BuzzMachine

The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.

Undemocratic CBS

27 comments on Undemocratic CBS

Undemocratic CBS
: Incredibly — unbelievably, disturbingly, appallingly — CBS has barred MoveOn from airing its commercial on the SuperBowl. AdAge reports:

Viacom’s CBS today rejected a request from liberal group MoveOn to air a 30-second anti-President Bush ad during the Super Bowl, saying the spot violated the network’s policy against running issue advocacy advertising.

A CBS spokesman said the decision against broadcasting the spot had nothing to do with either the Super Bowl or the ad’s specific issue but was because the network has had a long-term policy not to air issue ads anywhere on the network.

That’s a pile of Black Rock bile.

What, they can accept an ad about, oh, literacy and that’s not an issue?

They accept ads against smoking and that’s not an issue?

But an ad about the presidential election and the deficit is somehow corrupting?

Listen, I’m no fan of the MoveOn ads, as I’ve said. And I’m no fan of interference with the airwaves and media. But I have to say that this offends my senses of democracy, free speech, responsible media behavior, and just good business. It’s dumb on CBS’ part: insulting to the audience and irresponsible to democracy. It is, on the other hand, great news for MoveOn: They’ll get tons of publicity and I would be surprised if, oh, Fox calls and volunteers to run the ad.

: Sheila Lennon has lots more. She points out:

CBS will however run anti-smoking ads during the game and, for the third year, an entry from The White House’s Office of National Drug Control Policy (remember the “drug use aids terrorists” ads?).

Right. The issue rubicon has been crossed already.

27 responses to “Undemocratic CBS”

  1. Jeremy Avatar
    Jeremy

    Well, CBS is a business, first and formost. Do they want people boycotting the Superbowl just because of this ad? It would happen, no doubt, because running a hate filled ad during the Superbowl would ruin the experience for many (half the country).
    What if the KKK pooled their beer money and bought an anti-black ad during the superbowl. Do you think CBS should air it? It’s basically the same thing.

  2. finlay Avatar
    finlay

    Apt comparison. One of the awful slurs the KKK uses is comparing blacks to monkeys, sort of like the those MoveOn.org folks who call the president a chimp.

  3. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    You don’t see the difference between an ad that points out that our children will be paying for the current defecit and a KKK ad about killing black people?
    Yes, it’s quite clear that the Rethuglicans are the party of racial tolerance.

  4. angell Avatar
    angell

    Jeff, I am surprised a class guy like you would give moveon any respect and would condone such hateful messages to be shown during an American event as the superbowl.
    Maybe they could run this ad instead??
    http://dc.indymedia.org/media/all/display/17011/index.php?limit_start=24

  5. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    Angell asserts that the ad is “hateful.”
    Clearly, he/she has seen the ad, and will provide us with a transcript, bolding the specific “hateful” statments included.

  6. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    The line is already fuzzy. Sheila Lennon points out in email that the Bush drug campaign commercials are issue-oriented. And reading, as I said. And parenting (see the government’s plan to spend $1.5 million on marriage ads!). The line is already crossed; they run issue ads. They still have the absolute right to reject an ad because it’s offensive; that takes care of the KKK example. This is not offensive. I don’t like the MoveOn ads, as I’ve said clearly. But I will defend their right to say what they want to say. And the truth is that this is a campaign ad (campaigning against someone). That’s a matter of the democracy.

  7. KMK Avatar
    KMK

    See what happens. First Reagan then Jackson now moveon. Where is Eric so I can give him an I told ya so. :)

  8. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    Not to stab myself in the back here, but CBS didn’t have the superbowl last year. Of course, they didn’t excerpt this “no issue ads” to the superbowl, so that’s not really relevent.

  9. sickles Avatar
    sickles

    Let’s face it: I don’t know what the actual percent is but let’s put it at 50, CBS sees half their viewers pissed off and said forget it with the lame excuse. No smaoking ad and drug ads are somehow more innocuos so they don’t matter. And moveon ads aren’t likely to be innocuous.
    I say CBS saved them a pile of dough. Who wants to waste their cash in one big throwaway anyway?

  10. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    Harry and Louise sure made people turn off their sets.

  11. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    Sickles states that “moveon ads aren’t likely to be innocuous.” Clearly, he has seen the ad MoveOn proposes to show, and is willing to tell us what is not “innocuous” about it, highlighting in the transcript specific statements.
    Or, perhaps Sickles is making s–t up, having not even spent the ten seconds it would take him to find and view the ad.

  12. Fred Avatar
    Fred

    CBS is trying to protect their Democrat friends by stifling a Democrat fringe group. The problem for CBS, and the Democrats, is that MoveOn is not a fringe. It is big and rich and will be seen by the public as offensive and representative of the Democrats, which it is.

  13. Jeff B. Avatar
    Jeff B.

    I think this may have some semi-plausible explanation behind it, but nevertheless just smells awful. CBS looks like they’ve been intimidated by conservative pressure (heck, for all I know they HAVE), the indeterminate ‘forces of the Right’ look needlessly thuggish, and everyone loses. They should just let MoveOn run the ad. If it was really that awful, then it would have been self-discrediting – the American people know and reject a low blow when they see it. Wait…well okay, maybe in light of Willie Horton and the last-minute pre-election Bush DWI, that’s not at all true, but I still think it’s more constructive to just let the idiots have their say and refute them over the airwaves as well.
    All this does is create a new liberal ‘martyr,’ and out of one of the least-deserving groups at that. Blah.

  14. hugh macleod Avatar
    hugh macleod

    One angle nobody’s mentioned: a lot of advertisers paid millions of dollars to get their stuff on TV during the game. If the political ruckus from MoveOn was big enough, then I could see people coming into work Monday morning and talking about the ad, as opposed to the game (the franchise) or the other ads- Nike, Miller Beer etc. The ad had the potential to eclipse all the other ads… lessening their impact… and I could see CBS not wanting to anger the folks on Madison Avenue any more than wanting to anger the folks in Washington.

  15. Donald Sensing Avatar
    Donald Sensing

    Anti-smoking ads are not “issue ads” because they are not partisan. They take no sides in a political race. Neither are pro-literacy ads issue ads – who would be against literacy?
    What I think CBS means is that they will not accept partisan political ads that are not sponsored by the candidate; no third-party ads, in other words.

  16. Andrea Harris Avatar
    Andrea Harris

    Oh look, Jeff. It’s very simple: CBS turning down MoveOn’s little bit of propganda is not stifling their free speech. Is their website shut down? Have the members of this group been rounded up, bound and gagged, and thrown in a dungeon? As the very first poster pointed out, CBS is a private company. They have the right to accept whatever commercials they want, for whatever reason they want. If you don’t like it, Tivo the Superbowl without any of the commercials; or boycott CBS. Me? I don’t give a damn. I don’t watch tv, not even the sacred Superbowl.

  17. Austin Fusilier Avatar
    Austin Fusilier

    Hmm…it was pointed out earlier that CBS is a corporation, and the point has been made a few times that this ad may have hurt their revenues, but I think there’s another point here that needs to be addressed: CBS is under no obligation to air any requested ads they receive – just as they are not required to air any television programs that are pitched to them. They, just like other commercial ventures, have ‘the right to refuse service.’ Now, it’s in their best interests to run ads (they live off of the money the practice brings in), but they are certainly not required to do so.
    The Feds only step in if there’s some kind of criminal discrimination going on – last I checked, CBS didn’t refuse the ad because the makers were of a specific race or gender. We can certainly boo and hiss them for the decision; but I don’t know that we can assign them any fault for exercising what is certainly their right.
    In the same way, MoveOn.org had to request that their ad be run by CBS – they didn’t have the right to air it on the station without permission. So it’s not as if someone’s rights are being violated. As was pointed out earlier, Fox may even step in to run the ad – but even there, it’s not a right that MoveOn has, it’s a privelege (and one that can be revoked).
    Being upset at the choice is one thing – but an issue “of democracy, free speech, responsible media behavior”? I’d have to disagree.

  18. Greg Avatar
    Greg

    As stupid as MOVEOn.org is, the barring is shameful. Next time a liberal channel decides not to run a pro-Bush ad poeple would rise up in anger. It’s the same thing.

  19. Ann Avatar
    Ann

    They’ve also banned an add for Las Vegas. Now if that isn’t un-American, I don’t know what is!

  20. finnesota Avatar
    finnesota

    Jeff, you’ve really amassed quite the liberal audience, mate. Comparing Moveon.opg to the KKK. Gotta love it.

  21. Paul Zrimsek Avatar
    Paul Zrimsek

    Saying that CBS is within their legal rights in refusing the ads (true) is not at all the same thing as saying that the rest of us have no business complaining about it (false).
    Old-timers may remember that this is not the first time that something like this has happened– and on the very same issue.

  22. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    Hugh writes that perhaps CBS was just defending their other advertisers by keeping the really interesting MoveOn add (he said everyone would be talking about it the next morning) off the TV.
    Hugh should read up on “restraint of trade” laws. If that is in fact CBS’s motivation, some executives have some jail time in their future.
    Donald writes that he thinks that CBS just isn’t accepting any political ad paid for by the candidate (or the national comittee, I assume.)
    I’ll be watching, and I hope that Donald will admit that he’s wrong when CBS runs the next PAC ad.
    Andrea writes that CBS can do whatever it wants on it’s private airwaves. I would repeat what Paul said, and additionally note that those airwaves are not private – they are property of the people, lent to CBS by the FCC.

  23. Andrew | BYTE BACK Avatar
    Andrew | BYTE BACK

    Truly you need to see the MoveOn add that one. It does not call any one names it just says the deficit spending has mortgaged the future of our children (well, your children).
    it really is not offensive. Really.
    And as happens ever time this !@#$% comes up, there is an “honest” confusion over CBS’s right not to publish — um air – and the actual point that people make that they really don’t have a good reason not to.
    A conservative would not be offended by the MoveOn ad.
    Get a clue.

  24. Vic B Avatar
    Vic B

    CBS also rejected a PETA Super Bowl ad for similar reasons. Not that I’m a fan…
    http://www.peta.org/feat/superbowl/

  25. HH Avatar
    HH

    The Bush drug ads were not on CBS last Super Bowl. Secondly, as sad as it is to say, this sort of stuff is generally agreed upon by both major political parties.

  26. HH Avatar
    HH

    Conan backs off on Natl. Post ban…
    http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/154727p-136041c.html

  27. Richard Cook Avatar
    Richard Cook

    CBS has no obligation to air anyones ad. You might not like it but, there you go.