap Janet's heiny, I got up to get some food. I thought they picked bad music, too. Except for the beginning when they sang beer for my horses. LOVE that song (hated that it was lip synched).