IM2 | OQP

A few days ago, I had a post entitled Still fighting for democracy and freedom mentionning how the Hell’s Angels got their billboard. Although it’s a different media, Adbusters tried again and again to buy airtime for its TV clips, without any success. Here are a few excerpts from their site on this topic.

For more than a decade, Adbusters has been trying to buy airtime for its TV messages. These 15- and 30-second “social marketing” spots tackle issues from obesity to environmental destruction to consumer consumption. Never seen them before? That’s because most broadcasters flatly refuse to show them. - source: Adbusters

When Canadian TV broadcasters rejected our spots, they gave some alarming reasons ? reasons that put them squarely on-side with their corporate sponsors, like McDonald’s and Wal-Mart, and directly against citizens’ right to free speech on the publicly owned airwaves. We caught the conversations on tape. “[Your spots] are counter productive to what we do. We sell advertising,” said Susan Orr, national sales representative for CHUM Television. Al Hudak, CTV’s group director of national sales, said “we’re in the business to make money, and we’re in the business to sell our customers products. So why would we come out and [air your spots]?” - source: Adbusters

On September 15 2004, Adbusters launched legal action against four of Canada’s biggest television broadcasters ? CTV, CanWest Global, CBC and CHUM. With prominent civil rights lawyer Clayton Ruby as our lead counsel, we’re fighting for the right to buy airtime for our advocacy TV messages, which broadcasters around the world have refused to air. - source: Adbusters

THE FOLLOWING ARE THE MATERIAL FACTS giving rise to the constitutional question:

1. the applicant is a not-for-profit advocacy organization whose aim is to advance media democracy and social marketing;
2. in the autumn of 2003, the applicant attempted to advertise during television broadcasts by CBC, Global Television, CTV Television, CHUM Television, and two other Canadian television broadcasters;
3. three of the television broadcasters rejected all of the proposed advertisements; two of the broadcasters rejected almost all of the proposed advertisements; and one of the broadcasters accepted six of ten proposed advertisements, but with severe restrictions in regard to the programming during which the six advertisements could be aired;
4. requests by the applicant in 2004 that the broadcasters review their rejections of the advertisements resulted in negative responses or no responses; and
5. the content of the advertisements was the reason for the rejection of the advertisements or, where they were accepted with restrictions, for the restrictions imposed.

- source: Adbusters

See the rejected clips. Want to know more? See Media Carta. Let them know you support true free speech, contact Charles Dalfen Chairman, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission.