MSNBC, CNBC Refuse to Carry Pro-War Ads

By Rick Moran

Two cable networks are refusing to run ads created by a pro-Iraq War group on the basis that they are too controversial.

Freedom Watch, a group of military vets and their families, has initiated an ad campaign featuring soldiers and their families talking about the Iraq War and how important it is to allow our military to complete their mission. The ads are running nationwide in the lead up to the Congressional debate next month over funding following a report to be given by General Petreaus.

Fox and CNN have agreed to run the ads - but not MSNBC and CNBC. The networks have run other kinds of issue ads but for some reason, refuse to run the Freedom Watch ads. The group sent a letter to the president of the network seeking an explanation.

An excerpt:

We understand that MSNBC and CNBC (the “Networks”) are refusing to sell advertising time to Freedom’s Watch (“FW”) to air a series of educational advertisements. It is our understanding that the purported basis for the denial is a Network policy denying access to groups that wish to sponsor advertising on controversial issues of public importance.

Given your recent history of airing such ads (see below), we must wonder if your denial to FW is a subjective decision because the network officials disagree with the FW ads’ message? If you continue to refuse to air FW’s advertisement we request an explanation of your basis in writing or station policy within two (2) days from the date above as time is of the essence

[snip]

As noted above, it’s troubling that the Networks appear to be airing messages on issues on a selective basis. Our research indicates that your network has accepted and aired advertisements dealing with controversial issues of national importance in the recent past. For example, the Networks aired an advertisement entitled “Shameless Politicians” sponsored by Move America Forward regarding the war on terror in October 2004. In November 2006, the Networks aired advertisements sponsored by the American Medical Association entitled “Patient Voice” concerning the controversial issue of access to health care and coverage for the uninsured. During July 2007, the Networks aired advertisements sponsored by the Save Darfur Coalition. Your history of airing other issue advocacy advertisements makes the denial of FW advertisements troubling and raises the issue of whether your denial is based on an editorial disagreement with FW's message.

It should be interesting to see what excuse the network comes up with to rationalize not running the ads.

Hat Tip: Powerline