MyDD :: Refusal of UCC Ad Q's

Refusal of UCC Ad Q's

by Jerome Armstrong, Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 11:08:04 AM EST

Following up on the earlier post about the NBC & CBS boycott of the UCC TV ad, according to the UCC website, the ad has been accepted and will air on a number of networks, including ABC Family, AMC, BET, Discovery, Fox, Hallmark, History, Nick@Nite, TBS, TNT, Travel and TV Land, among others.

As Josh Marshall points out, the "explanation from CBS" adds another Viacom network station in stating that "...this spot is unacceptable for broadcast on the [CBS and UPN] networks."

Well, "What's going on here?" is right. Why does an explanation from CBS include UPN? Was it Viacom that refused the ad for two of its network stations?

Viacom is a public company, they trade on the NYSE under VIAB. Besides CBS & UPN, Viacom owns MTV, Nickelodeon, Nick at Nite, VH1, BET, Paramount Pictures, Infinity Broadcasting, Viacom Outdoor, TV Land, Comedy Central, CMT: Country Music Television, Spike TV, Showtime, and Simon & Schuster.

But you'll notice that BET, owned by Viacom, is showing the ad, which means what? I would like it if UCC released more information on what exactly happened. Put the whole refusal letters of explanation, and who exactly they were from, up on their website. There's a lot of justified agitation about refusal by CBS & NBC; but those networks are owned by public corporations, it's a bit confusing who exactly should be targeted for accountability.

Tags: Media (all tags)

Permalink :: 16 Comments :: Post a Comment

Running scared (3.00 / 1)

The pattern I see is that the broadcast networks are not running the ad, but cable networks are. Why? Broadcasters are running scared due to the FCC's overzealous pursuit of "indecency."

This is precisely the outcome Focus on the Family and their ilk wanted -- self-censorship by networks due to the threat of intervention.

by boffo on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 11:27:53 AM EST

Networks and cable (none / 0)

Oddly enough I'm more curious about UPN and BET. UPN is widely known as a "Black" network. Sinc eI live in a 99% minority neighborhood with my biracial daughter and we watch UPN (Yes, I can name a UPN show and WB, can you?) I feel safe in saying this.

People who are poor don't have access to cable and lots of areas still have no cable and no other alternatives for the poor. So, by refusing it on CBS and UPN, they are refusing to allow low income minorities to be excluded from seeing it.

Why?

Fox is showing it. They're a network.

I think about what Dan and Peter and Tom recently all said, that the evening news is still rated higher than the cable news networks. That means that this ad reaches more people on the regular networks. And that's why.

by bendygirl on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 11:48:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Networks and cable (none / 0)

You're right that Fox is airing it, which is interesting. It indicates that their assessment of the risk of FCC intervention may different than Viacom and NBC's. I'm not sure that disproves my general point, though, about cable networks feeling more free to air it because they do not have to worry about the FCC.

So what do you do? Contact NBC, CBS and UPN and then contact their advertisers. Get all your friends to do the same. Show them that there are costs to not airing the ad, too. Alas, as Pudentilla has pointed out, that seems to be the only language networks understand.

by boffo on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 12:44:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Networks and cable (none / 0)

UPN - Veronica Mars and Kevin Hill

WB - Smallville

;-)

by yitbos96bb on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 03:30:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Another question? (none / 0)

Where is the Alliance Defense Fund or other "Religious Freedom" groups? They are usually found this time of year protecting people's rights to display nativities. I guess they are just political movement not really interested in promoting religious liberty.

-jeff

by j pratt on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 11:31:28 AM EST

Re: Another question? (none / 0)

The ADF is a religious right front, not a "Religious Freedom" group like Americans United for Separation of Church and State. So of course they're just a political movement and not really interested in promoting religious liberty.

If you're always playing the fear card, it's a pretty good sign you're not playing with a full deck!

by Mathwiz on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 03:49:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The widening circle (none / 0)

I'm finding the trend in corporate stifling of free speech very, very disturbing. I'm, frankly, amazed at the tremendous stupidity of certain corporate entities. I mean... even FOX is airing this. Wow.

Okay, that's all I had to say. I know it's not particularly constructive, but oh well.

by Green Irishboy on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 12:06:13 PM EST

The NBC and CBS explanation doesn't smell right (none / 0)

My BS detector says something fishy is in the broth. This ad just doesn't strike me as political enough or offensive enough under any reasonable standard to justify their rational for not running this ad.

Maybe it's because my Reynolds Wrap hat is getting frayed from overuse, but it looks to me like they are playing into the right wing agenda to garner support from Bush and Michael Powell for furthur FCC deregulation of monopoly standards.

