Censorship and consolidation

Last year, the FCC dismissed concerns about the effects of media consolidation on the diversity of viewpoints available to Americans. They were overwhelmingly vindicated this year, when CBS even-handedly accepted ads from all political viewpoints during the Super Bowl.

Oh, wait a minute. They didn't.

The network refused to let political activist group MoveOn buy airtime for an ad that criticizes the Bush administration's runaway deficit spending. That's political issue advocacy, said CBS, and, gosh, we can't allow that kind of stuff on the air. (Meanwhile, an ad from the Bush White House was run in its place.)

Another ad, from PETA, was also banned:

"We just want to be able to present our jiggly women," said Lisa Lange, spokeswoman for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, asking to join advertisers like beer brewers who has boosted sales with images of scantily-clad women . -- from Planet Ark

CBS claimed that PETA's ad "raises significant taste concerns and has strong potential to offend significant numbers of viewers." I guess that's a privilege that CBS reserves for itself.

This story has actually received a fair amount of press over the last few days, and CBS has been on the receiving end of well-deserved jeers. What's less well reported is the fact that such bias is widespread and routine in the broadcast world, and is significantly restricting, even warping, the view of the world that is available to people who receive most of their information from broadcast media.

Adbusters, an activist group that criticizes and mocks consumerist "culture", has routinely been banned from purchasing airtime by all major broadcast networks (other then CNN, which acquiesced after some initial resistance.) The litany of reasons given for banning their ads ("Big Mac Attack", "Buy Nothing Day", etc.) is as damning as it is, occasionally, funny:

"We can't advertise something that's too controversial.... [w]e're a network and we're loyal to our advertisers." -- MTV

"[F]or a broadcast TV network things like boycotting television and anti-consumerism might not go over very well with our other advertisers." -- Fox Broadcast Corporation

"The character is seen burping." -- Channel 5, France

-- from Jan/Feb issue of Adbusters magazine

Now I recognize that a private business has the right to make decisions about what viewpoints it wishes to express, and isn't obligated to provide a soapbox to everyone who has an idea to shout out. But what about a marketplace where the availability of soapboxes is limited by artificial scarcity imposed by a government agency, as when broadcasting licences are controlled by the FCC? And is consolidation and centralized control of those scarce soapboxes, under any aegis, a good thing? (Discuss amongst yourselves, please.)