NPR to air political ads?

(From Reuters)--Reversing a decades-old rule, a federal appeals court said on Thursday that public television and radio stations could not be prohibited from broadcasting paid political ads. The ruling could prompt some noncommercial stations to start including ads from candidates and political action committees on their broadcasts, just as commercial stations do. Hundreds of millions of dollars are expected to be spent on advertising in the prelude to the elections this fall. 

The decision startled the television industry when it was issued on Thursday, in part because the case before a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit initially involved ads bought by corporations, not candidates.

In a 2-1 ruling, the appeals court argued that a law banning such advertisements violated the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by placing too great a restriction on speech without serving a substantial government interest.

“That is the kind of picking-and-choosing among different types of speech that Congress may not do, absent evidence to show that Congress’s favoritism is necessary to serve its substantial interest,” Judge Carlos T. Bea wrote.

The Minority Television Project, a nonprofit that runs KMTP-TV in San Francisco, challenged the law as unconstitutional after it was fined by the Federal Communications Commission for running paid ads from for-profit companies.

The court ruled that such ads can still be prohibited, but that political and public issue ads cannot. It said there is no evidence that political and public issues ads are more harmful than ads for goods and services by non-profits.

“Public issue and political advertisements pose no threat of ‘commercialization,’” Bea wrote. “By definition, such advertisements do not encourage viewers to buy commercial goods and services. A ban on such advertising therefore cannot be narrowly tailored to serve the interest of preventing the ‘commercialization’ of broadcasting.”

Comments

[Pete]

Anyone who thinks an ad for a politician doesn't involve the selling of a commercial product is a fool.

[Chucks]

This should put an end to the need for government funding of public broadcasting.
We can now get the same lies on NPR as we get on KPTK. All smoke and mirrors all of the time.

[Truth-seeker]

How does someone who doesn't listen to KPTK get lies from KPTK? For that matter, how does someone who doesn't listen to NPR get lies from NPR?

Rocket science. I know.

[Chucks]

As I sit here listening to the music on KPLU.

[Truth-seeker]

Music or lies? Taking you at your word.

[KS]

I would like to hear ad from the right and the left both. NPR is like Politifact, neither are blatant at omitting the complete story, but they both need a truth detectors, as do the right leaning websites. Any opinion spewed by Nina Totenburg about conservatives is suspect of lieing by omission. The problem is there is noone who is credible enough to be trusted as the final word on the credibility of political ads. Not in a polarized climate like we live in.

Politifact has been found to be leftwing biased, as their opinions are often splitting hairs and often losing track of the big picture (i.e. double standards). It has rated assertions in a Mitt Romney statement as "Mostly true but False" WTF ? It had to do with 92 % women layoffs since Obama has been in office. Romney would be wise not to state that one again, because of the alleged divisiveness of the comment, even if the numbers are reasonably accurate..

[Mary]

Perhaps you need to read the actual decision. I understood the facts perfectly and it requires you to understand the larger picture: the employment situation during the years previous to Obama's and the fact that most female losses occurred due to the downsizing of government jobs mostly in Republican states.

I would be interested to know how this reflects on Obama in your mind.

politifact

[KS]

You missed the big picture and so did Politifact. Romney's number was correct, but they did not sell me. He was not referring to Bush economy, like you wanted to make it Bush's fault, but I thought outside the box and saw the big picture that they did not fully acknowledge. He was referring to only since Obama was elected. I don't see this as being a big deal however one reads Politifact - there are many more glaring examples of the current president's economic incompetence.

It does not change my views of Obama one iota - I cannot trust anything he says after witnessing him for over 3 years. He is out to sow the seeds of envy, spread class warfare and does not understand how an economy works because he has no experience and is ideologically bound to statism. . Fewer government jobs is a better overall economic solution for the country as a whole. Small businesses are being killed off - meaning job losses for women continuing, thanks in part to Obamacare, IMHO.

[stevemc]

Ah, hell.

"Some" of us listen to NPR to avoid ads, and contribute to keep it that way.

I have a feeling the lure of this huge pile of cash will prove irresistible.

I know it's tempting to debate the fault for the sucky economy, the alleged bias / impartiality of NPR in this context. But for heaven's sake: think of the children... and the goddamn political ads they'll have to listen to on NPR!

[KS]

Long live Click and Clack !

[Mary]

You're cute, KS. The day after inauguration day, Obama set to fire all those people - especially public servants. But he is a socialist. That's a really smart perspective, KS. Really, really smart.

Nothing changes the views of someone who thinks he already knows everything. I prescribe a dose of NPR or Thom Hartmann or Ed Schultz. People who listen to socialist radio sound smarter.

[Finis Hominis]

“You missed the big picture and so did Politifact… He (Romney) was not referring to Bush economy, but I thought outside the box and saw the big picture” Posted by: KS | April 16, 2012 at 09:24 PM

Come on Mary, you’re missing the big picture. Narrow your view and see the big picture. If you squint your eyes narrow enough you’ll see everything, like KS that is.

[KS]

"The day after inauguration day, Obama set to fire all those people - especially public servants. But he is a socialist. That's a really smart perspective, KS. Really, really smart.

Nothing changes the views of someone who thinks he already knows everything. I prescribe a dose of NPR or Thom Hartmann or Ed Schultz. People who listen to socialist radio sound smarter."

