• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

PA Rep. Thinks Anti-Abortion Radio Ads Not Very "Classy"

Again a candidate can pressure a station to rejecu an opponent's ad all they want but the station cannot reject the ad, even if the candidate drops F bombs for 55 seconds (tested to SCOTUS by Larry Flynt). 529s are a different animal.
 
apostate said:
fromtheinsideout said:
A question regarding the political ads if I may. While stations have certain obligations under federal election law regarding the ads they must carry from those seeking office, do those obligations carry over to third party ads as well, like ads bought by the parties' campaign committees (DCC/RCC) or those run by groups like the Americans for Tax Reform or SEIU or can a station refuse those since they aren't technically candidate ads paid for by the campaigns themselves?

Stations can and do reject political ads from 529s, and other non-candidate sources. It happens all the time, including in the Super Bowl.

In terms of the "political rate" (the lowest rates on a station within 60 days of a general election and within 45 days of a primary), that is only mandated for candidates for federal office, but commonly extended to political candidates of all types.

The First Amendment does not allow lying with malice aforethought. That seemed to be Ms. Dahlkemper's, and plenty of other candidates', gripe. It takes too long to litigate these things, so, while it's unlikely to be effective, about the only chance candidates have to remedy the damage done by attack ads that are not true is to pressure stations to reject them.

I make no statement regarding the veracity of any of the claims, but that's the issue: A candidate seeking to suppress ads that (at least from their own assessment) aren't true.

Thank you for the answer, much appreciated.
 
gr8oldies said:
Again a candidate can pressure a station to rejecu an opponent's ad all they want but the station cannot reject the ad, even if the candidate drops F bombs for 55 seconds (tested to SCOTUS by Larry Flynt). 529s are a different animal.

Clearly, I was not talking about ads from candidates. Most of the ads on the air today are not from candidates, but from "Club for Growth," "US Chamber," moveon.org, or some "Citizens for this or that." They have more money, and are governed by fewer rules than the candidates.

Saying the same thing over for the third time is not answering the questions others post.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom