regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard) (08/08/85)
Howard Rosenberg Article from LA Times, Aug. 7, 1985
"CONTRACEPTIVE ISSUE: NETWORKS ON THE SPOT"
"Welcome to the 19th Century.
"ABC, CBS and NBC--whose entertainment programs routinely glamorize casual
sex--are refusing to air a public-service message aimed at reducing unin-
tended pregnancies and curbing abortions.
"Why? The unpaid spot, produced for the American College of Obstetricians
and Gynecologists as part of a public education and media campaign,
promotes knowledge of contraception.
"Uh-oh."
Lest we be worried that the commercial in questions is too out-of-line,
the article explains it's content:
"The spot is not pro sex. It's pro information.
"Scene 1: A wholesome young woman steps off a school bus and says,
'I intend to be President.'
"Scene 2: Another wholesome young woman working at a home computer says,
'I intend to go back to school.'
"Scene 3: A third wholesome young woman working over a stove -- and very,
very pregnant -- says, "I intended to have a family. . .but not this soon.'
"Finally an announcer adds, 'Nothing changes any intentions faster than an
unintended pregnancy. Unintended pregnancies have risks, greater risks than
any of today's contraceptives.' He then gives a number to call for
information about birth controll methods."
Rosenberg goes on to say:
"Scandalous? Outrageous? Monstrous? Hardly.
"There may be several words to describe the big three networks' rejection
of the spot, but _hypocritical_ tops the list."
"_Responsibility_ is often the secret word at the networks.
"In an average year, viewers are exposed to more than 9,000 scenes of
suggested sexual intercourse, sexual comment or innuendo, accoring to a
1982 book, _The Early Window: Effects of Television of Children and Youth_.
". . .yet it's 'controversial' to run a public-service spot that promotes
information and mentions contraception.
"Meanwhile. . .the United States has an unintended pregnancy rate of 3.3
million annually and a tean-age pregnancy rate among the highest of
developed nations. Perhaps the contraception message could help trim
those figures. But it's too controversial."
Rather than go in to my opinions here, I'm going to mail them to the
networks involved. For those who would like to do likewise:
CBS, INC.
Commercial Clearance Department
51 West 52nd Street
New York, NY 10019
NBC, INC
Traffic Department
30 Rockerfeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112
ABC, INC
Broadcast Standards and Practices
2040 Avenue of the Stars
Century City, CA 90067
Adrienne Regardjeff@rtech.UUCP (Jeff Lichtman) (08/12/85)
> > Howard Rosenberg Article from LA Times, Aug. 7, 1985 > > "CONTRACEPTIVE ISSUE: NETWORKS ON THE SPOT" > ... > "In an average year, viewers are exposed to more than 9,000 scenes of > suggested sexual intercourse, sexual comment or innuendo, accoring to a > 1982 book, _The Early Window: Effects of Television of Children and Youth_. > > ". . .yet it's 'controversial' to run a public-service spot that promotes > information and mentions contraception. > > Adrienne Regard It's only controversial because it's honest. If the ads treated contraception as an abstract issue instead of a real issue that involves real people, the networks wouldn't get so upset. This reminds me of a recent TV commercial for tampons that actually uses the word "period"; how long will it be before people start complaining about this one? -- Jeff Lichtman at rtech (Relational Technology, Inc.) aka Swazoo Koolak {amdahl, sun}!rtech!jeff {ucbvax, decvax}!mtxinu!rtech!jeff
zaphod@deepthot.UUCP (Lance Bailey) (08/13/85)
I really can't see why the networks are banning these
commercials. It is my opinion that lack of information is
one of the biggest causes of unwanted/teenage pregnacies.
maybe:
the commercials are deemed offensive
- hard to see why since the networks seem quite
willing to advertise feminine protection, a
class of commercials deemed offensive if not
at least embarrassing by most people I know.
the commercials take up time which might be better
"served" (ie: purchased) by corporate sponsers
- very likely in my view, in some people's
minds, money does make the world go round
while there is much 'implied' sex on the screen, the
commercials are to blatent.
- remember, there are a lot of people out there
who feel that contraceptives 'promote' illicit
sex. The contents of t.v. usually just implies
that it happens.
are the networks in the wrong?? YES!
--
4 222
4 4 2 2
4 4 2 would you say that this is a result of
44444 22 the "do-it if it feels good" generation?
