TV Ads Say S.U.V. Owners Support Terrorists

New York Times ^ | 1/07/03 | KATHARINE Q. SEELYE

[kattracks]

ASHINGTON, Jan. 7 — Ratcheting up the debate over sport utility vehicles, new television commercials suggest that people who buy the vehicles are supporting terrorists. The commercials are so provocative that some television stations are refusing to run them.

Patterned after the commercials that try to discourage drug use by suggesting that profits from illegal drugs go to terrorists, the new commercials say that money for gas needed for S.U.V.'s goes to terrorists.

"This is George," a girl's voice says of an oblivious man at a gas station. "This is the gas that George bought for his S.U.V." The screen then shows a map of the Middle East. "These are the countries where the executives bought the oil that made the gas that George bought for his S.U.V." The picture switches to a scene of armed terrorists in a desert. "And these are the terrorists who get money from those countries every time George fills up his S.U.V."

A second commercial depicts a series of ordinary Americans saying things like: "I helped hijack an airplane"; "I gave money to a terrorist training camp in a foreign country"; "What if I need to go off-road?"

At the close, the screen is filled with the words: "What is your S.U.V. doing to our national security?"

The two 30-second commercials are the brainchild of the author and columnist Arianna Huffington. Her target audience, she said, is Detroit and Congress, especially the Republicans and Democrats who last year voted against a bill, sponsored by Senators John McCain, Republican of Arizona, and John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, that would have raised fuel-efficiency standards.

Spokesmen for the automakers dismissed the commercials.

Eron Shosteck, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said of Ms. Huffington, "Her opinion is out-voted every year by Americans who buy S.U.V.'s for their safety, comfort and versatility." He said that S.U.V.'s now account for 21 percent of the market.

In an interview, Senator Kerry distanced himself from the commercials. He said that rather than oppose S.U.V.'s outright, he believed they should be more efficient.

"I haven't seen these commercials," he said, "but anybody can drive as large an S.U.V. as they want, though it can be more efficient than it is today."

Ms. Huffington's group, which calls itself the Detroit Project, has bought almost $200,000 of air time for the commercials, to run from Sunday to Thursday. While the group may lose some viewers if stations refuse to run the advertisements, the message is attracting attention through news coverage.

The advertisements are to be broadcast on "Meet The Press," "Face the Nation" and "This Week With George Stephanopoulos" in Detroit, Los Angeles, New York and Washington.

But some local affiliates say they will not run them. At the ABC affiliate in New York, Art Moore, director of programming, said, "There were a lot of statements being made that were not backed up, and they're talking about hot-button issues."

Ms. Huffington said she got the idea for the commercials while watching the antidrug commercials, sponsored by the Bush administration. In her syndicated column, she asked readers if they would be willing to pay for "a people's ad campaign to jolt our leaders into reality."

She said she received 5,000 e-mail messages and eventually raised $50,000 from the public. Bigger contributors included Steve Bing, the film producer; Larry David, the comedian and "Seinfeld" co-creator; and Norman Lear, the television producer.

[dead]

We use our 12 passenger van to haul our family of 10 to church.

For sale: Used van. Driven only by a little old, bicycle-riding lady to church on Sundays.

(How old is that van? What’s the mileage on it?)

[kaktuskid]

Solution;
CONVERT COAL TO OIL!
Technology here now (SASOL)

[sheik yerbouty]

I plan on buying one this year. I would like a turbo diesel in it though. No tuneups, and in theory it might function in a post nuclear age.

[biblewonk]

If we accept that we should stop using oil because terrorists will potentially profit from our buying it, then all that is necessary for them to deny us the use of any resource is to find some way to profit from it, anywhere in the world.

Well, this is an interesting statement and true. But you have taken the agrument way to far. We don't need to quit using oil, we produce 40 percent of what we use right here. We need to quit making ourselves so dependent on Islamic nations for oil that we don't need. We need to be a little more German in our thinking and be a little more energy self sufficient. Maybe quite a bit more.

[biblewonk]

That sums it up. You don't like the free market. Period. Your authoritarian slip is showing. Buying oil ain't like selling nukes. Goofy stuff, as usual.

Are you always this manipulative?

[xm177e2]

Then look it up.

[xm177e2]

this thread proves many people don't understand satire.

You think Arianna's kidding?

[tacticalogic]

We need to quit making ourselves so dependent on Islamic nations for oil that we don't need.

Define "need". What one person considers a necessity, another might consider a conspicuous waste. We don't "need" SUV's, or muscle cars, or superbikes, or Winston Cup races, or leafblowers, or air conditioning, or swimming pools, or amusement parks.

[newgeezer]

"Capitalists seek to conserve resources ... simply because every drop of oil, every ton of ore, every shipment of wood saved is a cost reduction and money in the pocket."

Amen. So, there must be another name for those who claim to be capitalists but couldn't care less about conservation. (How about gluttons?)

