did cbs use double standards to allow the tim tebow ad to run during the superbowl. in the past the have refused any politcal ads for being to contriversal but now they allow tim tebow to come about and say woman shouldn't control their own bodies. its disgraceful. No one wants to be preached to during the super bowl least of all by tim tebow.

And yet they turned down an advertisement for a dating website (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/29/national/main6154905.shtml) because it shows two men kissing:


CBS released the following statement: "After reviewing the ad - which is entirely commercial in nature - our Standards and Practices department decided not to accept this particular spot. As always, we are open to working with the client on alternative submissions."

(CBS (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/29/national/main6154905.shtml))

Of course they used a double-standard. If they're worried about awkward, try explaining an abortion to a child. Miscarriages are difficult enough.
_____________________

Notes:

CBS. "Gay Dating Ad Sacked before Super Bowl". January 29, 2010. CBSNews.com. February 5, 2010. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/29/national/main6154905.shtml

for me its a double standard to get an ad that has no business running during the super bowl top run during the super bowl. Not to mention no one out side of the university of florida fan base likes tim tebow.

Is there a link to the commercial? Or a transcript?

Is there a link to the commercial? Or a transcript?

pj doesn't do links.

did cbs use double standards to allow the tim tebow ad to run during the superbowl. in the past the have refused any politcal ads for being to contriversal but now they allow tim tebow to come about and say woman shouldn't control their own bodies. its disgraceful. No one wants to be preached to during the super bowl least of all by tim tebow.

But, if it were a pro-choice commercial, it'd be fine by you and wouldn't be preaching.

Please....you're ridiculous.

By the way, I'm ardently pro-abortion, but I'm simply throwing that out there.

But, if it were a pro-choice commercial, it'd be fine by you and wouldn't be preaching.

Please....you're ridiculous.

By the way, I'm ardently pro-abortion, but I'm simply throwing that out there.

Just wait till you have a couple of kids, then get back to me.

Just wait till you have a couple of kids, then get back to me.

What do you mean?

What do you mean?

Something that you can olny know when you look into the eyes of your new born child.

Meanwhile, a "moderately amusing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poFOjZKyfbw)" commentary.

Oh, just click the damn link.

Gloria Allred raised some very interesting questions about this alleged incident. During the time she was allegedly told by the doctors to have an abortion, it was against the law to have an abortion in the Philippines, under any circumstance. So I highly doubt the Doctors advised her to do something that's against their laws.

Something that you can olny know when you look into the eyes of your new born child.

A fetus isn't a child.

A fetus isn't a child.

Tell me that after you look into the eyes of your child just after it is born.

But, if it were a pro-choice commercial, it'd be fine by you and wouldn't be preaching.

Please....you're ridiculous.

By the way, I'm ardently pro-abortion, but I'm simply throwing that out there.

my problem with the commercial isn't its topic. its that its running during the super bowl and other political ads were denied.

... look into the eyes of your child just after it is born. To make it fair, you should look into the eyes of a fetus after it has been miscarried or aborted.

To see if looking at a dead fetus is anything like looking at a child, I mean. This shouldn't be a big deal, for anyone from a rural community where cows, sheep and so on abort spontaneously at times.

I mean, we kill and eat calves and lambs, in a very efficient way, so the city folks can uplift nicely packaged meat cuts, without having to get covered in blood and shit, and stuff.
So it's a bit precious to claim abortion is murder, when you buy packaged meat so you don't have to get your hands dirty. Imagine pro-life groups protesting outside abbatoirs and freezing works about all the murders being committed.

To make it fair, you should look into the eyes of a fetus after it has been miscarried or aborted.

To see if looking at a dead fetus is anything like looking at a child, I mean. This shouldn't be a big deal, for anyone from a rural community where cows, sheep and so on abort spontaneously at times.

I mean, we kill and eat calves and lambs, in a very efficient way, so the city folks can uplift nicely packaged meat cuts, without having to get covered in blood and shit, and stuff.
So it's a bit precious to claim abortion is murder, when you buy packaged meat so you don't have to get your hands dirty. Imagine pro-life groups protesting outside abbatoirs and freezing works about all the murders being committed.

So you eat your dead featus? You are a canabal?

