FREEP CBS for False "Gay Marriage" Claims on Amazing Race

Self & Worldnetdaily | 6/4/2003 | Andrew Ainsworth & Joe Kovacs

[Vitamin A]

Friends,

The Amazing Race is one of the most popular TV shows. Unfortunately, CBS has chosen to use the term "married" to describe the relationship of two males from California who are featured on that show. As such, CBS is effectively broadcasting to the nation that "marriage" between two men is valid and exists, despite the fact that NO state in the U.S. recognizes two men as being "married" to each other. At most, Vermont has recognized a "civil union" between two males, but that law was expressly designed not to use the term "marriage" or "married." California and Hawaii have given rights to "domestic partners," but likewise have expressly NOT used the word "marriage" or "married" to describe them.

CBS's intentional use of the term "married" to describe two males from California is an outright misrepresentation--i.e., a lie--for political purposes. I have friends whose children have been confused and questioned their parents when they see the "married" word come up under the male couple as they appear on the TV screen (not to mention the male couple's kiss in the show's intro). My friends, and I, certainly do not appreciate CBS's decision to turn marriage on its head during primetime viewing just to push a political agenda.

Below, I've posted an article which details CBS's lamest of lame non-excuses for using the "married" term.

I am writing to encourage you to take just a minute to express your opinion on this matter to CBS. You can do so by going to www.cbs.com. Go to the bottom of the homepage and click the "Feedback" button. An email frame will pop up on your screen and allow you to provide a comment.

Please pass this along to friends if you feel so inclined.

-Andrew

Culture: CBS Married Gays in Race?

WorldNetDaily May 29, 2003 Source: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32814

MEDIA MATTERS CBS television thrusting 'married gays' on public Network's 'Amazing Race' promotes real-life men as joined in matrimony Posted: May 29, 2003 1:00 a.m. Eastern By Joe Kovacs © 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

CBS Television is promoting tonight's debut of "The Amazing Race 4" by proudly proclaiming a male homosexual couple on the show to be married to each other.

The primetime reality show features 12 teams of two people with a pre-existing relationship racing around the world in a quest for a million-dollar prize.

'Married' male couple on CBS

In current promotional ads on the air, the network touts one of the teams - consisting of two men - as ''The Married Couple.''

"Yes, they are a married, gay couple," a CBS spokeswoman tells WorldNetDaily. "They're married and they're gay. Is there an issue?"

On the show's website, viewers are encouraged to click on biographical links for the teams, to learn more about their personal lives. The write-up on the "married" male couple includes the following:

Twenty-eight-year-old Reichen is a pilot and teaches at a flight school in Los Angeles. A former U.S. Air Force officer and a graduate of the U.S. Air Force academy, he is married to his teammate Chip. He loves skiing and flying and is very into being physically fit. He describes himself as "detail-oriented, caring and thrill-seeking." He speaks French and has traveled internationally quite a bit. Reichen's views on relationships are much more liberal than Chip's - He enjoys flirting with other guys, but that makes Chip upset. Owned by Viacom, CBS says "Amazing Race" has previously featured "gay" contestants, but this is the first time it's trumpeting homosexuals as actually being married to each other.

"They bring a tremendous amount of enthusiasm into the show. They're great!" says the network.

When WorldNetDaily pressed CBS to find out more about the alleged matrimony of its contestants, the network explained that's what Reichen and Chip had written in their application to be on the program.

"Why can't they say they're married? What's the difference?" said the CBS spokeswoman. She went on to state she "believe[d] it's legal in certain states," though she did not specify where the Californians had any binding ceremony, if in fact they had one at all.

Family advocates are blasting CBS's marketing move, saying there's no such thing as legal homosexual marriage in the U.S.

Robert Knight

"Two men is not a marriage. It's pretend marriage," says Robert Knight, a former news editor at the Los Angeles Times who is now director of the Culture and Family Institute.

"This is profoundly dishonest and is intended to persuade Americans that so-called 'gay marriage' is already a reality, when no jurisdiction in America has legalized it."

While there's no government sanction for homosexual marriages, the state of Vermont has approved what it calls civil unions, the legal equivalent to marriage in everything but name. Two other states - California and Hawaii - have approved laws regarding benefits of domestic partners.

But many other states are passing legislation to resist the status of homosexual marriages.

On Tuesday, Texas became the 37th state to approve a law preventing the legal recognition of same-sex unions that have been sanctified by a government elsewhere.

