Local Newspaper Censors Advertisements

[masterag78]

What happened to Freedom of Speech?

Brenham's Banner Press Agrees with the Dixie Chicks?

This is really hard to believe!!!!!!!!!

I apologize for this post if there is any errors in it . . . I have just been a lurker and reader for nearly five years and have never taken the opportunity to post anything . . . so forgive me in advance.

I recieved this email forward from my wife from an advertiser in our small town local newspaper, northwest of Houston. Hope some activism from the Freepers can make them see the light.

"Yesterday morning I received a call from my account representative at the Brenham Banner Press. She inquired if I would like to take out an ad in the upcoming issue to support our troops. I told her yes, but I also wanted included in the ad that we support our President the Commander in Chief) also. She told me I couldn't say that in the ad.

Unbelieving I asked her "You mean that I can't say that we support the President of the United States in an ad that WE ARE PAYING FOR?"

She left the phone for a few minutes and came back and confirmed that I could not. She further stated that no ad could say they were for or against the war. I told her to check again, that I did not want to say specifically that, but I did want to say we support and pray for the President. She asked again and her answer was still NO.

This morning I called the Banner Press to be sure that this was still the policy and the answer was still, No you can't say you support the President.

Now I may be a little narrow-minded, but I fail to see how a newspaper that is supposed to also be serving the interest of the public can refuse to accept an ad that is paid for.

If you believe as I do that this is a purely partisan decision that the Dixie Chicks, Tom Daschle or Ted Kennedy would be proud of, and you disagree with this decision from the Banner Press, I suggest that you call them at 979-836-7956, and let your opinion be heard."

Mane Withheld (for lack of permission to use)

Any help out there from some of the greatest people I have ever read.

[dirtboy]

What happened to Freedom of Speech?

Well, there is another part of the First Amendment called Freedom of Association - if the newspaper in question doesn't want to run your ad because they disagree with the content, they don't have to. That ain't censorship, just as the Boy Scouts can't be forced to admit gays.

[trebb]

Well, there is another part of the First Amendment called Freedom of Association - if the newspaper in question doesn't want to run your ad because they disagree with the content, they don't have to. That ain't censorship, just as the Boy Scouts can't be forced to admit gays.

Not exactly the same thing, but I would be interested to see if they would accept an ad saying that the war was wrong and implying that Bush was bad...

[dirtboy]

Not exactly the same thing, but I would be interested to see if they would accept an ad saying that the war was wrong and implying that Bush was bad...

That is well within their rights. There is a difference between censorship and hypocrisy.

[AgThorn]

I don't think that "freedom of association" exemplified by the boy scouts is the same thing here ....

For a US Newspaper to NOT allow someone to promote homosexual because of the newspaper's affiliation with a church, maybe ...

But for a US Newspaper to NOT allow an advertiser, a PAID advertiser, to say they support the President of the same country that this paper is part of ... well, to me that's a different matter all together.

[No Truce With Kings]

It's like this: Freedom of the press belongs to the fellow that owns it.

Don't like it? Start your own newspaper. No law against it.

[Mr. Bird]

but I fail to see how a newspaper that is supposed to also be serving the interest of the public

A newspaper business is no more "serving the interest of the public" than a cable company is. They are serving their own interest, and that's ok.

[dirtboy]

well, to me that's a different matter all together.

Well, a lot of folks think that it's shameful that the Boy Scouts can deny gays membership. But it's the exact same right - to associate with whoever you want to. The difference is, you agree with what the Boy Scouts are doing but disagree with what the paper is doing. But both are doing the exact same thing - choosing who or what views they wish to associate with.

[Hodar]

I respectfully disagree. It may be poor business sense, it may be poor Patriotism, but it is freedom. This is a PRIVATELY owned business, not a federal program. The owner of the paper may send cheers to Iraq, worship Kali, and espouse the love of small animals.

By virtue of being a newspaper owner, does not mean that he MUST print every ad that comes to his advertizing dept. Otherwise, we'd all be at the mercy of Larry Flint.

[Mr. Bird]

Clarification: often, it is in the newspaper's interest to serve the public interest, but it is not a requirement to do business.

[dirtboy]

The owner of the paper may send cheers to Iraq, worship Kali, and espouse the love of small animals.

And then we in turn exercise our freedom of association to convince folks to never, ever buy that paper again - just as we are putting a serious hurt on the sales of Ditzy Chicks records.

[chimera]

My sense is that as a private business the newspaper can exercise editorial control, including choosing which paid advertising business they will accept. I recall there was this controversy with some campus newspapers refusing to run the Horowitz reparations ads. They can choose not to run them, and those so refused are free to criticize that choice in other venues that might be more accomodating to a diversity of viewpoints (and those are usually conservative, not liberal forums).

OTOH, the courts have muddied the waters a bit with rulings based on this "public accomodation" notion. Some of the opponents of the Boy Scouts tried to play this gambit, but it didn't pass muster. Other things have. I wonder if its been tried with newspapers and other forms of media?

[Cobra Scott]

Or the advertiser could change to another medium and along with his or her message of support, make it clear that their message was denied in the original newspaper.

If they have any competition at all, I'm sure they would find a venue.

[Mr. K]

Call them say you want to buy an ad denouncing the war.

Then call them and say you want to run a page supporing the war.

Tape record and transcribe the conversations (if they do not match)

Distribute locally on fliers and on the internet.

[Reb Raider]

Well, I would have been surprised that Brenham wouldn't let you say you support Pres. Bush in your ad. I understand your outrage after all the anti war and anti Bush garbage we have been subjected to. I will leave the legalities to the other posters and just say I support your attempt to try and get your point of view into the ad.

[Atlas Sneezed]

The only entity that can infringe your freedom of speech is the GOVERNMENT!

That private newspaper is free to print whatever they want on each page. You can't force them to print your stuff.

Freedom of speech means that the government can't stop you from printing up your own papers with your own content.