Air America on Ad Blacklist?
 

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2983

Media Advisory

Air America on Ad Blacklist?
ABC document: Sponsors shun liberal network

10/31/06

An internal memo from ABC Radio Networks to its affiliates reveals scores of powerful sponsors have a standing order that their commercials never be placed on syndicated Air America programming that airs on ABC affiliates.

The October 25 memo was provided to FAIR by the Peter B. Collins Show, a syndicated radio show originating on the West Coast.

Headlined "Air America Blackout" and addressed "Dear Traffic Director"—referring to the radio station staffer who coordinates programming and advertising—the memo gives the following order to affiliates:



Please be advised that Hewlett Packard has purchased schedules with ABC Radio Networks between October 30th and December 24th, 2006. Please make sure you blackout this advertiser on your station, as they do not wish it to air on any Air America affiliate.

The directive then advises ABC Radio Network affiliates to take note of a list of other sponsors who do not want their programming to run during Air America programming.


Please see below for a complete list of all advertisers requesting that NONE of their commercials air within Air America programming.

The list, totaling 90 advertisers, includes some of largest and most well-known corporations advertising in the U.S.: Wal-Mart, GE, Exxon Mobil, Microsoft, Bank of America, Fed-Ex, Visa, Allstate, McDonald's, Sony and Johnson & Johnson. The U.S. Postal Service and the U.S. Navy are also listed as advertisers who don't want their commercials to air on Air America.

The ABC memo is evidence of the potentially censorious effect that advertisers' political preferences can have on the range of views presented in the media. When Al Gore proposed launching a progressive TV network, a Fox News executive told Advertising Age (10/13/03): "The problem with being associated as liberal is that they wouldn't be going in a direction that advertisers are really interested in.... If you go out and say that you are a liberal network, you are cutting your potential audience, and certainly your potential advertising pool, right off the bat." (See Extra!, 11-12/03.)

FAIR's call to the ABC contact person listed on the memo, to ask if similar "blackout" lists exist for other shows, including conservative-leaning programs, has not been returned.

Nope. No conservative conspiracy there.

Liberals are just whiners :rolleyes:

*whines* that's not very nice...

Rather a society-wide rejection of the so-called "values" Air America was founded to broadcast, I should think. No wonder they are in Chapter 11 bankruptcy. And it may yet go to Chapter 7 (@Aliantha: that's the real, permanent, way-gone bankruptcy).

Sounds like we have the same names for different levels of bankruptcy. :)

Time to bring back the real Air America
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...tnamescape.jpg

lol

Now now, maybe UG really does believe that Corporations constitute all of society. It would fit with the current administrations thinking which UG seems to agre with.

Sounds like the listed advertisers don't want their ads to run duing a program where nobody will hear them and their ad dollars will be wasted.

That's not a conservative conspiracy, that's a capitalist conspiracy.

IMHO, Corporations do not want their money wasted on advertising that no one will hear. It is not a question of politics, but of economics. I don't waste my money on unproductive advertising.

BS.

Typically, you pay more to air an advertisement the larger an audience is. Superbowl, anyone? So if Air America has a smaller audience, the cost would be lower for the corporations.

Corporations don't care so much about the size of the audience as long as the cost reflects that smaller size. What is happening here is that the corporations don't want to be associated with Air America. They fear that any association with Air America will hurt them more than help them. Look at all the conservatives out there who talked about not buying Heinze ketchup back when Kerry was running for president. It's the same thing. Conservatives can be a very tough crowd.

This will turn out to be rather innocuous: advertisers don't want any association with anything political, right or left. For example, O'Reilly has the top ratings on cable talking heads but his advertisers are not exactly Coke and Pepsi.

Or maybe they don't want this administration to find that they're financially supporting the opposition. Could cut off all the government handouts and looking the other ways. Hey, I guess that's capitalistic, too - at least from the corporate view.

You've gone so far down the path of the conspiracy theorist that you've turned yourself inside out and met yourself on the other side, haven't you?

I think that, in general, Corporate Mentality is more aligned with whoever will give them the most cookies. Right now, that's the Right. Wolf is right, this is only about money, not philosophy, ethics, freedom or anything else. If making this country into a dictatorship would put more money into corporate coffers, you can bet they'd be all for that, and you'd see commercials with a kindly, smiling Big Brother drinking a Coke. Meh.

As long as was pure corporate greed at work, I can only fault corporate greed. However, if there was instigation by some kind of ROVE-ing administration official, I will .... well... complain even louder!

I'm suspicious of what you're saying....

In a way, yes. Business, Jebediah, is what human beings do for their bread. Socialists and other economic illiterates try and make corporations and big business out to be something separate from humanity at large, but really the one difference between the corporate world and mom-and-pop corner stores and restaurants is scale. It is not necessary to be evil to be large in scale. Insist absolutely upon good ethical practice, and you can still be as large-scale as you like.