Yes, look into the eyes of a aborted 6 month old fetus, and you see the eyes of a child, look a little wider and you will see the face of a child.

http://www.medicinenet.com/fetal_development_pictures_slideshow/article.htm

http://images.medicinenet.com/images/SlideShow/fetal_ultrasound_24_weeks_s9.jpg

its that its running during the super bowl and other political ads were denied.

Well, the biggest controversy comes because they're running this one and rejected a non-political advertisement. Thematically, it appears they are pursuing a political agenda.

So you eat your dead featus? You are a canabal?

Yes, look into the eyes of a aborted 6 month old fetus, and you see the eyes of a child, look a little wider and you will see the face of a child.

http://www.medicinenet.com/fetal_development_pictures_slideshow/article.htm

http://images.medicinenet.com/images/SlideShow/fetal_ultrasound_24_weeks_s9.jpg

Its not a child its still doesn't have a mind. also this thread isn't about weather abortion is right or not but about weather the super bowl is the appropriate forum for it and weather or not forcing only the message that a woman shouldn't control her own body is right; other ads that counter this own weren't allowed.

CBS is a private entity, it can accept or deny any ads it wants, and can run them.

CBS is a private entity, it can accept or deny any ads it wants, and can run them.

the air waves are public proprety

the air waves are public proprety

So no freedom of speech, then.

So no freedom of speech, then.

no there is freedom of speech that's why your not allowed to suppress view points. freedom is about allowing not disallowing and preventing.


ie despite in your fucked up randian world where denying people the ability to respond is freedom the real world america its not considered freedom to prevent a response.

It would be a violation of freedom of speech if something public, like the government, stopped you from spreading your opinion.

But with private entities, like CBS, they do not have to accept everything...just like I do not have to accept anybody into my home if I don't want to.

CBS owns CBS, they can make the decision.

It would be a violation of freedom of speech if something public, like the government, stopped you from spreading your opinion.

But with private entities, like CBS, they do not have to accept everything...just like I do not have to accept anybody into my home if I don't want to.

CBS owns CBS, they can make the decision.

CBS own CBS they don't own the air waves. They lease them from we the people. they cannot use them to push their own political views. They are preventing people from using the publics property that is a violation of freedom of speech. I don't expect you to understand. I don't expect someone who caters to the randian free market ideas and don't understand how they limit freedom to understand the use of corp[orate power to retrict the publics access to its own property is anti freedom not freedom.


now please rather than push your lack of understood values could you stay on topic.

CBS doesn't belong to you or me, it belongs to CBS. You can't force them to do anything. They own their broadcast.

Seriously, are you that thick?

CBS doesn't belong to you or me, it belongs to CBS. You can't force them to do anything.

Actually, you can. If they commit a serious enough offense, the government can withdraw its grant of public airwaves to the company.

This isn't that kind of offense, though.

Actually, you can. If they commit a serious enough offense, the government can withdraw its grant of public airwaves to the company.

This isn't that kind of offense, though.

what would be?

Actually, you can. If they commit a serious enough offense, the government can withdraw its grant of public airwaves to the company.

This isn't that kind of offense, though.

What "offense" are they going to commit?


The government owns the airwaves? How sad. Though, it is curious.....how exactly do they enforce their ownership? And why do they "own" the airwaves? They havent' done anything with them.

CBS doesn't belong to you or me, it belongs to CBS. You can't force them to do anything. They own their broadcast.

Seriously, are you that thick?

Ni i leave idiocy up to you. CBS owns the information but the air waves that it is transmitted across they don't. the government lisencenes them out because we the people own them. that's been the law close to 90 years.

What "offense" are they going to commit?


The government owns the airwaves? How sad. Though, it is curious.....how exactly do they enforce their ownership? And why do they "own" the airwaves? They havent' done anything with them.

the government doesn't own them the people as a whole do. the government just grants the use of them to companies.

So you eat your dead featus? You are a canabal?
That's the kind of "shocked and horrified" response a country bum like me would expect from a townie who has never buried dead lambs, or slaughtered an animal.

