Superbowl Censorship

Two things to say:

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by RoadClosed
[B]Let me get this in perspective. You want to force a private company to air a political motivated add? And you say the opposite is a violation of free speech? That they don't have the right to decide on their own what to air? And you supported the notion that the add becomes illegal if the super bowl happened to be 6 months prior to an election. That a super bowl, an entertainment medium should become the showcase for highly hyped highly biased political ads that border on comical?

---

I agree with you here. Although I am kinda pissed that they will probably have stupid anti-drug or pro-bush commercials I agree it is their right to show what the hell they want on their station.

Quote:

---

Where does moveon.org get million upon million to air a commercial? Are they part of the corporate syndicate coming at our flanks to socialize the masses into a government dependent socialized hypnotized culture????? Where media is nothing but doom and gloom and no optimism exists anywhere?

---

Its called donations buddy. Have you seen how the Howard Dean campaign gets money for their campaign? That is how they get money. No secret consipiracy. ;) (Although it might be a little more fun if there was... ;) )

Quote:

---

Although I am kinda pissed that they will probably have stupid anti-drug or pro-bush commercials I agree it is their right to show what the hell they want on their station.

---

The ads for the Superbowl will be:

American Legacy Foundation Anti-smoking campaign
Anheuser-Busch
America Online
Bayer and GlaxoSmithKline
DaimlerChrysler
FedEx
Frito-Lay
General Motors
H&R Block
Monster WorldWide
NFL
Pepsi-Cola
Philip Morris anti-smoking campaign
Procter & Gamble
Sony Pictures
Touchstone Pictures
Visa
Warner Bros.
White House Office of National Drug Control Policy

<off topic>There is a whole site dedicated to Super Bowl commercials... ;)

http://www.superbowl-ads.com/</off topic>

I was quite pissed at the "drugs fund terrorism" commercial by the DEA (or was it the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy) last year. What about oil? That funds terrorism...

Wasnt Apple supposed to be doing another 1984 commercial to celebrate 20 years of the Mac?

Quote:

---

American Legacy Foundation Anti-smoking campaign
Philip Morris anti-smoking campaign
White House Office of National Drug Control Policy

---

If this is a question of free-speech, then Phillip Morris should be able to advertise their cigarettes and how cool they make you look not once but twice. And the Columbian drugs lords should be able to market cocaine or Canadian pot growers should be able to advertise the weed found in Barrie. :D

Anyways, this issue has been beaten to death. Let the grand consumerism called Football begin and get it over with. It's gonna be an annoying year of political ads, olympic cheering ads and other crap.

Then again, I might be a tad cynical. :)

Quote:

---

Its called donations buddy. Have you seen how the Howard Dean campaign gets money for their campaign?

---

I know :) I was playing to all the conspiracy stuff floating around. Just because some people get together, doesn't mean they are part of a huge conglomerate of sydicated corporations. They are just people who have an opinion and want to contribute to a candidates success or failure. My point is if someone like moveon.org tried to run an add during the back out period it would be illegal becasue the collected pool of money would be over the limit. I think that is wrong but everyone else seem to think it was ok.

/edit after MSMs post.

Those Phillip Morris adds are no doubt the result of the lawsuit they lost, were it was their fault that people chained smoked everyday. Part of the settlement was anti-smoking campaigns sponsored and constucted by them. They are FORCED to do it by our own government.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by RoadClosed

/edit after MSMs post.
Those Phillip Morris adds are no doubt the result of the lawsuit they lost, were it was their fault that people chained smoked everyday. Part of the settlement was anti-smoking campaigns sponsored and constucted by them. They are FORCED to do it by our own government.

---

I always find this stuff interesting because in some cases, the government is why people started smoking. My grandpa started smoking in the Marines because they gave you 15 minute breaks (from running and everything else) if you smoked.

Quote:

---

You want to force a private company to air a political motivated add?

---

Like I said, you'd think a company would have the right to decide what they want to air and what they don't. It's their station after all. However, it seems like whenever they exercise said right, everyone jumps all over them.

Quote:

---

My grandpa started smoking in the Marines because they gave you 15 minute breaks (from running and everything else) if you smoked.

---

When I was in the Air Force my non-smoking buddies and I started taking hourly non-smoking breaks too. Its always bothered me that smokers are somehow entitled to this 15 minutes per hour- wasting away 1/4 of the day committing slow suicide, but that non-smokers are often looked at as slackers if they take the same 15 minutes every hour.

The Phillip Morris "non-smoking" ads are a result of them "losing" the lawsuit. Its supposed to be part of their reparations. In my mind they got off easy and their non-smoking ads do as much to promote smoking as it does not smoking. Its a sort of backdoor way for them to get their name and likeness on TV even though tobacco companies are forbidden from advertising on TV.

For non-smoking, I like the Truth.com ads. I think Phillip Morris should just have to fund and bankroll Truth.com rather than being allowed to come up with their own ads.

I dunno...... The way a lot of you kids are talking I'm beginning to wonder why you are even bothering with your Democratic primaries....... It's quite clear from what you say that there won't be an election in November. Bush is simply soooooo powerful, with his fingers in every pie that by the time November comes around he will have anointed himself Emperor in a Napoleonic rite and done away with elections and the Constitution itself in favor of a monarchy where he will probably be succeded by Jeb.

You people are nuckin' futz......... Your hatred of the man has blinded you to common sense and reason. Bush is no more, (and no less), powerful than Clinton is/was. While Bush's power may be more closely rooted in commerce/industry, Clinton's was based in lawyers and the legislators that run the country. It's a toss up which group weilds more power - big business can take down an average lawyer but a good lawyer can take down a big business. But I don't recall you all whining about how Clinton was too powerful and was doing things he shouldn't even there there was/is far more evidence pointing to Clinton's little faux pas', (right down to stealing items from the White house on his departure), than there ever has been against Bush. Yet Bush is the multi-headed Gorgon that must be removed before we are all imperiled.......

Kids....... Your reality checks are bouncing..... like superballs..... Get a grip!

FWIW - I hated Clinton too and couldn't wait to get a Republican back in the Whitehouse. As it turns out, I hate Clinton's replacement as much or more even though I voted for him.

<EDIT>
The bottom line is that I am anti-government. The Republican creed of smaller federal government and pushing government down to the lowest possible level to let the people govern themselves makes sense to me.

Unfortunately, the current Republican party is more focused on their Christian agenda and growing government bigger.
</EDIT>