[1Old Pro]

There is a PSA running in NY where they blame a kid buying a joint for funding Bin Ladan, Al Quaida, and all terrorists.I guess it might have a scintilla of truth if the kid is an arab and his parents are wealthy saudis who fund terrorists.

[dead]

Call them whatever you wish, just keep the government out of their purchasing decisions.

That's conservatism.

[Spyder]

Does anyone believe this ad might actually have the opposite effect of its intention? I find the marijuana supports terrorist ads stupid, and this one only highlights the stupidity of whoever writes copy for some of the so-called public service announcements. I know an awful lot of liberal democrats (soccer mom types) who think their SUVs are their God-given right... I say keep 'em coming (the stupid ads).

[Protagoras]

Are you always this manipulative?

Are you always this obtuse?

[Protagoras]

Why not just say what it is next time? Now that I looked it up I find out it is irrelevant to my point. So another waste of time.

[newgeezer]

Call them whatever you wish, just keep the government out of their purchasing decisions. That's conservatism.

Oh, if only life were so simple as that. You say gov't should have no say in the public's purchasing decisions where oil consumption is concerned. Do you believe that's the way it should be with every other resource having national security implications, as well?

You must be too young to remember the OPEC oil embargo. Maybe you haven't yet noticed how much of our economy runs on oil. Maybe you think the reason for the Persian Gulf War was to free the oppressed people of Kuwait.

As biblewonk said previously, oil is a strategic resource -- every bit as much as steel, uranium, ordnance, or military personnel. Ever heard of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve? Oh, I suppose to be a "real" conservative, one has to let the "free market economy" determine the availability of oil, the size of the military, the number of aircraft carriers, and our foreign policy response to North Korea.

Yeah, go ahead and "drive large," my fine, self-proclaimed conservative friends. Keep the terrorists swimming in US$.

[mhking]

I hope you don't really think anyone is timid enough to wet their pants because of the Red white and blue.

You gonna keep standing there? Only reason I ask is so I can throw it into 4WD to drive over you, nothing special.

Contrary to popular belief, some of us own SUV's (I drive a Grand Cherokee, my wife drives a Wrangler, which we actually DO take off-roading, thank you very much) because we enjoy them outright. We've got three children, and getting them in the back of a car while having enough room for me to push the seat back (no, I'm not a small man by any stretch) was not possible. And I have no desire to drive one of those drafty, clumsy, poorly-made econobox vans that the auto manufacturers are foisting off on the suburban soccer moms.

Considering that it costs me just as much to fill my Jeep's tank as it would to fill up the Volvo wagon my wife and I considered before buying our Jeep, your "oil for terror weapons" analogy loses all sense of reality.

Just admit it. You've got a problem with everybody on the road, period. Go on over to DU. I'm sure you can find some like-minded tree-hugging luddites like yourself to play with. Just stay outta my way, thank you very much. Otherwise, I'll run over you and keep going.

[mhking]

this thread proves many people don't understand satire.

Go back and read her other work. She's not kidding.

[dead]

Oh, if only life were so simple as that.

It is.

You say gov't should have no say in the public's purchasing decisions where oil consumption is concerned. Do you believe that's the way it should be with every other resource having national security implications, as well?

Oil only has “national security implications” because of government interference in the marketplace for oil. Without that interference, brought about by misguided environmentalists, we would have very adequate supplies of domestic oil.

You must be too young to remember the OPEC oil embargo.

Guess again.

Maybe you haven't yet noticed how much of our economy runs on oil.

Guess again.

Maybe you think the reason for the Persian Gulf War was to free the oppressed people of Kuwait.

It was one of them. Preventing a complete lunatic from gaining access to a large percentage of the world’s accessible oil was a larger reason. Again, the reason the Arab world has such a large percentage of the world’s “accessible” oil is that their governments are not short-sighted enough to restrict their access to it.

As biblewonk said previously, oil is a strategic resource -- every bit as much as steel, uranium, ordnance, or military personnel.

No it isn’t. We have plenty of oil. Look it up.

Ever heard of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve?

Yes.

Oh, I suppose to be a "real" conservative, one has to let the "free market economy" determine the availability of oil,

Yes.

the size of the military, the number of aircraft carriers, and our foreign policy response to North Korea.

Of course not. That’s idiotic.

Yeah, go ahead and "drive large," my fine, self-proclaimed conservative friends.

I drive a Mazda Protégé - 25 mpg city / 31 mpg highway. But I still support the right of American consumers to choose the type of vehicle they want to drive without interference from misguided environmentalists and their luddite agenda.

Keep the terrorists swimming in US$.

As long as enviroidiots, like yourself, restrict access to domestic oil, I guess we all will.

[mhking]

I biked to work today.

Heh, heh. Try that here in Atlanta, bunky...

I've got a 25-mile one way commute, and that's on some of the most forbidding freeway in the nation.

And I'll lay you good money that I get better mileage in my Jeep than you do in your Ford or GMC conversion van.

[MrLeRoy]

yes, both ideas are moronic. and i imagine it was someone in the drug czar's office that thought up the original drugs=terrorism spots.

Right on both counts.