Whatever they want to send. Why do you feel the need to question what they write?

 

Because it is their right to express their opinion in this country.

Whatever they want to send. Why do you feel the need to question what they write?

 

Thanks, but Clyde's been picking on me for years. :lol:

Thanks, but Clyde's been picking on me for years. :lol:

 

But my young friend, you have made it so..... easy for Clyde to do it to you, for far too long....:sssh: :lol: why should he stop now!:clap::lol:

I'm in the camp that believes football and politics don't mix. I do like the ad, they should offer it for regular prime time viewing.

Whatever they want to send. Why do you feel the need to question what they write?

 

But my young friend, you have made it so..... easy for Clyde to do it to you, for far too long....:sssh: :lol: why should he stop now!:clap::lol:

:madman: I move to Lexington and you all NKYians pick on me now.

Whatever they want to send. Why do you feel the need to question what they write?

 

Need? Uh, no.

 

Are you saying that I'm out of line by asking what their message will be regarding this?

I already sent that it is hypocritical to tell one group that we don't air ads with a political message, yet tell another advocacy group (PETA) that the reason their ad was rejected was for how racy it is, and if they toned it down, it could air.

 

That's fair. However, I have no problem with a business deciding what they want to air and what they do not want to air. If enough people are bothered by their decision it will have repercussions. However, again, its their call.

 

With that said, I've written many a letter/email to businesses expressing disappointment in their actions/decisions so I'm certainly not criticizing the email jihad.

Thanks, but Clyde's been picking on me for years. :lol:

 

"Picking on" has such negative connotations.

 

I prefer "constructive criticism" or "coaching."

That's fair. However, I have no problem with a business deciding what they want to air and what they do not want to air. If enough people are bothered by their decision it will have repercussions. However, again, its their call.

 

With that said, I've written many a letter/email to businesses expressing disappointment in their actions/decisions so I'm certainly not criticizing the email jihad.

Agreed. I am not supporting a law against being selective. It is certainly the right of the business. Just my own letter.:thumb: In fact, I was thinking earlier tonight about how certain actions are acceptable by individuals but completely unacceptable by government. It is a fine line. :thumb::thumb:

"Picking on" has such negative connotations.

 

I prefer "constructive criticism" or "coaching."

True, true. However, in the context of "constructive criticism", does that mean you bear responsibility for how I turned out? :lol:

Great message, to bad Obama didn't get it.

I personally love the ad. I would not approve it for the superbowl if I were the NFL or NBC, however. Too much money has been invested on projected viewers of this event, for many to be offended and immediately turn the channel. Im not speaking on right and wrong here, just economics.

I personally love the ad. I would not approve it for the superbowl if I were the NFL or NBC, however. Too much money has been invested on projected viewers of this event, for many to be offended and immediately turn the channel. Im not speaking on right and wrong here, just economics.

 

You really think people would turn the channel after seeing this ad? I find it uplifting, not negative.

 

Furthermore- I am asking because I don't know- doesn't NBC make a lot of their money from advertising slots already paid for? Is there a clause in the contract that means if viewers tune out, NBC has to pay the advertisers back?

You really think people would turn the channel after seeing this ad? I find it uplifting, not negative.

 

Furthermore- I am asking because I don't know- doesn't NBC make a lot of their money from advertising slots already paid for? Is there a clause in the contract that means if viewers tune out, NBC has to pay the advertisers back?

 

There are probably guaranteed ratings for the advertisers.

You really think people would turn the channel after seeing this ad? I find it uplifting, not negative.

 

Furthermore- I am asking because I don't know- doesn't NBC make a lot of their money from advertising slots already paid for? Is there a clause in the contract that means if viewers tune out, NBC has to pay the advertisers back?

 

I find it uplifting myself. But, my politics are not the same as everyones. I do believe some with intense feelings on the subject would tune out. I know I would be offended if they showed a commercial with the opposite connotations. I wouldnt change the channel though, since Pittsburgh is playing!

NBC Rejects Pro-Life Super Bowl Ad Educating Viewers on Obama and Abortion

 

After several days of negotiations, an NBC representative in Chicago told the group late yesterday that NBC and the NFL are not interested in advertisements involving "political advocacy or issues."

 

Brian Burch, president of the pro-life group, told LifeNews.com he is upset that NBC officials rejected what he calls a uplifting and positive pro-life ad.

 

“There is nothing objectionable in this positive, life-affirming advertisement. We show a beautiful ultrasound, something NBC’s parent company GE has done for years," Burch said.

 

"We congratulate Barack Obama on becoming the first African-American President. And we simply ask people to imagine the potential of every human life," he told LifeNews.com.

 

Burch said NBC told Fidelis that they do not allow political or issue advocacy advertisements.

 

"But that’s not what they told PETA," he said about the network's recent decision to reject an ad from the animal rights group. “There’s no doubt that PETA is an advocacy group. NBC rejected PETA’s ad for another reason altogether.”

 

According to an email posted on the PETA web site, Victoria Morgan, Vice President of Advertising Standards for Universal, said, "The PETA spot submitted to Advertising Standards depicts a level of sexuality exceeding our standards.”

 

Kind of funny, since I just watched a rather long one on one interview on the NBC Super Bowl pregame coverage with the President and guess what, they just didn't talk about sports.... So I guess NBC and the NFL seem to talk out the both sides of their mouths.