Last week, this column spotlighted a public-service spot designed to make retired farm workers aware that they might qualify for pension funds. While producing a TV commercial to reach a potential audience of 2,000 former migrant laborers hardly makes sense from a strictly media-buying cost-per-thousand standpoint, justification for the endeavor goes well beyond the numbers. The PSA underscores the potential of advertising to do good, helping to improve the quality of life for workers and their families.
On the flip side, we have NBC’s aborted attempt to bring hard-liquor ads back to mainstream network television. From a numbers orientation, the prospect of tapping into more than $100 million in new ad revenue made perfect sense—particularly during tough economic times, which have adversely impacted television networks’ bottom line. However, from a people perspective, network acceptance of distilled-spirits advertising could only do harm—so much for the station license renewal criterion that television should serve the public interest.
Although NBC placed myriad restrictions on hard-liquor spots upon lifting network television’s self-imposed 54-year ban on that product category in December, the move generated much criticism. But NBC initially seemed prepared to weather the storm—that is, until Congress announced plans to hold hearings to investigate the practice, in the process calling into question ads for all kinds of alcoholic beverages, including beer. Broadcast networks realize some $1 billion-plus in revenue annually from beer and wine commercials.
According to published reports, NBC rescinded its relatively short-lived acceptance of hard-liquor ads last month, in large part because it otherwise would have run the risk of jeopardizing longstanding sources of major revenue generated by the beer and wine industries. NBC’s decision to back off came a day before Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) was scheduled to hold a press conference in Washington, D.C., calling for tougher standards for all alcohol ads. A group of lawmakers had also sent a letter to NBC threatening to regulate certain types of network advertising if NBC stuck to its policy of airing hard-liquor spots.
NBC issued a statement which read: "The bipartisan leadership of the House and Senate Commerce Committee asked NBC to reconsider our policy on distilled spirits advertising and to continue discussions with various public-health and interest groups. We have agreed to do that. We’ve said from the beginning that we want to be responsible on this issue. We are therefore ending the first phase of branded social responsibility advertising on our network [hard-liquor companies had to sponsor these public-service spots before being allowed to air ads promoting their products], and will not proceed into the next phase of carrying product advertising for distilled spirits. We will, however, continue to produce our own ‘The More You Know’ PSAs on using alcohol responsibly."
Joseph Califano Jr. of Columbia University’s National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse described NBC’s decision as being "an important victory for parents and children across the country."
Also vocal on the issue has been the American Medical Association (AMA). In late February, the AMA ran an ad in The New York Times when it appeared that NBC was determined to open up its airwaves to distilled-spirits advertising. At that time, the AMA print ad targeted at parents read that NBC had "let down America’s children." The copy also issued a caveat to families—"Warning: Watching NBC may be hazardous to your children’s health."