"Like the vast majority of Texans, I believe that marriage represents a sacred union between a man and a woman," Gov. Rick Perry said in a statement.

For broadcast television, homosexuality is not a new concept.

Sean Hayes portrays homosexual on 'Will & Grace' (NBC)

Sitcoms like ABC's "Ellen" and NBC's "Will and Grace" have been among the first programs to put "gays" and lesbians in the limelight, and just this week, the cable channel Bravo - owned by the NBC division of General Electric - announced its summer launch of TV's first homosexual dating series, "Boy Meets Boy."

"As bad as 'Ellen' and 'Will and Grace' have been, ['The Amazing Race' married-homosexual promotion] is an outright lie," said Knight. "This is the worst we have seen from the broadcast networks. ... It's another reason why the big networks are losing viewers, and people are gravitating toward alternative news sources such as WorldNetDaily and the Fox News Channel."

Knight suggests people objecting to this and other programs log onto websites like OneMillionMoms.com and OneMillionDads.com, which provide links for viewers to contact broadcasters and advertisers.

American Express is one of the advertisers to have had high-profile tie-ins with "The Amazing Race," and while the company no longer has its "Moment of the Week" promotion, it says its current slate of commercials will continue to appear on CBS.

"We are a global company and advertise on a wide variety of programs through a number of different media to reach a diverse audience - current as well as potential customers," American Express spokeswoman Monica Beaupre told WorldNetDaily.

Other large companies which have had special advertising segments on previous "Amazing Race" series include Royal Caribbean Cruises, T-Mobile and Kodak.

As WorldNetDaily reported in October, Kodak is proud of its commitment to diversity, which includes homosexuality, even firing a 23-year Kodak veteran after he objected to a pro-homosexual memo circulated in the company's e-mail.

Leslie Moonves, president and CEO of CBS-TV says the network is committed to displaying diversity in the shows it airs:

As broadcasters, we aim to ensure that our national viewing audience is reflected in our programming and our people. We recognize that a workforce comprised of a wide variety of perspectives, viewpoints and backgrounds is integral to our continued success.

This is not a campaign, but rather a fundamental way of doing business at CBS, and we continue to be steadfast in our goal to become more diverse and more representative of the public we serve.

Tonight's season premiere of "The Amazing Race" airs at 8 p.m. Eastern Time, in what's considered to be the family portion of primetime. Officials say previous episodes have drawn an estimated audience of 9 million viewers.

"There's a buzz about the show, but we have not received any calls one way or another about the participants," said Joe Barnes, director of marketing at KOIN-TV, the CBS affiliate in Portland, Ore.

In San Francisco, a market with a large homosexual population, the CBS owned-and-operated station KPIX-TV speculates more people will be talking about the "gay marriage" angle once the program is broadcast.

"We've heard nothing from gays saying 'Thanks,'" said KPIX spokeswoman Akilah Monifah. "We've also heard nothing from homophobic types saying, 'How could you?' either."

* * * * * * * * *

[Vitamin A]

Well said, RonF. Thank you for pointing out the obvious, which unfortunately needs to be done more often than it should be these days. Sounds like a couple guys in here are prime candidates for the CBS spokesPERSON.

[Vitamin A]

Sure, it provides a teaching moment, and any parent can turn off the show. No argument whatsoever.

But is that any reason why people should not speak up and express their opinion that intentional misrepresentation on primetime TV for political motives is something they disapprove of? I can turn off porno too. But does that mean I should sit silently when CBS throws "Debbie Does Dallas" onto the tube at 8 pm?

[Dilly]

In post No. 6, you said:

And for anyone of any age to not know that no state in the U.S.A. establishes or recognizes a state of marriage for homosexual couples; do you have to have any kind of brain to work in CBS's public relations department? Or at least read something other than People or Variety?

and in post no. 38 you said:

When people hear the word "married", it's a universal presumption that somewhere there's a legal document with the names of both parties and a legally authorized third party defining the two as married.

Which is it? I don't think you can have it both ways here.

[Vitamin A]

As a follow up, Dilly, we are consumers. We have tastes and preferences. We have every right to voice our tastes and preferences to people who are trying to get us to give them (or their sponsors) money.

My personal taste and preference is that I should be able to watch a primetime TV show about a race around the world without having to shoo my kids out of the room, or without having to resolve their confusion about two men kissing on camera with the "married" designation on screen.

As a consumer, I have every right to voice a preference for clean, wholesome primetime entertainment. They can agree and get my money, or disagree and not get my money.