Those people employed in the public sector rather than business are in one way or another engaged in activities deemed socially necessary, but which do not increase a society's wealth -- put another way, no profit in them. Many governmental functions cover protective/coercive functions -- army and police: not the muscle and sinew of the deer, but his antlers.

People diss McDonalds on any pretext; but still, McDonalds makes Big Macs very well. The one matter open to question is whether you want one.

Business is seperated from humanity at large. There is something called a corporate charter that makes business an artificial creation. They are imbued with more rights than the average person! So yes of course they are seperate from humanity at large if only for their special protections. Economics doesn't even enter into that.

While mom and pop can have a business charter so too can the megacorp. The difference is how much money is shielded. The megacorp has a much larger amount of cash to work with than mom + pop. Since this money is considered corporate property it cannot easily be touched. The megacorp has far more money to gamble with and rarely has to worry about losing it except in the case of bankruptcy. If corporate charters were still sometimes revoked this may not be a consideration, but I can't remember the last corporate charter to be revoked. Perhaps I'm too young.

McDonalds can act with near impunity as far as ethical practices go because they will not be punished for it. Their ethical practices don't make a lot of difference when most people are easily swayed by slick marketing and convenience.

huh, i just read through this thread trying to find a reason that this is even an issue. if i get this straight, some big successful companies don't want their ads (which they pay for) to air during times that they (for whatever reason) have decided are not beneficial to their bottom line... how is this new?

The corps have a right to do that, no doubt. The question is whether this is a coordinated effort to stifle a viewpoint they don't like.

why is it even a question? i don't think it is, but... eh. a group of businesses get together and decide "these radio stations aren't saying anything that benefits us. let's all agree not to air our commercials, which we pay for during their shows. agreed?" how is that a big deal?

if rush limbaugh or sean hannity (asshats #1 and #2) didn't bring a bazillion listeners to the table the big companies wouldn't be advertising during their shows either. welcome to business.

But what if ...

Karl Rove calls the CEOs of a group of businesses and tells them that if they spend ad money with Air America, the repubican controlled congress and white house will take back some of the candy they've been handing out for the last 6 years. That makes things a little different.

or

What if the companies get together and say "advertising on Air America yields a 50% return on our invested ad dollars (number puled out of my ass). But the money we get from the repubicans is just free money, we don't even have to invest a dime, except in campaign contributions, and they give us free money. To help keep this free money cash cow alive, let's make Air America go away by not spending our ad dollars with them." Less direct, but still effective.

Because major corporations have been around for more than six years, Spexx, and they know how to weather the storm regardless of who's in office. I know that when you're running around with your hair on fire looking for conspiracy theories, it can be hard to remember, but the Republicans have not been in power forever, nor will they be.

Are you trying to spoil all my fun? :eyebrow: And do I have to put out my hair?:flamer:

BTW, this nasty administration will come back from the dead to fuck its opposition. You mark my words... :yeldead:

necrophilia?

No, vitaphilia... the other way around, the dead fuckin' the live.

So when I tell someone to 'go fuck a dead donkey's dick' I'm actually suggesting they practice vitaphilia and beastiality at the same time?

Shit...i've still got it backwards. That must be because I'm liberal. ;)

I don't think corporations should be allowed to control what the public hears, do you? If they can sink Air America then they wield considerable influence. Would they dare to be opposed, even by the ruling party, if they had such might?

The media isn't anything but another business. Frankly, I don't know how people have been convinced of this illusion of an impartial information-provider. We don't have a basic right to information sources, it's a privately-owned business, for profit. That's all. Trust it accordingly.

they don't control what you hear. they control what they PAY for people to hear. if i was a shareholder of a company that chose to invest money in ad time that caters to a market that is less than profitable i'd scream bloody murder at their inept calculations on ROI.

i'm not saying air america should or shouldn't be heard, but if they can't get ad support it's because they are producing a product that not enough people value. that may be because all of america is stupid or it may be that they just do a really really poor job at the business of business.

I think we're taking two different angles to the reading of this article. I got the impression that Air America is being targeted for it's stance; in other words that it's not the lowest rated radio show. Now that could be wrong. I searched for recent Arbitron ratings and couldn't find any besides for individual markets (nothing nationwide). If somebody can find recent nationwide ones I'd be greatful.

I'm more than in agreement with you if Air America is getting shitty ratings and other "blacklists" like this one exist. Whatever the case we're not getting the full story.

Of course. In this case I'm very wary about the number of corps possibly trying to decide something for ABC (cancelling Air America), which has not been fearful of kissing Neocon ass lately.

Try autonecrophilia - having sex with your dead self.

Somehow I don't think the mental image of zombies beating off will appeal to many:neutral:

But you just know somebody will get around to it -- on a bet.