Soldiers gay-marriage ad rejected by Tennessee TV station - outrageous censorship?

2015-05-31T08:49:55-04:00

In an interview with BuzzFeed, WRCB president and general manager Tom Tolar said his station had no position on ads on same-sex marriage until this week when they reviewed the FTM commercial. “It’s just a very controversial and personal issue, and we just choose to not air a commercial on either side of that debate,” Tolar said. He said there were “not really” any other issue-based commercials that stir such emotions.

http://www.stripes.com/news/us/soldier-s-gay-marriage-ad-rejected-by-tennessee-tv-station-1.349807

Soldier's gay-marriage ad rejected by Tennessee TV station

As the national same-sex marriage debate turns its focus on Tennessee, a Chattanooga television station has been drawn into the conversation by rejecting a commercial from Freedom To Marry, an organization that promotes marriage equality.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made May 31 at 2015 12:03 PM

2015-05-31T12:03:40-04:00

First, I don't consider this a gay rights issue OR a censorship (the TV Station is not the government....) issue. I consider it a fairness and equity issue.

So... I would really need to know their track record in order to have an opinion here. They have made the claim that they made the choice do it it being a "controversial and personal" issue... Fair enough - there is a LOT of emotion on both sides of the issue. On its face, this is a perfectly reasonable position for a TV station to take. They are in business to sell ads, which means that they need to maximize viewership and goodwill. They are not in business to be a lightning rod for the issue of the day.

I don't know the exact state of the law at the moment, but I do not believe that TV stations have "common carrier" status, so they CAN make decisions based on content.

Do they have a history of making a similar choice when faced with similar issues? Have they refused adds from either side of the abortion issue, for example? While I find it impossible to believe that a TV station has avoided ALL political ads, has it at least shown a history of not running the ones that make (half of the) people throw things at the TV screen? Secondarily, do they have some sort of official policy about avoiding divisive topics? If so, I tend to find that they acted with forthrightness and integrity.

Do they have history of running ads for one side of an issue, but not the other? If so, their claim doesn't pass muster. Though it may STILL be legal, depending on the exact status of the law - again, TV stations aren't common carriers (though I think the cable providers are).

As a secondary issue, it is not uncommon for issue advocacy groups to create over the top ads SPECIFICALLY to either 1) offend people and thus make create a buzz or 2) get banned/have media refuse to carry it and thus make news and create a buzz. I have not seen the ad in question (and have no interest in doing so) and so cannot comment on this potential aspect. I mention it only because I have seen it many times about issues I care about.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made May 31 at 2015 12:43 PM

2015-05-31T12:43:26-04:00

One look at the photo and you know its over the top. "One Country, One Constitution" has nothing to do with marriage. Right now such decisions are state decisions. Whether or not the TV station decided to carry the ad is their business. I think COL Vincent Stoneking is spot on with the rest.

Response by Sgt Den OBrien made May 31 at 2015 3:48 PM

2015-05-31T15:48:44-04:00

One Country,
One Constitution,
One rack,
2 sphincters,
It just don't get any better than that.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 31 at 2015 9:14 PM

2015-05-31T21:14:43-04:00

Its a New America and people need to be more accepting of this. As Soldier all I care about is can they perform the duties they are expected to perform.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 8 at 2015 10:07 AM

2015-10-08T10:07:55-04:00

As the owner and proprietor of a business have the right to refuse to buy products or services or sell products or services to anyone without any explanation. When I start explaining my position behind my decision to NOT sell those products or services is when I start to tread into dangerous legal territory. In this climate, it is better to refuse the service and provide no explanation at all. Instead, refer them to the sign at the front of the store that says "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason".