Augusta National says Masters will be without commercials - rather than invite women into club

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | 8/30/02 | Glenn Sheeley

[GeneD]

Augusta National Golf Club is putting its money where its mouth is in its fight with a women's group pressuring the club to admit a female member.

Club chairman Hootie Johnson announced Friday that because corporate sponsors of the Masters' telecast are being pressured by the National Council of Women's Organizations, the 2003 tournament will be shown without sponsors or commercials.

At least golf fans will benefit from the fight. The 2003 telecast would have contained its normal four commerical minutes per hour. With 12 1/2 hours of live programming, that's 50 minutes of commericials that will not take golf fans away from the action.

"Augusta National is NCWO's true target," Johnson said in a statement. "It is therefore unfair to put the Masters media sponsors in the position of having to deal with this pressure. Accordingly, we have told our media sponsors that we will not request their participation for the 2003 Masters."

Rather than put its sponsors in a position where boycotts or their products or services would be threatened, Johnson said the Masters will absorb the advertising fees that would have been paid by IBM, Coca-Cola and Citigroup.

Johnson said, "We are sorry, but not surprised, to see those corporations drawn into this matter, but contunue to insist that our private club should not be 'managed' by an outside group. . . There may come a day when women will be invited to join our club, but that decision must be ours. We also believe that the Masters and the club are different, and that one should not affect the other."

[My Favorite Headache]

What they will do more than likely is have sponsor logos at the top of the leader boards on screen and score or hole shots. Like Tiger Woods -1 with a Ryder symbol ontop of it.

[FreedomPoster]

This kicks butt! What else can be said?

Bump for the right to free association.

[Spruce]

Why is it that the feminists "celebrate" women's colleges but condemn all-male clubs?

Because white christian males are the root cause of ALL the worlds problems.

[Maigrey]

ANGC Bump!

Maigrey

[uncbob]

These councils ain't nothing but a bunch of over the hill dykes

Why the hell sponsors should care what they think I don't know
Do they really think they are going to lose business because of these lessies

[Mark Felton]

"Dr. Martha Burk is a political psychologis"

Burk doesn't have a clue how power politics works. Her letter was amateurish. It never should have been sent. One must first seek to establish personal one on one informal communications before resorting to formalities.

IF her goal was to deliberately creat a conflict that could escalate in time for the election (most likely) then again she will find she has misjudged the mood of the country and that she does not have the politics of the situation in hand at all.

[Lorianne]

Rather than put its sponsors in a position where boycotts or their products or services would be threatened, Johnson said the Masters will absorb the advertising fees that would have been paid by IBM, Coca-Cola and Citigroup.

I'm sure these companies will still be kicking in the money for the telecast or else they wouldn't be mentioning them. Let the boycotting begin.

[Lorianne]

I think women understand "private" just fine. Protests, including boycotts are a legitimate form of free speech. People who don't like what "private" organizations are doing have the 1st Ammendment right to protest ANY and ALL behaviour they don't like.

The threatened boycott is a free speech issue. If you don't like allowing free speech, ditch the 1st Ammendment.

PS. You can't have it both ways.

[Lorianne]

Exactly. It's a free speech issue.

[Mark Felton]

"When someone has a business meeting at a private club, it is no longer truly private."

nonsense. You have neither moral nor legal grounds to make such conjecture. One on one personal business discussions are not regulated by law.

[mhking]

CBS is contractually bound to pay the money to Augusta National for the right to broadcast, isn't it?

Yes, but Augusta National gets to dictate terms, plus they've got right of refusal on sponsors. The contract for The Masters differs dramatically from anything else in sports, and because it is as big a tournament as it is (in terms of dollars generated, it is the biggest tourney every year, bar none), CBS (and USA for the early-week cable coverage) have very little wiggle-room.

There's no way that CBS/USA in their right mind would give the exposure up. It's akin to the NBA Finals or the Superbowl or the World Series. They'll make the money back elsewhere.

The key here is that Augusta National has held VERY tightly to tradition and contractually gets to dictate terms. If CBS/USA didn't like it, they could leave (!?). But once someone else grabbed it (and someone WOULD grab it very quickly), they'd acceed to the same terms, and they would get to hold it indefinitely, period.

[Mark Felton]

You have a right to free speech but you do not have a right to insert that speech into private matters. None at all.

They are welcome to proclaim their views publicly any where they wish that will have them say it. They do not have a right to deny free association or intrude upon private affairs.

[Diddle E. Squat]

Well done.

[Lorianne]

Huh? In the Ameria I live in you are allowed to organize a protest, including organize boycotts. What part of "free speech" don't you understand.

Free speech and free association are both a part of the 1st Ammendment to the Constitution. They are part of the "checks and balances" that our Founders envisioned making our system strong. As it turns out they were right and it is working beautifully.

Adherence to the principles embodied in the 1st Ammendment is a two-way street. Make it a one-way street and you trash the 1st Ammendment.

[johnb838]

You also have the right to stamp your little feet and hold your breath until you turn blue but it don't mean you're getting into Augusta!

[RobFromGa]

being pressured by the National Council of Women's Organizations

Dear Martha-

Just a question, isn't the name of your organization a bit exclusionary and discriminatory and hypocritical? Please explain why there are numerous "Women's Organizations"-- enough to require a Council.

Is one of your duties to help these Women's Organizations to exclude Men from their organizations?

Just wondering,

RobFromGa

[Archie Bunker on steroids]

As long as Hootie keeps tweaking Augusta National so that Tiger keeps winning, he doesn't need sponsors.

[Lorianne]

LOL, silly you. I don't want into Augusta! I doubt most women give a hoot about Augusta or golf for that matter.

But I'm pleased as punch to see all of our 1st Ammendment rights taken out for an excercise run.

[Psycho_Bunny]

Wow.  Only took 15 posts for a lefty disruptor to launch a straw man.