Boycott "Grey's Anatomy!!!" and tell ABC why you're doing it

[doubleg]

My favorite comment on the video.

I don't consult my doctor to put a new turbo on my car, because he's not an expert in cars.

I don't consult my mechanic about my knee problems, because he's not an expert in medicine.

I don't consult an actress in a doctor costume about squat, because she's not an expert in anything.

 

[FieroCDSP]

I think we need to get the NRA to pay off a big-name actor that's pro-gun (Er...is there one?) and get a compare and contrast of the stats put onto a commercial and the link of the FBI stats site. If even one person looks at the real stats and realizes the bull the Brady's are spouting, it'd be worth the money.

 

[Grayrider]

How can I boycott a show on ABC when I boycott all network television.



I gave up on the mainstream media years ago. I don't recall the last time I watched a network show of any kind.

John

 

[sm]

I do not personally own a TV.

So naturally I have not seen this show and many others. I personally chose to not have an inlet of sponsored propaganda, brainwashing in my home.
Oh, one less something to dust as well.

The times I do view a TV, it is of something I can dictate and I can choose, such as a old movie, training tape or something educational.

I have better things to do, than hear orchestrated lies whether it be the news, or some program.

Anatomy & Physiology - I really enjoyed this class and Hoyle's was the Textbook used. I recommend this text.

Just me you understand, then again I do not get worked up over TV shows.

Steve

 

[carterbeauford]

I do not personally own a TV.

not a thing wrong with that.

 

[MrDig]

Tom Selleck come to mind, It occurs to me that there are others but not certain as to whom. Ted Nugent might be more than willing to shoot( pun intended) a rebuttal.
I find it interesting that a person with only the bully pulpit of celebrity would attempt to sway my position on any issue without giving me credentials to speak on the topic at hand. I also find it laughable.
I would be more interested in emailing said actresses publicist and ask for credentials and sources for her information.

 

[localFFL]

Here is my email to ABC....For whatever it's worth

"Dear ABC:
I am writing to let you know that I am extremely
unhappy with a PSA for the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence featuring Kate Walsh.
It is clear that ABC shares her views, as she appears in character. The information is skewed and misleading, and works to further erode our civil liberties. Civilian ownership of firearms is vital in defending life and liberty. Our founders understood this but ABC doesn't. Until I see a retraction, I will no longer view your programming."

I like your comment. Pointing out to ABC how despicable it is that she is "appearing in character" will get their attention if enough of us do it. HERE is abc's contact form. It's sad, but I've learned that the networks only care what you think if you're female and this show is marketed to women. Thus, I would suggest putting in a female name.

 

[dcoop]

My wife watches that show and I have always hated it. Seeing this just reitterates my feelings

 

[jlbraun]

I don't consult my doctor to put a new turbo on my car, because he's not an expert in cars.

I don't consult my mechanic about my knee problems, because he's not an expert in medicine.

I don't consult an actress in a doctor costume about squat, because she's not an expert in anything.

Yep, that would be me.

 

[Gord]

I've watched a few episodes of Grey's on DVD and thought it was all right as those kind of shows go.

I'm not sure why I should be boycotting the show or the network because one actress did a badly-filmed propaganda commercial for something I don't happen to personally agree with. The teleprompter-reading was so obvious I can't believe they actually let it slide, and just because she appears in a lab coat doesn't mean she has the support of the show or the network.

I'm always amused (and slightly disappointed in the apparent failure of logic) when somebody raises a call to "boycott xyz company/network/entity" because of the actions or words of one person.

OP, I hope you realize that every show on TV, just about every movie ever made, every magazine published, has or does employ anti-gunners, at least some of whom have actively campaigned in one way or another for gun control. Better sell that TV, cancel those subscriptions and never touch mainstream media of any sort ever again.

(By the way, if all the other actors on the show happen to be gun nuts/NRA members, are we still boycotting it? Has anyone bothered to check? Didn't think so. All aboard the bandwagon, no reason to apply logical thought process here...)

 

[Erebus]

Here's my letter to them.

