...and how they responded, after Natalie criticized our right-wing Commander In Chief.As you can imagine if you know how I feel about the Chicks (they're damn-near perfect, and long may they wave), I'm rather looking forward to this. And it has a great title-Shut Up And Sing.
But it seems I'm going to have to keep my eyes peeled for its release, since the networks are refusing to accept to accept ads for it.
From Unclaimed Territory:
According to Matt Drudge (a phrase that does not roll out of one's mouth easily), both NBC and the CW Television Network (the joint venture of CBS and Warner Brothers that combines the WB and UPN Networks) are refusing to air ads promoting Shut Up & Sing on the ground that the ads are "disparaging" to our President
...which is preposterous. NBC doesn't want to disparage the President? I'll remember that tonight when I'm watching The Tonight Show or Conan O'Brien. Where, call it a hunch, I predict there will be at least one joke built on the notion that Mr. Bush is, in fact, kind of stupid.
It's preposterous, but it's important because, as Glenn writes, it fits into
a very disturbing trend whereby television networks are refusing to broadcast political advocacy material that will offend the Republican power structure in Washington.
Remember when the networks-even the nominally gay & lesbian LOGO-wouldn't run an ad by the UCC promoting their message of acceptance? Remember when CBS censored-and I do not use the word lightly-the Reagans miniseries?
Same thing. Glenn continues:
The very idea that it is in the "public interest" to prohibit ads that criticize the Leader is ludicrous on its face. The President is constantly given free airtime to argue his views and propagandize on virtually every issue, and the networks endlessly offer forums for his followers and surrogates to defend him. And the networks' argument is particularly absurd now, given that networks are awash with cash from offensive, obnoxious, and repugnant political ads of every kind.
No comments:
Post a Comment