Any problem with that?

[RonF]

The point is that "marriage" is not a term whose definition is mutable. If their relationship doesn't meet some state's definition of marriage, they're not married. It's that simple. When people hear the word "married", it's a universal presumption that somewhere there's a legal document with the names of both parties and a legally authorized third party defining the two as married. The CBS spokesperson certainly seemed to think so. Of course, by her own words she reveals her own brain to be hermetically sealed.

CBS can't change this. The fact that they seem to be trying to do so for financial gain is outrageous.

To compare this to a woman calling her best friend "sister" fails on two counts. For one thing, there's no multi-billion company trying to get publicity for and consumption of their product on the basis of that statement. Secondly, there's also a tradition of the use of the words "brother" and "sister" to sometimes symbolize a relationship based on shared experiences of a highly emotional nature rather than blood that cuts across cultures back into antiquity. And when such a thing comes up, if the people involved are not actually blood related, it's made clear. There is no such tradition for the word "married". Anyone seeing the word "married" presumes a legal relationship as well as a social one.

Fine, forget the lawsuit. Perhaps the government shouldn't be involved. I accept the criticism. But this is still deliberately devious and misleading on the part of CBS, and they should be ashamed on that basis, regardless of how you feel about gays and marriage. But shame is not an emotion that is much in vogue, these days. So many people seem to think that shame is old-fashioned and an imposition on their right to blame everyone else for their problems; an impediment to doing as you please to get whatever you want.

[Dilly]

Hey, I didn't say you couldn't (or shouldn't) speak up or complain to CBS if you're offended by this. What I said is, I don't think this is a matter that it appropriate to take to the courts. I didn't instruct you to sit silently by. Please don't put words into my mouth.

[LiteKeeper]

SPOTREP

[RonF]

Whoops. Sorry about the double post.

There's no conflict. The woman at CBS apparently did presume that there was a legal state of marriage between the two men, thus fufilling my term of "universal" in post 38. The fact that she was ignorant of the truth was what I was deploring in post 6.

Of course, it appears that somewhere in that spokeswoman's brain there is a perfect vacumn. Since a perfect vacumn doesn't exist in this universe, she might well be excludable from the term "universal" ;-)

[Vitamin A]

Dilly, fair enough. But I stand by my belief that CBS has potential legal problems here. They are engaging in misrepresentations while selling advertising. It's arguably prohibited in CA. The libs use the courts to get what they want, why shouldn't we?

[colorado tanker]

I don't watch the bilgewater on the networks.

[Dilly]

The libs use the courts to get what they want, why shouldn't we?

Because two wrongs don't make a right, and that's something I do want my children to learn.

[Vitamin A]

Haha, good point motherbear. I hereby declare myself the King of England! Who's to say I am not? Just because they use that term differently? Hey, I should call CBS and let them know!

[Vitamin A]

I guess by that logic you don't approve of war either. I guess the intentional killing of another human being who is trying to kill human beings would be two wrongs also. So because the libs use the courts to do damage, we shouldn't use the courts to undo their damage and do good?

[Vitamin A]

I'm out people, gotta get back to work.

[LWalk18]

Are you going to sue the vast majority of brides who were white on their wedding day?

[Dilly]

I guess by that logic you don't approve of war either.

I'm not going that far afield in this conversation. We're not discussing "just war", which philosophers have debated for millenia. You and I started our discourse discussing what influence CBS' actions might have on children. My point is that I'm not going to teach my children to go file a lawsuit every time someone does something that offends them.

[ChicagoGuy]

Many words have both legal definitions and other connotations, too. Their use of the word 'married' to describe their relationship simply doesn't meet the legal standards for 'fraud' (intentionally untrue, detrimental reliance, etc.) that take it outside the First Amendments bounds. Like I said, if you don't like it, don't watch, complain all you like, etc. But don't try to twist the First Amendment so that people can't describe their relationships how they like.

"I expect more from a law school valedictorian. Which law school by the way?" Northwestern. And your expectations aren't really my issue.

[PoisedWoman]

Yes, hearing the word "married" over and over to describe those two dipsh*ts was disgusting. The good news, however, is that they are inept, clumsy, and basically stupid. Two haircuts in matching levis falling further and further behind in the race. If they succeed in staying on for a few weeks, they'll probably throw a dozen hissy fits and sue for divorce on camera. Gay "marriages" usually last 20 minutes.

[Vitamin A]

Well because there is no law against non-virgins wearing a white wedding dress, then "No"