CBS execs are full of it!

[12voltman59]

The powers-that-be at CBS Television rejected a funny ad for a gay male online dating site, while it is going to air an ad during the actual Superbowl broadcast paid for by Focus for the Family featuring the now former University of Florida Gators quarterback, Tim Tebow and his mom that has a "pro-life" message about how she was faced with a decision about having Tim or not and that she chose to have him--but that does bring up one important point I am sure they are not going to talk about in the ad----she had a choice whether or not to have that child, a freedom Mrs. Tebow and Tim seem to be in favor of doing away with for other women.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/01/gay-dating-site-claims-cbs-is-discriminating-against-its-super-bowl-ad/1?obref=obnetwork

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/01/gay-dating-site-mancrunchcom-calls-for-help-after-super-bowl-ad-rejected-by-cbs/1

http://foolocracy.com/2010/01/cbs-to-run-pro-life-ad-during-super-bowl-but-stalls-on-gay-dating-ad/

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/football/nfl/super-bowl/01/25/cbs.superbowlad.ap/index.html

I had read in Thursday's printed edition of USA Today that CBS was not only going to be running the Focus on the Family ad during the game itself--but will run several versions of it prior to the game during the many hours long pre-game coverage--for a total of four times the ad or a version of it will be running on Sunday.

I could not find anything online about that----but if true--so much for CBS not wanting to run "advocacy ads!"

If you feel CBS is wrong to be running the Focus ad, go to this site to sign an online petition directed at CBS execs expressing your displeasure:

http://emilyslist.org/news/cbs/20100202_cbs_petition_choice

PS--I was wrong on the date of the article running--the article I spoke of ran in today's edition, Friday Feb. 5, in the Money section, "Game Gets More Political"--I will try to see if they put that article online or not. Another PS----They didn't run a version of that article online, sorry to say.

[Long Duck Dong]

they should air neither of them.... its a family sports event, it should not be turned into a positive parenting / family values issue for families as that can stuff up the viewing for a lot of sports watchers and create more issues that take the focus off the sports teams and players that play sports

[12voltman59]

I agree with ya LDD--either there are no restrictions on such ads and let all such groups, company, orgs run them--or there is a zero tolerance policy and the networks don't run any such adds on either side of such issues.

It would be nice if we could have one thing, for a few hours that we don't have to be exposed to such issues!!

[tenni]

This point was raised on another site. CBC had refused many ads in previous years that might be considered more progressive. The argument given is for the anti abortion ad being accepted is that this year due to the recession CBC is hurting due to insufficient ads during Superbowl. It was argued that it is all about money and that CBC has no moral stance. Strange though that they are more inclined to accept "family value ads" camoflauging what really are extremist ads accepted from the right extremist Christians. I wonder if they would accept ads for basic black, purple and red burkas....lol

[TwylaTwobits]

It's actually kind of ridculous given the amount of money people pay for Super Bowl Ads.

I remember a few years ago Snickers had a hilarious commercial, a take off of lady and the tramp with two guys eating a snickers bar. They wound up touching lips then jumped back and ripped hair off their chest. It was banned shortly after SuperBowl because it was offensive to some people.

The ads are the highlight of the blowout games. I'd rather watch the commercials and pee during the game during those contests. When it's a tight game I have to sit there and judge whether or not I have enough time during a timeout to run to the bathroom, grab a drink, do anything that requires eyes off the tv.

I don't want to sit there and be forced to see a prolife ad when I'm prochoice or to see another person's family values shoved down my throat. I'm sure most Americans would agree with that and like Voltie wish for a few hours of no drama other than a fumble, no politics other than replacing players and no ridicule other than the fans booing.

[shybipinay]

It's too bad, that as a species, we can find nothing better to do than watch the Superbowl and all its consumerist crap contained therein.

The money spent on ads etc. for the Superbowl could be spent feeding and housing the poor and cleaning up the environment.

Nope, we'd rather be sheeple and sit in front of the tube oblivious to the fact, that if we don't tend to the cleanliness of the environment, we might not be here much longer to enjoy our mindless television oblivion.

Oh, and there's nothing more patriotic than Canadians going whole hog on an American pass time.

Just something to think about on your lazy Saturday morning.

[roy m cox]

CBS in general is full of crap,,
reruns of reruns up the ying yang

i don't like watching tv any more cuzz of all the poop on it :2cents:

lot more good stuff on line like Hulu and some other sites i like ..

[jamiehue]

I watch p.b.s. and the "flying tomato"and watching qualityroad run and rowing!and readin threads good nite

[12voltman59]

I somehow missed the Focus ad!!!

It does get me--they had all those ads with guys in underwear and those could run----but the one for ManCrush with two guys making out was "too much"???

Seems to me--with so many of the ads already being "so gay"--it wouldn't have hurt a thing to have had the ManCrush run!!

They sure had plenty of ads that made straight guys look like idiots and cads---couldn't be any worse to have the two guys making out over the potato chip bowl!! :bigrin::bigrin:

[Toad82]

CBS did us a favor. Besides that the ad in question was never going to air for two reasons. 1) The Superbowl air time was already sold out. They only reviewed it in case someone else dropped out. 2) The company didn’t have the 2.5 million to run the ad even if it was accepted. Furthermore, the ad was stupid. It was nothing more that negative stereotypes, showing how “we” have no decorum about sex. Even more the site is not a gay owned site. It is own by the same woman that owns many other niche sites. The woman is even known to dislike “queers”.

This was about nothing more than free PR. They didn’t pay a cent, but people have been talking about it for days because they just ran with it, without checking to get the real story.

[jamiehue]

on track..I watch Fox news all the commentators are plenty queer for me.

[mikey3000]

Oh, and there's nothing more patriotic than Canadians going whole hog on an American pass time.

Just something to think about on your lazy Saturday morning.

I don't know about out west there, but here in Toronto, most don't give a crap about football. We just go to the bars to watch the girls get shit faced drunk with free drinks during the Super Bowl. :cool: