The Laws Governing Political And Product Ads Differ In Important Ways

By Author: Amandda
Total Articles: 60
Comment this article

Networks are free to recommend changes in product ads and often do so when, in the judgment of their staff, the ads are inaccurate, are in poor taste, or embody negative stereotypes. In contrast, it is illegal to censor a candidate's political ad. Consequently, material that would never be heard or seen in a commercial ad can be included in a candidate ad.

Similarly, candidate political ads may employ words found to be "obscene, indecent, or profane," although commercial ads and programming may not. In 1978, the Supreme Court upheld the FCC's right to impose Breitling Bentley Replica sanctions on a radio station that broadcast George Carlin's monologue about words that cannot be used on radio and televi?sion.1 In 1980, however, presidential candidate Barry Commoner was allowed to air a political radio commercial that included one of the prohibited words in Carlin's monologue: bullshit. "Bullshit" said the ad. "What? Reagan and Anderson—it's all bullshit."

What protects a station, then, from a libel suit claiming that a ...
... person or organization was defamed by a political commercial or statement made during broadcast time secured as a result of an equal-time request? In 1956, such a situation arose in Fargo, North Dakota. A candidate for the Senate requested and received equal time on WDAY-TV. During the time secured by the equal-time request, the candidate charged that a prominent union, the North Dakota Farmers Union, was controlled by communists. The union responded by suing both the station and the candidate. In the land-mark case Farmers' Educational and Cooperative Union of America v. WDAY(\959), the North Dakota Supreme Court held, and the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, that stations could not be considered legally responsible for untrue or libelous statements made in such a circumstance. Because Section 315(a) of the Federal Communications Act forbids the censoring of remarks by candidates, the station could not be held ac-countable.

Occasionally, the results offend. "This commercial is not suitable for small children because abortion is not suitable for America," said an ad broadcast on July 3, 1992, on the Atlanta superstation TBS. Pictures of three happy infants appeared with the label "Choice A." Next were bloody fetuses tagged "Choice B." Then Republican congressional candidate Jimmy Fisher stated, "When something is so horrifying that we can't stand to look at it, then why are we tolerating it? Pro-choice is a lie. This baby wouldn't have chosen to die. Vote Jimmy Fisher July 21 and stop the killing." In April 1992, another pro-lifer had won the Republican primary in Indiana's Ninth Congressional District with similar ads.

Within hours of the broadcast on TBS, the call-in lines at talk shows in Atlanta began ringing. Some expressed outrage. Others Omega Replica said that it was about time the effects of abortion were displayed. Still others asked, why do they let pictures like that on television?

The simple answer is that the First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech. Initially the FCC responded to complaints about the ads aired in Indiana with a ruling that said that although the stations could not refuse such spots, they could "channel" or time-shift them to a time in which children were less likely to be in the audience. The stations were cautioned in the ruling to act in good faith. Channeling was not intended as a means of indicating the stations disapproval of the content. In 1996, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals overturned the FCC rule on the grounds that stations did not have the right "to deny a candidate access to adult audiences of his choice simply be-cause significant numbers of children may also be watching television."

The Federal Communications Commission has placed some limits on broadcast political speech, but not many. A station that has accepted ads from one candidate must accept them from the candidate's opponents. A station may refuse an ad for a bona fide candidate for federal office only if it is too long or too short for the time purchased, if it fails to indicate the name of the sponsor, if it has technical problems (for example, the sound breaks up in the middle of the ad), or if it is "obscene." A candidate cannot invoke free speech rights, for example, to show a copulating couple, even in the missionary position.