Posted by: Mary | April 17, 2012 at 09:46 AM

Nice try, he has already had his one inauguration day and Obama hasn't fired anyone yet and the Republicans were the first to suggest that remedy. He should have fired Eric Holder by now, if he had any integrity for being an accomplice in "Fast and Furious" gun running among other corrupt practices by the worst AG in history.. Evidently, statism knows no bounds. I don't happen to agree with Ed Schultz's propaganda and Hartmann, while nuanced in his arguments is a big government wonk, which I am not. I have heard both and listen periodically.
As Finis just said, you are missing the big picture because you apparently don't hear what conservative pundits are saying. If you disagree with them, bring your arguments forth and we'll have a discussion.

I subscribe to Chris Christie's belief that we (collectively) have become a nation of folks predomninantly not producing, but sitting on the couch waiting for their food stamps, welfare or tax credit check.

Finis, Pot meet kettle. You have not yet presented a compelling argument that shows that you understand the big picture and dire straits that our avalanche of debt has put us in. Can you ever come to say that there is something wrong with this scenario ?
Surprise us for a change.

[KS]

From an article written by Susan Brown - a dirty secret is exposed, Townhall.com;

"It really boils down to marketing. In marketing, many times the same product is given a different name or label in order to increase its appeal to certain groups. Names are sometimes changed due to the product's connection to other products, or the public's association to a prior name.

Although Progressive share much in common with CPUSA and DSA, they are shrewd enough to understand the terms "communist" or "socialist" are unpalatable for most Americans. Hence, the word "Progressive" was injected into American political verbiage. While the words are not interchangeable, one thing is for sure: The CPC is doing its part to further the goals of modern Communists and Socialists who have found a voice in the Democratic Party.

In 2002, Communist Party USA PAC leader Joelle Fishman reported CPUSA uses the Congressional Progressive Caucus as "an important lever" to "move the debate to the left." A February 2, 2010 Communist Party USA article "Convention Discussion: A Time to Grow" explained they plan to meet their goals by running for office "within the auspices of the Democratic Party" because "conditions rarely if ever allow us to run open Communists for office."

The same article praised Obama's election asserting, "We have the opportunity to build something big, a large, influential and effective Communist Party USA. After the incredible movement to elect Barack Obama, more far-reaching solutions and socialism in particular are back at the dinner table for discussion."

It seems they are moving toward attaining their goals. Obama's election, in conjunction with Progressives cannibalizing the Democratic Party by ousting common sense Blue Dogs, aided in a severe shift to the left. Americans have witnessed the deterioration of this nation by way of the same type of race-baiting and class warfare Communism cannot exist without.
Unbecoming to an American president, Obama has led the charge in attacks against job-creators, extended the olive branch to "99 Percent" anarchists, and publicly castigated the third (and his equal) branch of government. Americans have had zero control over the appointments of unsavory anti-capitalist cabinet members like former "Green Czar" and avowed Communist Van Jones."

Seems like the dots have been connected, like it or not & most here probably don't. I find it disturbing.

[Mary]

Oh my. KS, you are her perfect target. Do you realize she moved from Communism/Socialism to communism solely? Do you know how little relevant and specific evidence there is for her generalisations and propaganda? Do you even know what the terms communism and socialism mean?

Do you even care?

I subscribe to Chris Christie's belief that we (collectively) have become a nation of folks predomninantly not producing, but sitting on the couch waiting for their food stamps, welfare or tax credit check.

Christie? Judging from his ass, I doubt he's done much besides sitting on the couch or in his oversize chair.

As for being a nation that isn't producing, I thought your rich friends were the job creators. Where are the jobs? I'd say your side is falling down on the job?

And are you the one who is waiting for his food stamps or welfare check because it isn't me.

[KS]

"Communism/Socialism to communism solely? Do you know how little relevant and specific evidence there is for her generalisations and propaganda? Do you even know what the terms communism and socialism mean?"

Yes, Mary as a matter of fact I do, but I question if you know or care based on your comment. The case was made by Ms. Brown for today's Democrats morphing into the "reds" (hammer & sickle) as you haven't produced any evidence to the contrary. I am still waiting for a substantive rebuttal. So far, all I have read is evasive rhetoric and denial. I wish it wasn't true either, but those facts are stubborn things.

"As for being a nation that isn't producing, I thought your rich friends were the job creators. Where are the jobs? I'd say your side is falling down on the job?

And are you the one who is waiting for his food stamps or welfare check because it isn't me."

Posted by: Mary | April 17, 2012 at 08:08 PM

What else have you got besides ridicule of Gov. Christie ? Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

How is the House (the only body) controlled by Repugs able to do anything about creating jobs when the Democrat Senate and President either refuse to act on the bills or veto them ?

This president has stymied the economy with piles of regulations, signing Dodd-Frank and Obamacare. All of this has kept the job creators locked in a poor environment for creating jobs, because taxes will rise dramatically next year if Obama is reelected thanks largely to Obamacare. The real unemployment rate is over 15%, counting all of those who quit looking for work. Evidently you don't want to get the big picture. I have heard Ed Schultz, Randi Rhodes and Chris Matthews use the same talking points time and time again, without reliable proof.

No government subsidies here,

[Mary]

Where are the jobs, KS?

[KS]

JObs ? have been outsourced to India, Brazil and Outer Mongolia.

The corporate tax rate will have to be dropped to 25% or lower before they will come back. Also, if ObamaCare is gutted and disabled, the jobs will also come back - have faith !