(no subject)

[apocalypsos]

You know, I've been thinking about it for a few days now, and I have this to say about the CBS/MoveOn.org debacle.

I'm on MoveOn.org's side. I like the commercial. I think it's cute, smart, and it gets the point across. But it's not bloody censorship and it's not violating MoveOn.org's First Amendment rights.

If their rights were being violated, none of us would have seen it. But we have, by going to the website.

CBS is a company, and it has company policies. The particular policy that blocks their showing the commercial during the Super Bowl has been in place for decades. Which means that either a.) MoveOn.org didn't do enough research to find out something so simple before their ad contest, or b.) they knew damn well they wouldn't get it shown, and were trying for the publicity that they could get if they complained. As someone who's behind the sentiment of the commercial, both options piss me off.

If MoveOn.org is so intent on showing their commercial, I'm sure there are plenty of other networks that would be willing to show it. And considering they could afford the Super Bowl price (what is it now, half a million?), I'm sure they can buy even more airtime on a network that could use the publicity.

Sheesh. *steps off soapbox*

Comments

[anne-jumps.livejournal.com]

They are. They're showing it on CNN during halftime.

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

Well, good. As long as it gets shown somewhere, I suppose.

Re:

[anne-jumps.livejournal.com]

It's been on the air before, I believe.

I honestly don't recall reading anywhere that MoveOn was saying that their First Amendment rights were being violated, because you're right, CBS is not a gov't agency, it's a private company. I might just have skimmed over it.

What I find annoying is fact that CBS is just giving the Repubs whatever because they made it easier for big media to own more of small markets, leading to fewer and fewer companies controlling the media.

Also they are apparently airing a White House-supporting ad during the Super Bowl, so this trying to pretend that they don't air ANY "controversial" or "political" ads is total crap, because I think they have before.

Heh, look at me with the "apparently" and "I think" and "they might have."

Re:

[lots42.livejournal.com]

moveon.org has been producing banner ads crying that they're being censored. See
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~ar24/fc/index.cfm for an example

Re:

[anne-jumps.livejournal.com]

Well, it's annoying that they're exaggerating then but it just doesn't bother me that much, I guess.

[thebratqueen.livejournal.com]

I'm with you. Not that I don't like the ad, and not that I like the Bush administration, but as you say it's a long-standing policy held by a private company that has dealt with this issue before and handled it in the exact same manner. If people want to argue about the policy as a concept that's fine, but those who are acting like it's a personal slam against MoveOn or something really need to research first and react second.

Just my bitchy opinion ;)

[http://users.livejournal.com/_redpanda_/]

My sympathy evaporated when MoveOn started spamming me. e.e