[faithandlife] Advertising freedom of speech?

Message: < previous - next > : Reply : Subscribe : Cleanse
Home   : October 2003 : Group Archive : Group : All Groups

From: charles scott <crscottblu@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 16:36:55 -0800 (PST)
Brothers+

Methodists find it difficult to advertise, even when
paying big dollars because commercial interests are
buying up all the space.  Also, media sources are
discriminating against religious organizations.

Charles+



Reuters Will Take Methodists Ad After All

by Ted Olsen | posted 10/30/2003


Reuters: Methodist ad can appear on our Times Square
billboard
It's rare to see the United Methodist Church and
liberal mainliners like the National Council of
Churches complaining about having their religious
viewpoint excluded from the public square. That's
something that's more often left to
conservatives—unless it's liberals complaining about
the attention paid by the media to the religious
right.

But this week, the mainliners have been mobilized
against the Reuters news agency after it went back on
a $30,000 contract to air ads for the United Methodist
Church on its 7,000 square-foot electronic billboard
in New York City's Times Square. The news agency
explained that it does not allow "pornographic,
political, religious, libelous, misleading, or
deceptive" ads on its billboard.

Of course, the mainliners cast the debate in different
terms than evangelicals would have, had, say, a
Southern Baptist Convention ad been rejected. "The
public square is becoming increasingly like private
property, overtaken by larger and larger corporations
who control more and more of our channels of
communication, from cable to broadcast networks to
newspapers to billboards," the NCC lamented. 

If we get to the point where a handful of corporations
can buy up the walls of the town square and rule that
certain topics, like religious faith, cannot be
expressed there—even when those who wish to speak are
willing to pay for the opportunity—American democracy
will truly be at risk. … Are we afraid that hearing
these voices could change the agenda of the
conversation from consumption to conscience? … If
religious speech is banned from the public
marketplace, the remaining dialogue will revolve
solely around getting and spending.
This week, the cries of outrage were heard by Reuters
CEO Thomas H. Glocer, who had been traveling during
the mounting controversy. 

"You state on your website that your church should be
given the same access and opportunity to speak in the
commercial marketplace as corporate advertisers. On
reflection, I believe that you are right," Glocer said
in a letter to UMC communications head Larry Hollon.
"Consumers have become more sophisticated over recent
years, and I think there is little likelihood of an
advertisement being viewed as the opinion of a news
gatherer such as Reuters. Provided it is made clear
that the material in question is paid advertising and
that there is no possibility of confusion with our
news output, I believe you should have the same access
to commercial space as any other organization."

Hollon said that the agency's policies are changing,
but that not all religious advertising would be
accepted. "For example, we would not permit
advertising that maligned another religion," he said.

The Methodist ads will now run 10 times daily during
Thanksgiving week, one of the busiest shopping times
of the year.

Had this happened to an evangelical denomination or
church, conservatives probably would have merely
decried "liberal media bias." Perhaps this argument
about religious speech vs. the message of consumerism
is worth exploring and using further. Especially if it
works. 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/