Osakatomebaby

Martin D. Franks, executive vice president of CBS, is evidently also responsible for superbowl ad selection. An article in the New York Times investigates CBS's rejection of the Anti-Bush MoveOn.org commercial dealing with Bush's budget deficit.

"...we don't want those who have deep pockets to have an undue influence on the debate."

Are we talking about the same 2,000,000 member nonprofit organization? Last I checked CBS had no objection to big corporations running dubious pr ads about how they are working to save the environment or feed developing nations.

Regarding ads they have approved:

"If you can find somebody responsible who is for drug abuse...or...teenagers seeking to smoke, then it would be a credible rebuttal of our policy."

I guarantee if tobacco advertising weren't illegal they wouldn't be taking this stance. As for drug abuse, well duh (rolls eyes) no one thinks that's good, but the ad is coming from the White House, and the illegality of at least some drugs is a major political issue. More than anything, a top TV exec giving the NYT such a transparent and very hokey challenge just shows that the guy either has no respect for print media (NYT in particular) or he's been in TV too long and doesn't know sound bites are a lot more dubious in print.

Asked about last year's drug policy advertisement that linked drug sales to international terrorism, Mr. Franks said, "Is it an absolutely perfect system? Absolutely not. On the other hand, the MoveOn.org ad wasn't even close. I didn't need to rewind that one in the VCR."

Lucky for them this one didn't accidentally slip through. Whew!