As an regular watcher of ABC programming I was dismayed by ABC's support of a PSA by Kate Walsh of Grey's Anatomy that is designed to attack our civil liberties. Clearly allowing her to appear 'in character' is endorsement by ABC of an organization avowed to destroy a right that the founding fathers of this country and it's Constitution guaranteed. I will no longer view any ABC programming unless and until I see a public retraction of that endorsement and the original announcement.

 

[Erebus]

I'm not sure why I should be boycotting the show or the network because one actress did a badly-filmed propaganda commercial for something I don't happen to personally agree with.

By mentioning the show, her character, and appearing in character I can only assume that ABC endorsed or at least approved of this PSA. I will continue to believe so until I am shown to be incorrect. The character is the property of ABC and cannot be legally used in promotional material without their approval. If ABC takes action to protect their character such as demanding the removal of the PSA than I will assume that it was done without ABC approval. If it wasn't done with their approval and they do not demand it be removed than it's approval by default.

OP, I hope you realize that every show on TV, just about every movie ever made, every magazine published, has or does employ anti-gunners, at least some of whom have actively campaigned in one way or another for gun control.

And that's fine they have their won lives and can do as they please. If it was Kate Walsh in a sweater I wouldn't care. My issue is with the use of the character and apparent approval of ABC of this PSA. If Kate Walsh wants to advocate for the banning of Constitutional Rights my issue is with her alone and not her employer. When the employer approves or endorses that behavior than my issue is with them as well.

 

[Gord]

While I am uncomfortable with the mentioning of the character and show, she said that she played said character, not that she was said character - I'm not going to speculate on the legalese but I don't believe that that constitutes use of the character for the purposes of endorsement, but rather just aids in recognition.

Just because Anna Nicole might introduce herself as a "former Playmate," for example, doesn't necessarily mean that Playboy is endorsing TrimSpa...

I don't know about you, but I see celebrities referencing their movie or TV-show characters (or simply the movies or shows themselves) in commercials all the time - and you'd pretty much have to if your only identifying characteristic is a white lab coat, with all the med dramas on TV these days. I sure as heck wouldn't have any idea who she was otherwise.

 

[localFFL]

First, I love how the rating on the video is dropping

I've watched a few episodes of Grey's on DVD and thought it was all right as those kind of shows go.

I'm not sure why I should be boycotting the show or the network because one actress did a badly-filmed propaganda commercial for something I don't happen to personally agree with. The teleprompter-reading was so obvious I can't believe they actually let it slide, and just because she appears in a lab coat doesn't mean she has the support of the show or the network.

I'm always amused (and slightly disappointed in the apparent failure of logic) when somebody raises a call to "boycott xyz company/network/entity" because of the actions or words of one person.

OP, I hope you realize that every show on TV, just about every movie ever made, every magazine published, has or does employ anti-gunners, at least some of whom have actively campaigned in one way or another for gun control. Better sell that TV, cancel those subscriptions and never touch mainstream media of any sort ever again.

(By the way, if all the other actors on the show happen to be gun nuts/NRA members, are we still boycotting it? Has anyone bothered to check? Didn't think so. All aboard the bandwagon, no reason to apply logical thought process here...)

I think you misunderstand what we're doing here. We're sending a message to ABC in the only way they understand: PUBLICITY. We're doing this because Erebus' comment is exactly correct that ABC owns the character and how it is used. This is not about punishing this woman for her incorrect opinions, or punishing the one pro gunner who MIGHT work on the show. This is about banding together and punishing ABC for allowing a character THEY OWN to be flat out used by the brady campaign. Speaking of the brady scum, you can send them a message and/or comment on their youtube account here: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=BradyCampaign

 

[shield20]

20,000 gun laws on the books, ya figure they would have got at least a few "sensible" ones down by now; things like unlawful possession, criminal use, criminal possession, prohibited use, & criminal purchase seem to cover things pretty well, and seem somewhat sensible...atleast the parts where they don't infringe on natural rights, restrict lawful gun owners, restrict concealed carry, ban certain guns, ban certain mags, ban certain features, ban certain styles, ban certain actions, limit the amount of purchases...

hey...

Ya know what?? We DO need more sensible gun laws!

Lets get rid of ALL the crap limiting us good guys, and make the CRIMINALS actually fear breaking the law - now THAT makes sense!

