Main Stream Media Firearm Related Ads Ban

[mnrivrat]

Some year ago I had been told that the major networks would not sell ad time to the NRA or to firearms companies.

I have always believed that thru such ads the general public could be shown something pro gun related to try to achieve a better, and more informative, balance on the issues of firearm ownership.

Does anyone here have any information regarding this "ban" by the media on NRA or Firearm Company commercials ? Does it truely exist, as it seems to , or is there something else going on ?

 

[poolingmyignorance]

You know, I honestly never thought about it. I think cause I know that some of the more obscure cable channels will have ads for firearm manufactuers, and tactical gear, mixed in with hunting/fishing shows, I just assumed that the money wasn't there for mainstream media. Now after having seen the popularity of SOG's and American Guns.. and ofcourse the anti-gun lame stream media..I suspect your right. They just decied to black list them. I mean after all Bank of UNamerica black listed a multimillion dollar client because they moved from accesories to receivers. Major network advertisment would serve to normalize and desensitize the masses to firearms ownership in this nation and thats not what these pansy's want. If it were normalized we wouldn't have situations like this:
http://www.kgw.com/news/Rifle-report-closes-Burnside-Bridge--167950915.html
These law abiding citizens are going to be charged because of ignorant peoples fear.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

Previous threads discussing network advertising that might be of interest.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=371509
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=262388
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=192274
*

 

[230RN]

Not a new problem. I asked NRA about that about 15 years ago via their Q&A service for members and they were absolutely clear that the mainstream media (MSM) did not accept their ads. I suggested that rather than advertise in MSM, they should attempt to place ads with a lot of the local little weekly papers and low-power radio and TV stations which abound, all of whom are always desperate for ad bucks, and the little newsies are usually independent of any Big Corporate Control.

I suggested that they appeal to members to feel out these local papers who might accept this kind of advertising and advise NRA of their willingness to accept NRA ads. Nothing ever came of that, but then again, my ideas always seem to be 20 years ahead of my time.

I recognized that dealing with many, many local advertising accounts would be a bit of a managerial problem, but I still think something along those lines would be workable... even for firearms manufacturers and gun accessory mfrs, etc. Especially if local "gunnies" are engaged as advertising agents --even for free, no commish.

I also realize that the "bang for the buck" return would be small, but I was looking at it as a progaganda mechanism rather than a profit mechanism.

Later (about two years ago) I noted with pleasure that one of our local "freebie" papers was carrying ads for concealed carry classes. This, to me, was a big breakthrough.

I still think the concealed carry (CC) movement, coupled with the internet, will ultimately save the Second Amendment, as long as the various municipal, state, and national dot-govs don't use the CC lists for confiscation or other infringements under color of phony law.

( ^ Hey. I sound paranoid there for a reason. They are after me. Hell, "they've" been "after" me and my guns one way or another for the whole >60 years I've been shooting.)

Terry, 230RN

 

[Twiki357]

I never actually noticed it, but I don't recall ever seeing a firearms related ad on a major network when I lived in Los Angeles for 40+ years. Here in Arizona, we don't have any actual major networks, It's all independent affiliates of the networks. And there are ad's (Not by manufactures) for firearms retailers and gun shows. Actually, there was just an ad for J&G Sales while I was typing this.

 

[k_dawg]

Ever notice how the 'Main Stream Media' and 'Main Stream Movie' all but banned cigerette smoking to reduce consumption. . . .

. . . yet continue to make billions off of continuing to glamorize guns?

 

[TennJed]

Every year it seems like some very controversial ad attempts to buy a spot in the Super Bowl and it is denied. The result is lots of free advertising for the group. Sport talk and media talk about the ad being denied. I say the NRA makes a big bid for a Super Bowl spot. If they get it, great lots of eyes on it. If it gets denied, it is free pub

 

[mnrivrat]

Not a new problem. I asked NRA about that about 15 years ago via their Q&A service for members and they were absolutely clear that the mainstream media (MSM) did not accept their ads.

That is also my recall on the subject. The previous (thanks Jorg) threads seem to heavily imply that it is the cost, but that does not ad up. Sure the cost of main stream ads are high, but not so high as to price the NRA and gun companies out of occasional spots.

I would throw in some extra cash to see a Super Bowl NRA spot . A simple statement by them to counter all the demonization that the media likes to present.

 

[rskent]

I don’t know about main stream media. But all through the Olympic telecasts here locally there were ads almost hourly for the biggest gun shop chain in the area.
It was nice to see the ads, but I fast forwarded through them just the same.
DVR is your friend.

 

[Ky Larry]

We all know that NBC,CBS,and ABC are at the far left fringe of the liberal agenda, but what about Fox? I would think that they would be glad to take the NRA's ad money. A low key commercial about, say, a family enjoying a day at the range shouldn't offend most Americans.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

MSM Anti-Gun Bias has been blatant and unrelenting....

The first mega anti-gun nut I encountered (before mega was an adjective) was Carl Bakal ("This Very Day a Gun May Kill You!" and "NO Right to Bear Arms"); he was a major New York City Madison Avenue advertising executive. In the 1960s the MSM ballyhooed his book "No Right to Bear Arms" as the equivalent to the gun industry as Ralph Nader's "Unsafe at Any Speed" was to the auto industry in "news stories". Library Journal advised librarians that the book was full of truths, half-truths and insinuations, that bias was the most important ingredient and was painfully obvious. I can always count on AP "news stories" on gun issues reading like VPC op-ed pieces.

I like to joke that part of the job process at New York Times is to take an oath to support and defend the Sullivan Act against all enemies foreign or domestic and bear true faith and alliegence to the same, and that every lunch period they have an Orwellian Two Minute Hate directed at the current president of the NRA. A recent piece by the outgoin NYT ombudsman has me wondering if it is just a joke of mine, or closer to a fact.

MSM anti-gun bias has been blatant and unrelenting; it is taught in journalism class that their job is to transform society to a leftwing model, advocacy journalism it is called. The MSM news slant has always amounted to free advertising for the anti-gun movement. Why would they accept pro-gun ads? Their ideology is too pure to be compromised by mere cash.

 

[Nanook]

The MSM doesn't seem to realize that if they ever get their wish, and usher in a "paradise" like the former USSR, they will be the second ones gone right after the guns.

The microphones and cameras are next to be throttled. A conqueror never respects those traitors who helped him conquer. Usually, they are stood up against a wall and shot. If you would turn on your own country, how could you ever be trusted by anyone else?

I'm not sure why they can't see this, must be blinded by ideological purity.

Really, it's hard to generate any measure of respect for journalists. Even sports journalists have agendas. It makes watching tv very difficult if you're paying attention.