In the alternative, they could be trying to appease some of the conservative groups, who joined liberals in opposing Powll's loosened standards for media consolidation, with an eye to breaking them away for the grass roots opposition that derailed Powell's last effort.

by Gary Boatwright on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 12:17:51 PM EST

Re: The NBC and CBS explanation doesn't smell righ (none / 0)

Im not sure Powell's last effort was totally derailed. It was put on hold by the courts, but I don't know the status of any appeal.

If you're always playing the fear card, it's a pretty good sign you're not playing with a full deck!

by Mathwiz on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 03:52:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The NBC and CBS explanation doesn't smell righ (none / 0)

Amazes me how Colin Powell could have a son who acts like that. The differences between the two are amazing and startling.

by yitbos96bb on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 04:28:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The NBC and CBS explanation doesn't smell righ (none / 0)

You're right. It is more accurate to say it is on hold.

by Gary Boatwright on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 06:56:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

FOX (none / 0)

FOX is amoral. They just want the ad revenue.

by global yokel on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 12:48:59 PM EST

If Only! (none / 0)

If only they were a-moral!

And only if CBS were such!

FOX is clearly afraid of nothing, given their general level of drivel.

by Long Haul on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 02:43:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

UCC (none / 0)

This disturbs me too. I go to a UCC church. Best church I have ever attended. I had sworn off christians and the christian church after sitting for years and having hate thrown down my throat. Many christian churches today preach hate; it goes way past intolerance. I left church in high school after a sunday school class talking about how the mormons, jehovah's witnesses and other non protestant groups were evil cults whose members would burn in hell. This was not being taught to adults but to elementary and high school kids. A kid I knew from that church attacked a mormon over this issue. The insanity got to me and I left. That church and many others make a mockery of the teachings of Christ and fail to understand that the bible was not meant to be taken literally. The early christians never did. It was always allegorical interpretation. The literal interpretation did not take place until the time of Martin Luther. If we were to take it literally then yes, homosexuality would be wrong (Leviticus 18:22), but among the things I would be allowed to do would be buy slaves from neighboring nations (Leviticus 25:44), sell my daughter into slavery (Exodus 21:7), kill anyone who works on Sunday (Exodus 35:2) etc. The list goes on and on...including banning shellfish and pork (Leviticus 11:7 and 10). Amazing how all animals are created equal, just some are more equal to others.

The UCC was the first place I have been where they throw this literal garbage out the window and welcome everyone...just as Jesus did. They want to help people like Jesus does. They do do evangelism, but not in the traditional sense of trying to convert people but by being there for those looking to belong and welcoming all people regardless of race, creed, orientation or RELIGION into the church. We have a hindu and a buddhist at my church (their wives believe in christianity) and they have a great time. The pastor takes the bible and relates it to real life...not telling you to follow this or burn in hell, but using the little parable to make you think about NOT how to be a better Christian, but instead how to be a better person. THAT is truly WHAT JESUS WOULD DO!!!

Sorry to get off on a rant, but I finally feel comfortable in a church and with my faith again for the first time in 10 years. I don't want to see the (non) christian right try to influence and destroy the love and tolerance I have witnessed over the last year.

by yitbos96bb on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 04:27:34 PM EST

There is a benign explanation (none / 0)

One possibility is that the networks didn't want to get involved in a religious ad war. The Big Media bias is actually stridently apolitical. There is a conservative corporate bias at the ownership and upper management level, but they are quite aware that they need to appeal to as broad a spectrum of their audience as possible.

Perhaps they made a small inferential leap to the next logical development. What type of commercials will Dr. Dobson and Jerry Falwell want to run? It is very foreseeable that the UCC commercial would compel a response from the right that just might be genuinely offensive. Big Media execs may view their refusal to run this ad as their only option to avoid getting stuck in the middle of a relgious ad war that would alienate large blocs of their audience.

by Gary Boatwright on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 07:06:21 PM EST

Re: There is a benign explanation (none / 0)

Funny you mention that. The Chicago tribune had this as one of its front page stories today (12-2). In 1993 (I think), some hardcore conservative christian groups wanted to run ads with former homosexuals who were "turned" straight, showing all gays "they can still be saved." That is the kind of crap to expect from them.

My favorite was the guy from the Catholic group who said that when the Roman soldiers asked Jesus how to be saved, he didn't say Be tolerant and inclusive (although by actions he was this) but instead said follow the commandments.

ANYONE KNOW WHICH COMMANDMENT SAYS "DON'T BE GAY!!!"? Just curious.

by yitbos96bb on Thu Dec 02, 2004 at 10:44:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.