|
Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.
Comcast Censoring Political Ads Critical of Its Actions
Share and save this post:
Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form
Also in Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace
Stock Market Drops 107 Points During Bush's Speech on the Economy
Amanda Terkel Think Progress
Dow Dips Below 8,000; Anxiety, Anger at all Time Highs
Joshua Holland AlterNet
The Spiral Continues: Panic in the Markets
Stirling Newberry Firedoglake
Glenn Greenwald is reporting that Comcast is refusing to run an ad critical of Representative Chris Carney, an ad which features Comcast itself as a major donor to and beneficiary of Carney's policy choices. The network told him that they would "face potential liability for any defamation contained in the spot."
Comcast in this case concocted a factual inaccuracy and is refusing to run the ad. While there's no excuse for this blatant conflict of interest, the company created an artifice of legal barriers that most stations simply do not. Censoring advertisements from network and cable TV is a common practice in our political discourse, one that often goes unremarked. Here are some recent examples:
Religious materials from both the right and left and political materials from the left seem to be especially 'objectionable' in corporate parlance. I just got back from the Conference on Media Reform, and I'll have more on the history of the various media institutions in this country. Let's just say there's a reason for the bipartisan deep anger at the hammerlock these large and irresponsible millionaire executives have on our discourse.
There is simply no reasonable argument that a station has to turn down a mainstream political advertisement making an indictment of a politician based on his or her policy choices. None. There is nothing pornographic or dangerous in these ads (what constitutes those qualities is an interesting yet separate question), this is just an abuse of power.
Any enterprising Congressperson would do well to hold hearings on advertising censorship, and ask why the massive subsidies from the public in the form of cable monopolies, broadcast licenses, and regulatory favors should go to organizations that censor the very public from which they feed.
Meanwhile, Chris Carney should hope that no evidence comes out that he pressured the stations to refuse this ad. My guess is that he did not; Comcast needs no additional incentive to refuse to indict its own business or a Congressman it supports.
This is a serious indictment of our media system, it's one we've lived with for years, and it's one we need to see ended. It is censorship, after all, of political speech, and woefully and entirely unAmerican.
Tagged as: censorship, comcast, chris carney
| Also in Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace | |||
| Stock Market Drops 107 Points During Bush's Speech on the Economy That's the kind of confidence Bush inspires these days. Post by Amanda Terkel. October 10, 2008. |
Dow Dips Below 8,000; Anxiety, Anger at all Time Highs The long-held dominant economic paradigm is under fire. Post by Joshua Holland. October 10, 2008. |
The Spiral Continues: Panic in the Markets For those of you who slept well last night, here is what happened. Post by Stirling Newberry. October 10, 2008. |
|
EMAIL
PRINT
10 COMMENTS
PERMALINK