Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Recently US airports rejected controversial Russia Today ads that are turning heads across the UK. Major US airports refused to display these and other images intended for use in the Russia Today’s December 2009 US advertising campaign.
Airports are government owned and they are stepping into questionable legal grounds in censoring ads like this. The company or the ACLU should take this to court. Besides I don't really see what the fuss is about. The ads are not that radical. Certainly not as controversial as the Abercombie Fitch ads that were on billboards last summer here in Atlanta.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,752,651 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by chielgirl
Why?
You don't have to accept anyone's advertising.
You think that half the news we receive isn't censored?
It's the free market saying NO.
It is different in a public place. The government may refuse to allow any advertising but if it does allow it then it generally cannot censor content unless it is clearly obscene. Cases have been decided on this already:
These ads were more controversial than the ones here. They have a good case if they decide to sue. If I were a lawyer I would take it in a second. There is lots of precedent in favour of the plaintiffs.
I disagree, the point of the ads is not to get people to think they are there to get people to think in a particualr manner, BIG difference. I am glad they are not running them here since they are not even real ads to begin with, even though they are trying to sell something.
Casper
What is the difference between this and corporations financing political ads. Yet the left is wetting themselves because the Supreme Court wont censor them.
i enjoyed those images..there is a truth that someone here wants to block....if it was false then what would be the harm...because people would laugh at the pics knowing how false they were....but they want to regulate them here for an agenda it seems
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
