Re: Re:Re:Wired.com on Reversing Consolidation

["Aaron 'Bishop' Read" <aread@speakeasy.net>]

At 06:39 PM 1/12/2003, Dave Faneuf wrote:


>On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 01:22:26 -0500 "A. Joseph Ross"
><lawyer@attorneyross.com> writes:
> >
> > I've been wondering for a number of years to just what extent
> > stations can refuse to carry
> > political ads.  I seem to remember that when WCVB first took over
> > channel 5, they had a
> > rule not to sell political ads, but they would air extensive TV
> > debates by the candidates.
> > This rule eventually was dropped for fear of lawsuits, but I never
> > understood why..
> > A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
>
>To the best of my knowledge Dan is correct, the only political ads a
>station is forced to broadcast is ads for candidates for federal office.
>df

IIRC...non-commercial stations are forced to carry underwriting (I think 
the underwriting/advertising rules still apply - although for obvious 
reasons that's largely a moot point) for federal office candidates at no 
cost to the candidate.   However, most candidates don't take advantage of 
this because:

A: They're completely unaware of it.

B: They're aware enough to know that most public radio listeners would be 
more annoyed than pleased to hear political ads on their favorite public 
radio station.



_________________________________________________________
Aaron "Bishop" Read       aread@speakeasy.net
Fried Bagels Consulting   www.friedbagels.com
AOL-IM: ReadAaron         Brighton, MA 02135