Comcast refuses to air anti-war ads during State of Union

AP | 1/28/03 | JOHN CURRAN

[CyberAnt]

Thanks, I just did!!

[steveegg]

All I have to say is...

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[RummyChick]

CBS just showed the ad on the NEws...Is sarandon going to be worse than hanoi jane

[concerned about politics]

who are they to decide?

Because they own it. They can chose to air anything they want and chose NOT to air anything they want.

[amused]

who are they to decide?

I assume this is in response to "unsubstantiated" claim. It's tough to make a call on whether the claims by the ad were in fact unsubstantiated but it is perfectly within the rights of a company to decide what it considers appropriate advertising.

[amused]

I would add the non-running of David Horowitz's "No to Reparations" ad campaign as an example.

[steveegg]

CBS just showed the ad on the NEws...

Of course, CBS didn't charge because that "ad" matches their position.

Is sarandon going to be worse than hanoi jane

Hmmm, Hanoi Jane vs Baghdad Susie. I might pay to have that Celeberty Deathmatch happen, but I wouldn't watch it.

[RummyChick]

THe more I think about that ad the more pissed I get. If you haven't seen it..try to watch it at least once so you know what to be irate about...

it goes something like
before we start bringing home our soldiers in body bags..I want to know what Iraq has done..and we see crosses in a graveyard..and then some guy says..NOTHING

rough paraphrase..I would like someone to put up an exact translation if they see it.

[concerned about politics]

perhaps regulated companies given monopoly cable priviledges might have a first ammendment public interest mandate to air advertisemetns at fair market value whose content they dont agree with.

Why? Why should they? The commies can go elsewhere. Maybe nobody wants them. Anti-Amercanism is sooo regressive. Soooo '60's.

[capydick]

And look for the ad to be shown on abcnbcnbcmsnbcpbs before the night is over.

[cyncooper]

who are they to decide?

Um, it stated right in the excerpt you chose to post:

Comcast's legal department...

[cyncooper]

I assume this is in response to "unsubstantiated" claim.

I haven't seen the ads, but I'm thinking they are diplomatically saying the ads are filled with obvious lies.

[Frohickey]

You need to read that Constitution, buddy. Comcast isn't required by law to provide you with any forum at any price.

Maybe they should have offered $10K if Comcast were to air it when the anti-war group wanted it. Keep raising the price, I bet that there is a price that Comcast would agree to air it at. If not them, their competition.

[RummyChick]

The "lie" would be when susan says she wants to know what Iraq has done and the guy says something like..."The answer is nothing"...assuming that CBS showed the whole ad..it did't last long..I didn't time it but it was probably the whole thing

[Falcon4.0]

How about Susan Surrender.

[concerned about politics]

How about Susan Surrender.

Susan Surrender and Hanoi Jane. Not bad! I like it!

[cyncooper]

The "lie" would be when susan says she wants to know what Iraq has done and the guy says something like..."The answer is nothing"...

RC, I didn't "get" your first description and that the guy said "nothing". I just re-read your first post--How can they say that?

I can understand having questions about a war--I can understand and disagree--but to outright state that Iraq has done nothing--yes, I can see why the legal department would have a problem with this.

Sounds like Susan has gone well beyond questioning her own country, to actually siding with Iraq.

Shame

[TLBSHOW]

BUMP