One-Sided Controversy

How can you have a one-sided controversy? Well, you can't actually. By definition a controversy has at least two sides, often more. What I'm referring to here is an effort by two of our major media sources trying to cut one of the sides out of the debate. Here's what I mean. CBS and NBC don't want to run the United Church of Christ (UCC) TV spot because it's "too controversial." The commercial clearly takes the position that the UCC is open to gay and lesbian members. What's controversial about it? Well, according to the two networks what makes is controversial is that the President supports a constitutional amendment to bar same sex marriage. The fact that something opposes the President's position makes it too controversial to get a public airing? Say what? That doesn't sound like the American way of democracy. That certainly doesn't sound like public debate on an issue. It sounds a lot like Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

But, wait a minute! The President opposes same-sex marriage. The UCC wants to include gay and lesbians members. What am I missing here? The two positions are not even about the same issue. One is about marriage and one is about acceptance. This sounds both stupid and dangerous. Stupid because there are two different issues here. Logically, they're not even connected. Dangerous because it smacks of not even allowing debate. If this stands, it means that opposing a position taken by the current person in the White House prevents you from getting a hearing in the media.

So, if there's really not a connection between the TV spot and the President's position, what's going on? I believe that the two networks in question don't really shy away from controversy. Hell, they seem to revel in it! No, I think they are in shock and are overreacting to the "moral values" issues highlighted by the election. They are mortally afraid of offending religious conservatives. Losing viewers is even more important today than in the past, because broadcast television no longer the only game in town. It's not about controversy, it's about market share.

One fascinating point about all of this is that according to an NPR report I heard this week, "moral values" were considered important by larger percentages of voters in the 1996 and 2000 elections that the most recent one. Could it all be for nothing?

- posted by Marcos @ 8:53 PM (0) comments