Supreme Court rule in FAVOR of unlimite political ads from private industry

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Chibibar

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/01/21/crossroads/entry6124197.shtml

Basically (as I understand it)
the Supreme court upheld the 1st Amendment regarding freedom of speech regarding private industry posting ads on TV
What I worry about is that.....

Private industry have a LOT more money and facility to broadcast and "drown" out any other candidate that can't afford TV/Radio ads. Now if a TV company (like NBC) wants to broadcast a ton of political ads at NBC expense there is no limit now. This can be a bad thing. A company DO have a limit on how much money they can give to a political figure, but what about if the company instead give political ads instead (which can be in the millions) instead? can you imagine how much power an advertising company has? or private industry with access to it?
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
This is a mistake and one of the biggest problems with politics today. The Moveon.orgs and the swift boat guys just tell lies and spread dissension.
 
Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

Dave said:
This is a mistake and one of the biggest problems with politics today. The Moveon.orgs and the swift boat guys just tell lies and spread dissension.
Click to expand...
Those were always legal through PACs. The only good sign is with this, at least they'll be public about it? I dunno.
 
Krisken

Krisken

Dave said:
This is a mistake and one of the biggest problems with politics today. The Moveon.orgs and the swift boat guys just tell lies and spread dissension.
Click to expand...
No no, Dave, private industry. Haliburton. GE. Dow. Banking industry. Etc. These people will have free reign to create ads for candidates (who will pretend to have no involvement).

If anything encourages the destruction of the democratic process, it is this. You thought politicians were crooked before? It will be nothing compared to what this will cause.
 
S

Soliloquy

ugggh...

I can understand this decision from a first amendment standpoint, but this can't be good...
 
C

Chibibar

Krisken;331904][QUOTE=Dave said:
This is a mistake and one of the biggest problems with politics today. The Moveon.orgs and the swift boat guys just tell lies and spread dissension.
Click to expand...
No no, Dave, private industry. Haliburton. GE. Dow. Banking industry. Etc. These people will have free reign to create ads for candidates (who will pretend to have no involvement).

If anything encourages the destruction of the democratic process, it is this. You thought politicians were crooked before? It will be nothing compared to what this will cause.[/QUOTE]

exactly!! This is going to be bad. Politician can now be "bribe" by these private institution.... since they have "limitless" fund for ads... imagine if if GE doesn't like certain thing going in the government, they can "sponsors ads" for the next election which can cost millions for X senators... BAM. A new way to lobby and government can't restrict them cause it is private institution doing it. GE can just say, we support X senators this is our own decision blah blah blah....

This can't be good.

edit: I can see if a company is against.... say abortion or same sex marriage, they can spend money and run ads and support X political figure saying that this person is against too.. vote for him/her.
 
S

Soliloquy

If it's a medium through which people can say things, I'd say it counts as speech, and therefore the 1st amendment applies.
 
sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

I can't believe that the Court is treating a Corporation as though it was a citizen in terms of speech.

On the bright side, this will most likely end the Astroturfing that has cropped up in recent years.
 
C

Chibibar

sixpackshaker said:
I can't believe that the Court is treating a Corporation as though it was a citizen in terms of speech.

On the bright side, this will most likely end the Astroturfing that has cropped up in recent years.
Click to expand...
well. As a corporation entity it is consider a person, this is why you can sue a corporation. A corporation can take out a bank loan regardless who is running it as if it is a person so it is easy to see why the constitution can cover corporation. (if you treat it like a person then it has same right as a person I guess)
 
SpecialKO

SpecialKO

I predict future issues when individual employees with different political views start complaining that their parent company is misrepresenting them by releasing those ads, marked with their corporate logo.

Or worse, shareholders with different views.
 
C

Chibibar

TeKeo said:
I predict future issues when individual employees with different political views start complaining that their parent company is misrepresenting them by releasing those ads, marked with their corporate logo.

Or worse, shareholders with different views.
Click to expand...
I see it more of people who support prop 8 businesses can legally pour millions into advertising for their "favorite" senator/house reps to do their bidding. Can you imagine how much money those political reps can save on campaign ads?
 
sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

Now it is time to start putting patches with ads all over politicians' suits, like a NASCAR driver. That way there would not have been the dust up over Palin's wardrobe last year.
 
Espy

Espy

They have to say who they are right? So if GE makes an ad for Charlie Schumer or whatever they have to say it's GE right? While I don't care for the ruling that's a good thing.
 
sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

This will likely just open the floodgates for "position ads"

Just trash one candidate or popular political position, and maybe post what company paid for it. But not the candidate it wants you to vote for.
 
