Super Bowl Ad Smackdown

CBSNews.com ^ | 30 January 2004 | CBS Broadcasting Inc.

[MegaSilver]

(CBS) In the religion of advertising, the Super Bowl is a mecca, a nirvana for nachos and a bonanza for beer.

With 90 million viewers at stake, sometimes the competition between commercials is better than the competition on the field, but, as CBS News Correspondent Lee Cowan reports, this year it's gotten nasty.

"I think it basically amounts to censorship."

CBS refused airtime to at least three Super Bowl hopefuls: the animal rights group PETA for one.

Turning down advertisers is nothing new. But this year one jilted suitor is turning up the heat.

"What's at the core of it is, where in the national discourse can you speak freely, and CBS is saying, not here," says Eli Pariser, Campaigns Director for MoveOn.org.

It's a short, pointed ad questioning President George W. Bush's budget policies. It depicts children wearily working adult jobs, and ends with this simple question: "Guess who's going to pay off President Bush's $1 trillion deficit?"

CBS says the sponsor, an online activist group called MoveOn.org, crossed the line by attempting to use Super Bowl airtime as a platform for public debate: something CBS and other networks have banned for years.

"The network simply does not accept any advocacy advertising of any kind," says CBS Executive Vice President Martin Franks.

But CBS does plan to air anti-drug ads sponsored by the White House.

The difference?

"There isn't a group out there advocating drug abuse."

In other words, stopping drug abuse is not controversial- so the White House spot isn't an advocacy ad. Still, some ad executives see the quandary.

"Let's put it like this, there were conspiracy theories after CBS cancelled the Reagan series, and this makes it very easy to ad to a conspiracy theory," says Ira Teinowitz, of Advertising Age.

Some Democrats wasted no time. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-IL, used the Senate floor to poke CBS right in the eye.

"It's time for CBS to announce that the name of its network is the Conservative Broadcasting System," says Durbin.

Which set off the unthinkable - conservative talk radio defending their favorite target, the allegedly liberal media.

"CBS, I think, is right thinking in this. Probably the first time they've been right thinking in a long time," says Dan Patrick, KSEV Radio host.

In the end, the controversy over not airing the ad has given it lots of airtime. Maybe not 90 million viewers in one shot, but if the point was to convey a message; mission accomplished.

[MegaSilver]

Go figure. CBS' analysis of their own reporting is biased--feeding the ridiculous notion that there's a conspiracy involved in "censoring" the ad. "Conservative Broadcasting System" my *ss.

CBS says the sponsor, an online activist group called MoveOn.org, crossed the line by attempting to use Super Bowl airtime as a platform for public debate: something CBS and other networks have banned for years.

Of course, some people might argue (and I don't know if I agree, though I don't think it matters; I think we all agree the media has a liberal slant) that were it not for the fire CBS has come under in recent days, they might not care.

Point is, MoveOn.org has its head so far up its rump that it's not seeing straight any time soon.

Speaking of MoveOn.org, their satellite group (read: the Young Democrats) the had a march through the University Center breezeway while I was working the Film and Theater information table today. They swarmed around the Advocates for Conservative Thought table, holding up their egregious posters and chanting "NO MORE BUSH!" for about a minute, then left. Not that I cared too much, as it was horrible publicity for them and made A.C.T. look like victims, but I had to wonder if we at A.C.T. or the College Republicans could have gotten by with something similar around the Young Democrats table.

In any event, they hit me with one of their smarmy fliers. With sign-ups for auditions a little slow, once they were gone I took the liberty of annotating it:

Then, I folded it, and sealed the front flap with the Mark of the Beast:

And in the Hallmark tradition of back flap:

[Rodney King]

But CBS does plan to air anti-drug ads sponsored by the White House. The difference? "There isn't a group out there advocating drug abuse."

Wolfie, your 15 minutes are at hand..

[CrazyIvan]

Wouldn't a PETA parody add be great for the Superbowl! How about what animals go best with (brand here) beer.

[Just Lori]

In the end, the controversy over not airing the ad has given it lots of airtime. Maybe not 90 million viewers in one shot, but if the point was to convey a message; mission accomplished.




So, Mr. Soros has gotten his message out loud and clear, and he didn't even spend a dime. Can you even IMAGINE how this would go if the tables were reversed? If a conservative movement were to "cry fowl" over something like this against a Democrat in the White House? Have we had ENOUGH yet?

[RM77]

"But CBS does plan to air anti-drug ads sponsored by the White House.


The difference?


"There isn't a group out there advocating drug abuse." "

So therefore, CBS will not be airing any of the truth.com adds I take it, considering that cigarette companies cannot advertise on television anymore. Even though I agree with CBS's decsions they should use it the same way for this issue. (It's my first post please don't flame me too bad.)

[Casloy]

I think they should of run it. Just put up a message first that says "You're about to get mau mau'd by a bunch of mental defectives who think a political ad 11 months before the election is the way to win. This would be a good time to go get a beer."

[bereanway]

I heard earlier this week that Moveon didn't even have the funds to buy the Super Bowl slot. They knew going in they would get jilted which is what they ultimately wanted. Having been stiffed they can now spend these couple weeks screaming about conservative bias and get much more pub than they probably would through the ad. I wouldn't doubt that PETA had the same thing in mind.

[DeepDish]

Welcome to Free Republic.

My thinking on this is that I do not want to watch political ads during a sporting event. And if the networks cave in to this they will lose some, maybe even a significant portion of their viewers. Also CBS is NOT PBS, it is a private business, and as such can decide what products it wants to accept for advertising. The anti-drug ad is probably part of their public service requirement, and if so is irrelevant to any argument about who can buy time.

[NYCVirago]

"It's time for CBS to announce that the name of its network is the Conservative Broadcasting System," says Durbin.

Isn't that the joke of the century! CBS couldn't even bother to call MoveOn "liberal"!

[IncPen]

1. "You can say anything you like."

2. "You can't force anyone to listen."

Liberals always forget part 2.

[Wolfie]

Not necessary, RK, Anheuser-Busch will more than take care of it.

[evolved_rage]

"It's time for CBS to announce that the name of its network is the Conservative Broadcasting System," says Durbin.

Just ask Paleo-Conservative Dan Rather, the only true Constitutionalist in the media today....<\vomitting>