 

[gunsmith]

8 kids a day! thats almost 3000!

I bet you for real children (14 under) it's more like 300 a year if that.
I am willing to bet more kids drown in buckets of water/pools then get shot.
real dirt bags.....oooh! edited to add
from
www.guncite.com
A fatal gun accident, particularly when a child is involved, often makes state or national news. This gives the impression that: fatal gun accidents are more prevalent than other fatal accidents, gun accidents are increasing, and civilian gun ownership must be further restricted or regulated.

The reality does not correspond to the perception created by media coverage. Fatal gun accidents declined by almost sixty percent from 1975 to 1995, even though the number of guns per capita increased by almost forty percent.

Fatal gun accidents involving children (aged 0-14) also fell significantly, from 495 in 1975, to under 250 in 1995. More children die from accidental drownings or burns than from gun accidents.

 

[Gord]

This is about banding together and punishing ABC for allowing a character THEY OWN to be flat out used by the brady campaign.

Has anyone actually figured out whether or not it's an illegal use of the character, or are we just blindly making assumptions and sending ABC a bunch of emails about something they have no legal control over, thereby making ourselves look foolish and ignorant?

Sorry, but knee-jerk reactions on both sides of the line get my eyes rolling.

 

[RKCheung]

Once again, this is not an ABC sponsored or broadcast video. It was made by the Brady Campaign and uploaded to Youtube. ABC has nothing to do with it. Anything you send to them is going to be automatically disregarded.

 

[CNYCacher]

Don't miss the bigger issue here

The Brady Campaign is taking their propaganda to the net in a new way. They are targeting a younger-generation's web hangout, using spokespersons from popular TV to spread their lies.

This is their first video so far. I almost want to subscribe to their account so I can be notified when new vids become available, but I don't want to make them seem more popular than they are. . .

 

[localFFL]

ABC has nothing to do with it. Anything you send to them is going to be automatically disregarded.

She is ABC's contracted employee and is using their character. ABC can tell her to cease and desist, and can order her use of the character in this way be stopped. I don't understand why you would want to discourage people from communicating this to ABC.

Has anyone actually figured out whether or not it's an illegal use of the character

The only way to answer that to your satisfaction will be for ABC's legal department to say something on behalf of their client ABC. HENCE the reason to put the heat on ABC. Until ABC cares, it's NOT an "illegal [more properly termed unauthorized] use of the character."

 

[Car Knocker]

It's sad, but I've learned that the networks only care what you think if you're female and this show is marketed to women. Thus, I would suggest putting in a female name.

That sounds an awful lot like a suggestion that we lie in a letter to the network.

 

[RavenVT100]

I think we need to get the NRA to pay off a big-name actor that's pro-gun (Er...is there one?)

I dunno. There was that one guy, what's his name? He was in that movie where monkeys run the planet or something. I think he was associated with the NRA at one point...

 

[jlbraun]

This is a violation of YouTube's terms of use.

"In connection with User Submissions, you further agree that you will not...(iv) post advertisements or solicitations of business..."

This is an advert FROM the Brady Campaign, to incite people to JOIN the Brady Campaign.

Clear violation of terms of use. Flag it as inappropriate, and let's get it deleted.

 

[MrTwigg]

Contact ABC anyway

Send a message to ABC anyway and they will put some pressure on her.

Dear ABC:
I am writing to let you know that I am extremely
unhappy with a PSA for the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence featuring Kate Walsh.
It is clear that ABC shares her views, as she appears in character. The information is skewed and misleading, and works to further erode our civil liberties. Civilian ownership of firearms is vital in defending life and liberty. Our founders understood this but ABC doesn't. Until I see a retraction, I will no longer view your programming.

http://abc.go.com/site/contactus.html

 

[gunsmith]

all hail jlbraun!

Today, 02:19 PM #48
jlbraun
Senior Member


Join Date: 12-29-05
Posts: 500

This is a violation of YouTube's terms of use.

"In connection with User Submissions, you further agree that you will not...(iv) post advertisements or solicitations of business..."

This is an advert FROM the Brady Campaign, to incite people to JOIN the Brady Campaign.

Clear violation of terms of use. Flag it as inappropriate, and let's get it deleted.