Posted on 01/20/2005 5:16:16 AM PST by wmichgrad
GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (AP) — An advertisement for a new translation of the Bible by the nation's largest publisher of the book is gathering moss at the headquarters of Rolling Stone magazine.
Zondervan, a division of HarperCollins Publishers, is in the midst of an aggressive advertising blitz for Today's New International Version, or TNIV. The new Bible, which contains both the Old Testament and the New Testament, is to be on store shelves in early February.
Doug Lockhart, Zondervan's executive vice president of marketing, said Wednesday that research by his Grand Rapids company indicates the TNIV would hold particular appeal for young people.
Zondervan decided to advertise the TNIV in some magazines and at some online sites frequented by 18- to 34-year-olds. Months ago, it bought ad space in Rolling Stone, Modern Bride, The Onion, MTV.com and AOL, Lockhart said.
"Last week, we were surprised and certainly disappointed that Rolling Stone had changed their mind and rejected our ad for the TNIV," he said.
A telephone message seeking comment was left Wednesday at the New York headquarters of Wenner Media LLC, publisher of Rolling Stone. Zondervan paid Wenner Media last July to run a February ad.
On Tuesday, USA Today quoted Kent Brownridge, general manager of Wenner Media, as saying his staff first saw the actual copy last week. He called it more of a religious message than a Bible ad, and "we are not in the business of publishing advertising for religious messages."
The other media outlets have said they still intend to run the ad, Lockhart said. The version sent to Rolling Stone features the face of a contemplative-looking young man and the following copy:
"Today it makes sense more than ever. In a world of almost endless media noise and political spin, you wonder where you can find real truth. Well now there's a source that's accurate, clear, and reliable. It's the TNIV — Today's New International Version of the Bible. It's written in today's language, for today's times — and it makes more sense than ever."
Lockhart said when Zondervan asked the magazine why it had decided not to run the ad, it was told that Rolling Stone's policy was not to accept advertisements for religious materials. When pressed for a written copy of the policy, the magazine did not produce one, he said.
Lockhart called Rolling Stone's decision disappointing.
"We continue to believe it is an appropriate vehicle for (targeting) this age group and we certainly would hope to have the opportunity to go back to them," he said.
The gender-neutral, rewritten, politically correct and propagandized TNIV bible has been denounced by a multitude of biblical scholars and theologians as inaccurate and distorted.
Rolling Stone may have actually exercised good judgment in this case.
"Rolling Stone may have actually exercised good judgment in this case."
Well, it is certainly their call what ads to run. Why is this even a story? Who cares! Let the editors chose and the readers be the judge.
Without actually stating it, I guess I was wondering the same thing myself.
On the face of it, the headline gives the impression that this is a story about Rolling Stone being anti-religious. The TNIV "bible" is fraught with controversy that many may not be aware of. I find the whole story, headline included, to be misleading.
I'm sure Zondervan considered this effort to fall under the category of "missions".
Sheesh, Zondervan had been around for years with by far the best digital versions of the bible in different translations. this is a well-established book and software publisher. They should sue.
"They should sue.
"
Sue? Over what? The Rolling Stone is a privately-owned publication, which may choose not to run any advertising it wishes. This is not a free speech issue.
Most publications have printed policies regarding what advertisements they will/wont accept. The law states that if they violate this policy and show discrimination, they can be successfully sued.
"Most publications have printed policies regarding what advertisements they will/wont accept. The law states that if they violate this policy and show discrimination, they can be successfully sued."
Actually, most publications reserve the right in those policies to reject any ads they don't want to run. Let's see: How about a magazine called "Christian Life?" Should it be able to reject an ad for a new translation of the Koran, or should they be sued by its publisher?
Private businesses may reject what they like, in terms of advertising. I wouldn't have it any other way.
Rolling Stone these days is half filled with full-page ads of semi-clothed youth selling overpriced jeans and kitsch, part reviews of music and artists I've never heard of and would never buy, and of course the obligatory Bush hating, apologies-to-the-world political rants. I doubt that they exercised good judgement in any case.
Rolling Stone may have actually exercised good judgment in this case.
I doubt very seriously that the sound logic you point out is what RS (or more particularly Jann Wenner) had in mind when they rejected the ad.
I absolutely agree - but I wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt.
I was a 20+ year subscriber to that rag. I dropped them in 1998 when I also dropped my Independent status for Republican. :-)
"was told that Rolling Stone's policy was not to accept advertisements for religious materials. When pressed for a written copy of the policy, the magazine did not produce one, he said."
The magazine doesn't produce *anything* except misconceptions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.