4 2 -- i've got five bucks riding on it
4 2
4 22222
decvax!{utzoo|watmath}!deepthot!zaphod
(Lance Bailey @ UWO Comp Sci, London, Canada)paulh@tektronix.UUCP (Paul Hoefling) (08/16/85)
> Howard Rosenberg Article from LA Times, Aug. 7, 1985 > "CONTRACEPTIVE ISSUE: NETWORKS ON THE SPOT" > > "Welcome to the 19th Century. > "ABC, CBS and NBC--whose entertainment programs routinely glamorize casual > sex--are refusing to air a public-service message aimed at reducing unin- > tended pregnancies and curbing abortions. ... stuff edited out... > Rather than go in to my opinions here, I'm going to mail them to the > networks involved. For those who would like to do likewise: > > CBS, INC. > Commercial Clearance Department > 51 West 52nd Street > New York, NY 10019 > > NBC, INC > Traffic Department > 30 Rockerfeller Plaza > New York, NY 10112 > > ABC, INC > Broadcast Standards and Practices > 2040 Avenue of the Stars > Century City, CA 90067 Here is the letter I have sent to the three network addresses above, anyone who wishes to make a copy of this and put their own name on it is more than welcome to do so. Thanks, Adrienne, for posting this. =================================================== Gentlebeings: I have recently read that you are refusing to run a Public Service Announcement from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists which promotes information about contraception. THIS IS UNCONSCIONABLE ! Given the amount of implied sex and innuendo that can be found on television, and the rising rate of teen-age pregnancy, such a message is vital. For you to refuse to run such a spot on the grounds that is it 'controversial' is an inexcusable situation. Jerry Falwell does not speak for all of the American public, nor does the "Right to Life" movement. I cannot urge you strongly enough to reconsider and run this announcement. Sincerely, =================================================== -- Paul Hoefling Information Pack Rat uucp: {allegra,decvax,ihnp4,ucbvax,zehntel}!tektronix!paulh
whitehur@tymix.UUCP (Pamela K. Whitehurst) (08/26/85)
In article <629@deepthot.UUCP> zaphod@deepthot.UUCP (Lance Bailey) writes: > > I really can't see why the networks are banning these >commercials. After reading the commercials as posted a few times I realized that certain groups of people could interpret it as pro-abortion and cause problems for the networks. I would like to see some less ambiguous commercials. Instead of talking about 'unintended pregnancies' how about the actresses and actors talking about how they are not going to take any chances, even though there is still a small chance with contraceptives. >It is my opinion that lack of information is >one of the biggest causes of unwanted/teenage pregnacies. In my opinion, lack of experience with reality is the biggest cause of unwanted/teenage pregnancies. A lot of teenagers who know about birth control do not think it will ever happen to them. -- PKW hplabs!oliveb!tymix!whitehur
tron@fluke.UUCP (Peter Barbee) (08/29/85)
>>It is my opinion that lack of information is >>one of the biggest causes of unwanted/teenage pregnacies. > >In my opinion, lack of experience with reality is the biggest cause >of unwanted/teenage pregnancies. A lot of teenagers who know about >birth control do not think it will ever happen to them. And now for my opinion, I think it is America's overall hangup concering sex is the single biggest cause of unwanted teenage pragnancies (UTP). Why is it that there are far fewer UTPs in European countries that are more permissive, not permissive about sex itself but permissive about talking about it. It is time to admit to ourselves, as a country, that we like sex, it is ok to like sex, and almost everyone else likes sex too. I understand why it is taboo to discuss the intensity of your last orgasm with your SO's parents. But why can't we communicate to our children the need for contraception? Thankfully, we can allevaiate the problem. We are the parents of the next generation, we can educate our children properly about sex. If we can decide how that is. Peter B
wallace@ucbvax.ARPA (David E. Wallace) (09/07/85)
There was an article about this in the paper here a couple of weeks ago. As I understand it, the networks decided not to air the spot as a public service announcement (i.e., for free) because it was "too controversial." They left the door open to airing it at the usual commercial rates, but the physicians group that sponsored it declined to pay for this (and may well not have had the bucks to do so). I still disagree with the networks' decision, but this at least makes it somewhat more comprehesible to me. Dave Wallace (...!ucbvax!wallace wallace@ucbkim.berkeley.edu)