The precious attitude is a little disingenouous - you eat your slaughtered meat don't you, like all the other animal killers, even when you don't need to get covered in blood and that other yukky stuff...

oi i leave idiocy up to you. CBS owns the information but the air waves that it is transmitted across they don't. the government lisencenes them out because we the people own them. that's been the law close to 90 years.
And CBS can transmit what they want. It's their broadcast.

the government doesn't own them the people as a whole do. the government just grants the use of them to companies.
I see, so I own them? I'm a part of " the people", after all........so that's great. Since I own them, I declare that no liberal media is to ever play again. Becaues the people have decided!

what would be?

Some sort of legal offense. This bit with the adverts is just morally repugnant. It would take more than a one-time, high-profile occasion like this to demonstrate that they were using their trusteeship of the public airwaves inappropriately.


• • •



What "offense" are they going to commit?

I don't recall the government ever having pulled a major network's trusteeship before. But unrepentant broadcast of obscenity could probably raise the spectre. So could using the airwaves to help throw an election. Conservatives were all up in a dither a few years ago because some Congressional Democrats reminded the ABC network of its duty to the people after the company broadcast a 9/11 propaganda film in the guise of an historical docudrama, or something like that. Republican histrionics included the complaint that Democrats just threatened ABC's license.


Though, it is curious.....how exactly do they enforce their ownership?

The fellas at the freakin' FCC (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NDPT0Ph5rA).

(Do you recall the brouhaha about the half-million dollar fine because Janet Jackson's nipple was seen during a Super Bowl halftime show?)

And CBS can transmit what they want. It's their broadcast. no they can't. because its not their air waves


I see, so I own them? I'm a part of " the people", after all........so that's great. Since I own them, I declare that no liberal media is to ever play again. Becaues the people have decided!

Either your being sarcastic because you don't like being wrong or you really don't understand the notion of public ownership.

no they can't. because its not their air waves

Actually, so long as they're not violating FCC guidelines/standards - as Tiassa has already pointed out - they can. What constitutes an "air wave"? Aside from the FCC, where does public ownership of an "air wave" commence?

no they can't. because its not their air waves Then there is no free speech; and further, nobody can ever make any choices about anything because "the people" own everything. It's not your house; it's not your land; it's not your car; it's not your life. It's [/I]the peoples'![/I]

Either your being sarcastic because you don't like being wrong or you really don't understand the notion of public ownership.

Sure I do. I am one of "the people", so I have ownership over the air waves.

Then there is no free speech; and further, nobody can ever make any choices about anything because "the people" own everything. It's not your house; it's not your land; it's not your car; it's not your life. It's [/I]the peoples'![/I] please get your head out of ayn rands ass.


Sure I do. I am one of "the people", so I have ownership over the air waves.

but not by yourself.

please get your head out of ayn rands ass. What? I'm only espousing the very things you said! It's the peoples' stuff!



but not by yourself.

Then it's pointless, because no one can make a decision about it.

Actually, so long as they're not violating FCC guidelines/standards - as Tiassa has already pointed out - they can. that's just it the FCC could decide what CBS did violates the trust it was given to broadcast and revoke it(they won't for 2 reasons the FCC doesn'ty have the clout to go up against corporate power and they have a conservative bent as nipplegate shows)
What constitutes an "air wave"? its part of the eletromagnetic spectrum that is broadcasted on.
Aside from the FCC, where does public ownership of an "air wave" commence?

I do not have the legal background required to answer that question in a completely factual manner.

What? I'm only espousing the very things you said! It's the peoples' stuff! No your espouseing randian beliefs which were never connected to reality.





Then it's pointless, because no one can make a decision about it.

well no not as a mob.

No your espouseing randian beliefs which were never connected to reality. No, not there; I was espousing the idea that it is the peoples' stuff, like you said.


well no not as a mob.

Not as anything. Like you said, the air waves belong to me and my friends.

that's just it the FCC could decide what CBS did violates the trust it was given to broadcast and revoke it(they won't for 2 reasons the FCC doesn'ty have the clout to go up against corporate power and they have a conservative bent as nipplegate shows)

Possibly so, but they have not done so, even as the protector and representative of the public interest.

I thought the ad evoked a big "YAWN!"

I thought the ad evoked a big "YAWN!"

yeah, it seemed pretty harmless to me. If there hadn't been the fuss made over it I wouldn't even have noticed it.