C

Chibibar

Espy said:
They have to say who they are right? So if GE makes an ad for Charlie Schumer or whatever they have to say it's GE right? While I don't care for the ruling that's a good thing.
Click to expand...
Yea. If GE "gives" TV time to Roger Rabbit for Senator, then GE has to have a small label somewhere that this ad is payed for by GE for Roger Rabbit, BUT there is no limit. I guess there was a limit before to provide "equal" footing? so without limit if GE wants to contribute millions of dollars for all republican ads, they can. The problem would be that many company can only give so much campaign contribution (Federal law limits) but now they have loop hole in terms of unlimited ad.

Imagine superbowl ad slots are like million dollar for 30 seconds, now a senator or house of rep with the right pull can have a 30 second blip during prime ad times.
 
Covar

Covar

TeKeo said:
I predict future issues when individual employees with different political views start complaining that their parent company is misrepresenting them by releasing those ads, marked with their corporate logo.

Or worse, shareholders with different views.
Click to expand...
It will be just like how it is with Union members and their Unions now.
 
Espy

Espy

Covar;332102][QUOTE=TeKeo said:
I predict future issues when individual employees with different political views start complaining that their parent company is misrepresenting them by releasing those ads, marked with their corporate logo.

Or worse, shareholders with different views.
Click to expand...
It will be just like how it is with Union members and their Unions now.[/QUOTE]

You know that's what I wondered. Around here if you are a republican you get to spend the election season getting SLAUGHTERED by unions who are all but common law married to the democrats whether their members like it or not.
 
MindDetective

MindDetective

I am required to be in a union and I'm not a huge fan of them. In some ways I am but in others definitely not. Been down that conversational path before.

And Espy, I sent you a PM...
 
SpecialKO

SpecialKO

Covar;332102][QUOTE=TeKeo said:
I predict future issues when individual employees with different political views start complaining that their parent company is misrepresenting them by releasing those ads, marked with their corporate logo.

Or worse, shareholders with different views.
Click to expand...
It will be just like how it is with Union members and their Unions now.[/QUOTE]

Yes, that's it exactly. I'm not 100% down on unions, but that's one of the worst aspects of them.
 
Krisken

Krisken

Which is really funny, because this ruling also prevents the Feingold/McCain bill from halting the influence of Unions on politics.

So congrats, they just made unions more powerful, too.
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
Speaking as someone who works in broadcasting and is intimately familiar with how political advertising is bought and scheduled on a broadcast medium, let me say this is going to make our lives living hell. The thing about political ads is you have to accept ALL political advertising that wants to buy... or NONE. Also, political ads MUST be guaranteed the LOWEST RATE you have sold, meaning you don't HAVE to be GE to buy 17 bajillion ads, because you're literally getting the best discount EVAR.

What this means is you can look forward to wall-to-wall issues advocacy advertising in the future.

I can see this as a 1st amendment issue, but believe it or not advertising inventory IS limited, and to force unlimited access to it without allowing the laws of supply and demand to enter into it... oi. >_<
 
SpecialKO

SpecialKO

GasBandit said:
I can see this as a 1st amendment issue, but believe it or not advertising inventory IS limited, and to force unlimited access to it without allowing the laws of supply and demand to enter into it... oi. >_<
Click to expand...
GB, I don't think I've ever agreed with you more.

<--- worked as an account manager at an ad agency for a bit
 
S

Soliloquy

GasBandit said:
Speaking as someone who works in broadcasting and is intimately familiar with how political advertising is bought and scheduled on a broadcast medium, let me say this is going to make our lives living hell. The thing about political ads is you have to accept ALL political advertising that wants to buy... or NONE. Also, political ads MUST be guaranteed the LOWEST RATE you have sold, meaning you don't HAVE to be GE to buy 17 bajillion ads, because you're literally getting the best discount EVAR.

What this means is you can look forward to wall-to-wall issues advocacy advertising in the future.

I can see this as a 1st amendment issue, but believe it or not advertising inventory IS limited, and to force unlimited access to it without allowing the laws of supply and demand to enter into it... oi. >_<
Click to expand...
Hmmm... perhaps there'll be a way to make a distinction between political ads that come from the actual campaigns, and political ads that come from corporations.
 
C

Chazwozel

TeKeo;332152][QUOTE=GasBandit said:
I can see this as a 1st amendment issue, but believe it or not advertising inventory IS limited, and to force unlimited access to it without allowing the laws of supply and demand to enter into it... oi. >_<
Click to expand...
GB, I don't think I've ever agreed with you more.

<--- worked as an account manager at an ad agency for a bit[/QUOTE]


Is..is...the world over now? I agree with him too. I'm scared Scoob.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top