I recieved this in the mail today and thought I would pass it on [img]smile.gif[/img]

Dear friend of MoveOn,
Over the last four days, something incredible has happened. CBS has received over 340,000 emails and phone calls asking it to stop its censorship. Clearly a huge number of us believe that CBS's refusal to run our Voter Fund ad, while allowing the Bush White House to run an advocacy ad of its own, is just plain wrong.

Columnists and editorial pages are writing about it. And on Monday, FCC commissioner Michael Copps issued a statement on it. These folks understand that this issue isn't just about our Voter Fund's ad -- an ad by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals was censored as well. At heart, it's about free speech. Huge companies like CBS that control access to the publicly owned airwaves have to air opposing points of view.

CBS still refuses to run "Child's Pay." But together, we can increase the pressure on CBS. And through the power of the Internet, we can make sure that millions of people see the ad and learn about the controversy. As a first step, forward this email or the original message attached below to your friends. Ask them to check out the ad at:
http://www.moveon.org/cbs/ad/

(You can also point them directly to the CBS petition at http://www.moveon.org/cbs/?id=2288-3...p6lLXdvpbBxSg)

They can also send an email to CBS and join the campaign at that address. If you haven't joined the campaign yet, you can sign the petition there as well.

Next, consider taking a moment to call CBS and let them know why you believe their refusal to run ads like this one is wrong. If you call, please be calm and polite -- it's not the folks who answer the phones' fault that CBS made this decision. You can reach them at:

CBS Comment Line
(212) 975-3247

(We're spreading out the calls across a number of relevant CBS numbers, so hopefully you won't get a busy signal.)


After you've called, help us track the number of calls that are pouring in by going to:
http://www.moveon.org/cbscalls.html?...Zp6lLXdvpbBxSg

If you have a website or blog of your own, you can also help by placing the banner ad or button below on the site. This'll help push the ad to a whole new level of prominence. Click on the images below to get the code to put on your site:





Finally, you can contribute to the conversation in the nation's editorial pages by writing a letter to the editor. Here are a few tips on writing an effective letter:


- Brevity is the soul of wit.
- The key to publication is to pounce on something specific you've seen in the newspaper -- such as a story on Super Bowl advertising.

- Be sure to include your name and address, and especially your phone number when submitting your letter. Editors need to call you to verify authorship before they can print your letter. They don't print your phone number.

- Your newspaper's letters page should give you an email address or fax number to use, or you can try Congress.org's website:
http://congress.org/congressorg/dbq/media/

- Please let us know when you've sent your letter by going to:
http://www.moveon.org/cbsltes.html?i...Zp6lLXdvpbBxSg

Here are a few talking points you can use in your letter:


It's about free speech. The First Amendment doesn't mean a whole lot if we're denied access to the airwaves. CBS has a constitutional obligation to air opposing points of view.

If the White House can run an ad, other groups should be allowed to also. CBS will be airing an ad sponsored by the White House on this year's Super Bowl. Previous ads in this series have implied that buying drugs funds terrorism -- a much more controversial claim than the one "Child's Pay" makes.

CBS just got a huge favor from the White House. Senator John McCain said that the bill was custom tailored to CBS and Fox, which have been lobbying heavily to be able to grow larger. MoveOn and other groups have lobbied against this bill. Now the White House is allowed to run an ad, and groups like MoveOn Voter Fund are not.

What's "controversial"? CBS claims that it has a policy against running "controversial" issue ads. But the only line in the whole ad is a fact: President Bush has created a $1 trillion deficit. In fact, according to numbers released by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office yesterday, that number's low.
As you know, this campaign is bigger than one ad. It's about free speech. We're putting the country's media on notice that we're not going to take censorship lying down.

Sincerely,
--Adam, Carrie, Eli, James, Joan, Laura, Noah, Peter, Wes, and Zack
The MoveOn.org Team
January 27th, 2003

P.S. Some of you have written in to tell us that local CBS affiliates are willing to run the ad. It's true, and it points out CBS' hypocrisy: If the "policy" under which it rejected this ad made sense for the national organization, one would think it would apply to the affiliates as well. Placing the ad nationally via affiliates would likely cost several times the $1.6 million to run it on the network. But even if in the end CBS still refuses to broadcast the ad nationwide, we'll make sure it gets on TV in a powerful way. Please stay tuned.

Sent an email, but I don't know exactly what the FCC rules regarding refusal of advertising are. We shall see.

I've sent an e-mail to CBS as well. The video in question is very well done and it would be great if it was shown on TV.

Mark

1)CBS DOESN'T have a Constitutional OBLIGATION to run anything, Freedom of speech ALSO means they have the freedom NOT to speak if they so desire. CBS MAY have a FCC obligation to run opposing points of view, if they GIVE FREE AIR TIME, but last time I checked the FCC is NOT the US Constitution.
2) CBS is Not the US Government therefor the dening of PAID AIR TIME is CBS's right, unless people are avocating the denial of CBS's freedom of speech. Then what the "HALE" does that do to the argument of the 1st amendment meaning anything?
3)Dening of Paid air time is a stupid business move, left-winger's money spends just like right-wingers money!
4) It's Hypocritical for CBS to alow one advocacy ad while dening another, but hey that's freedom of speech.

Censorship!!!!! Well spank my rear end and paint it purple, since when is the exercise of how an NON GOVERNMENTAL orginization, in a free Representative Repulic, choses to act Censorship? Is Not compeling said NON GOVERNMENTIAL orginization to say something they don't want too also a form of Censorship?
ie: We don't care what you want to say, YOU HAVE TO SAY THIS!!!

[ 01-28-2004, 12:42 PM: Message edited by: John D Harris ]

Normally, you'd be right, John D., but I don't know in this case. It works like this--

The FCC IS the government and it divvies up air time to a select few huge companies that own almost all broadcasting. Because these companies, like CBS (or, more importantly -- its owners), are so large (owning dozens of other broadcast companies including many you think they don't), there is a concern that their policy decisions as to what to run and NOT to run can affect our Constitutional rights -- both our right to speak (on air) and our right to listen to speech, including all forms of speech (pretty much).

Also, note that political speech is the most protected speech under the Constitution.

Accordingly, while broadcast companies are not the gummint, the gummint is very intricately involved in what they put on the air, so the gummint DOES have a Constitutional concern in this case.

The level of that concern is addressed in the volumes and volumes of regulations the FCC has. As I said, I'm not familiar with the details, but there is a Constitutional concern believe it or not.

Regardless of anything, the fact remains that they choose to air what they want. That doesn't make it right. In fact, that's sort of the definition of censorship, isn't it?

In so far as the FCC, a Governmental body, controls the Air ways. CBS is bound by whatever laws/regs the FCC has issued inaccordance to the FCC's area of Gov't control. I think you'll find "Equal Time" pertains to free air time, not paid air time. The TV networks, cable and broadcast, reject paid advertising all the time for whatever reason. Normally I might even argee with you since it is about paid "Po-litical speech", Except!!!!! everybody remember the campaign reform act, It limits "Po-litical speech" within a certain amount of time of an election. The Law of Unintended Consquences, Rear's up it's ugly head and bites. If it's ok to limit "Po-litical speech" in one manner way, would it not be OK to limit it in another manner? Careful what you ask for you just might get it! ;) [img]smile.gif[/img] :D

As for the size of CBS, save that for the downtrodd'n masses that own CBS and it's like. ;) [img]smile.gif[/img]

You chose to write what you wanted, so that would be censorship, by the same definition. CBS made a dumb move, but dumb is not censorship or a violaion of the 1st amendment. Infact I would argue that being able to make dumb moves is the very essence of the 1st amendment of the US Constitution. ;)

You chose to write what you wanted, so that would be censorship, by the same definition. CBS made a dumb move, but dumb is not censorship or a violaion of the 1st amendment. Infact I would argue that being able to make dumb moves is the very essence of the 1st amendment of the US Constitution. ;) </font>[/QUOTE]The term "self-censorship" DOES exist. It is when an author, a publisher or in this case a TV station eliminates critical passages from his/her/their work to avoid negative consequences.
When for example in a dictatorship authors "voluntarily" only wrtie hagiographies about the dicatator instead of criticising him/her, because they know that if they write open criticism
1. the book will get censored anyway
2. they will face grave punishment

In this case CBS choose to self-censor its program to avoid getting heat from the Bush administration just as Comedy Central did when cancelling "That's my Bush".
The only difference here is that CC canceled a program that cost money (allegedly because of the high costs) and CBS refused a program that would make them money, which leaves no excuses here.

<font color=deepskyblue>I don't see that CBS needs to provide any "excuses" or explanations for it's decision. My guess is that the national corporate offices of CBS decided the negative reaction they would recieve from airing the ads made by MoveOn and P.E.T.A. to the SuperBowl crowd far outweighs the revenue it would generate.

I was surprised to learn that there may actually be a Constitutional concern regarding this issue. I feel that CBS - just like ANY corporation or business - has a right to decide which advertising it will accept and which it will not.

As for the claims of censorship, the very fact that some affiliate stations are choosing to air the ads in question negates that claim outright. Freedom of speech is NOT being denied, although it may be limited. Also, it isn't like CBS is the ONLY media mogul MoveOn and P.E.T.A. could approach to air their ads.

No, the argument isn't that they can't show their ads at all (as they are trying to imply). Their argument is that CBS is choosing not to air their ads during the SuperBowl and thus - denying their right to Free Speech. Sorry, but <font color=white>John Hale</font> already reminded us that the First Amendment is a two-way street and applies to CBS's right to NOT accept paid advertising just as much as it applies to MoveOn and P.E.T.A.'s right to produce the commercials and seek to have them aired.</font>