Journal Broadcast breaking the law
by running corporate issue advertising
UPDATE: An apology is in order.
Republican radio host Charlie Sykes is quite proud of himself for producing and airing an ad comparing Gov. Jim Doyle to two racist former Southern governors George Wallace and Orville Faubus, on the issue of school choice.
He's talking freely about how he and a WTMJ radio production person, Jim Gilles, produced the spot. Sykes is airing it on his program. He's posted the script and audio on his weblog.
It has no disclaimer, because, he tells WisPolitics, no one is paying for it.
Actually, that's not true. Journal Communications, and its Journal Broadcast Group, which owns WTMJ radio, is paying for it.
It is a corporation running free issue advertising on a bill that is in the legislature.
If that sounds illegal, it's because it is. State law does not allow corporations to run issue or political advertising, although in some instances it allows them to contribute to groups that do, like Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce.
Sykes says the commercial is simply "an element of my show."
But it's not, and it's not the same as parody commercials Sykes or Mark Belling have run making fun of Tom Ament or other elected officials.
This one is a real, honest-to-goodness issue ad that is trying to affect legislation and -- not incidentally -- do some damage to Gov. Jim Doyle, whom Sykes despises and wants out of office. The campaign for governor is already underway, which is a relevant fact as well.
Do you think Journal Broadcast lawyers reviewed and signed off on this spot? I would be amazed if they did, since the station is running an issue ad for free on taxpayer-owned airwaves. The Journal Broadcast Group does not own the airwaves; it is licensed by the government to use them.
WTMJ-AM is the biggest station in Wisconsin. This week, a spot on Sykes' show would cost an issue advertiser $520 if it ran before 10 a.m. and $320 between 10 and noon. There is a dollar value as well as a poliltical value to what Sykes and his corporate bosses are doing.
I'm not a lawyer and not in the business of filing lawsuits or complaints. But someone who is should take a close look at this and consider filing complaints with both the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the State Elections Board, for starters.
If Sykes can do this now, what's to prevent him, Jeff Wagner, Mark Belling and whoever to produce and run their own negative issue commercials right through the coming campaign and up to election day? Does that sound legal? If not, then what Sykes and Journal Broadcast are doing right now isn't legal either.
POSTSCRIPT: Sykes wonders why I don't mention Mikel Holt, editor of the Community Journal, who helped produce the spot. Is it because he's black? No, actually it's because he -- unlike Sykes and Gilles -- doesn't work for the Journal Broadcast Group, so his participation is not a corporate contribution. It does raise the interesting question, however, of whether Holt is an agent or representative of one of the other organizations that is advertising or lobbying on the issue. That could be a little problem, too.
POSTSCRIPT 2: Sykes' defense is that it's free speech. It's free to him because he's on the air, but it is paid for by the corporation he works for. If it were really free speech, the station would offer equal time for people on the other side of the issue to air their opinions and run their own "unsponsored" commercial.
THE REAL CHOICE. If anyone wants to get past the rhetoric and compare the proposals on choice caps from Gov. Doyle and the legislative Republicans, click here.
posted by xoff @ 10:31 AM
13 comments
13 Comments:
I respectfully disagree with both your analysis of the specifics of this issue and the broader issue.
Tsk! Tsk! Tsk! Such a disingenuos post Xoff. Here are the facts regarding radio advertising:
1) WTMJ sells a certain number of minutes each hour during Sykes program to advertisers ... once those minutes are purchased, and spots scheduled for them, no more spots can be purchased during that time
2) Charlies 'Spot' that he and others produced does not run during this allotted advertiser time, nor has it displaced any ad already paid for.
3) The 'Spot' is coming out of HIS show time, and therefore hasn't cost WTMJ anything because they wouldn't be selling the time he is using up with this spot to sell to advertisers, even if all advertising time available on the show were not sold.
It is disingenous at best for you to argue that Charlie or WTMJ are doing anything other than having an on air personality offer up editorial opinion during his show, as he is paid to do. In this case he is using a specific vehicle to do it ... a 'Spot'! I have heard Charlie state opinions ... I have heard him interview guests to help promote an editorial opinion he has ... I have heard him encourage others to read articles in specific newspapers which espouse a particular opinion he is advancing (By YOUR standards, does this become an advertisement for that magazine or periodical which is provided free?) ... I have heard Charlie use satire ... parody ... and now, a very well produced editorial 'spot' which advances his opinion. Its the same as a newspaper offering an editorial ... or running a column or excerpt from a book on their editorial pages ... to advance an issue. Its the newspaper's space for editorials ... how they choose to advance that opinion is the prerogative of the newspapers editorial staff ... just as it is Charlie's prerogative to advance his editorial opinion any way he sees fit, so long as it is during time set aside for his program, and not during time allocated for paid advertising.
You know this ... which makes it clear all you are doing is trying to raise dust to take people's attention off the ad because it is so damning!
Weak effort XOff ... VERY VERY Weak!
Regarding your Postscript 2, the last time I checked, the "Fairness" Doctrine didn't exist anymore. Nice try though.
We know there's no fairness at WTMJ radio, whatever the law.
Well, enough talk, X.
Bring suit. Stop with the pandering to racists (like Jimbo did in the S-O-S message--you know, the Mercedes...)
And you KNOW that's meant to inflame racism out-State.
Because that's what it IS, X.
WTMJ is no less "fair" than WPR, the Madison papers or the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, or even you and me. Again, nice try.
Which specific statute did they "violate"? I'm not a lawyer either, so it shouldn't be a surprise that I couldn't find it; but I did find the annotated version of the State Constitution. While it notes a questionable exemption to the right of free speech for ads that expressly advocate for or against the election of a candidate or referrendum (one that appears to be contradicted by other annotations), it does not have a blanket "issue ad" exemption, not even for an issue that is before the Legislature or governor.
Interesting that the objection of the original article, as well as the responses to the article is one of 'fairness' rather than a rebuttal of the premise of the 'spot' Sykes' show. That speaks volumes in and of itself.
Spotlight - you forget that editorial boards can and do keep on hammering and hammering and hammering on the same points on issues like concealed carry. There have been so many of those from the Journal Sentinel I've lost count.
Welcome, Sykes Writes readers. your rants are very insightful.
I'd invite you to post some of your thoughts on his blog -- but he doesn't alllow comments.
So much for free speech.
C'mon Bill. You know you owe Sykes an apology. You're a political consultant. By now you should know the rules for mass media, and you know that unless Sykes and Journal Communications expressly coordinated their activity it was fair commentary. Otherwise we'd all be in Madison on Monday filing complaints against wispolitics.com for the shill job you do for some Democrats around here. Next time take a deep breath before you hit "send."
If any apology is due, it is from Sykes to Doyle for comparing him to two racist governors who supported segregation and tried to keep black students out of public schools.
This is beyond fair comment, and misrepresents what Doyle has offered to do to solve the problem.
It is the Republicans, with their all-or-nothing approach, that are standing in the schoolhouse doors.
I guess if I had a radio station I could broadcast that. But I don't, of course. The only way I can get that message on WTMJ is to pay thousands of dollars.
Sykes, meanwhile, is free to play the same "spot" -- his term -- over and over, for free.
What's next, free issue ads on television, paid for by the stations?
Mr. Cheaney:
Don't let the facts get in the way. Doyle is not trying to eliminate choice.
He has made a reasonable offer to solve the problem.
If you want to deal in facts, and compare his proposal with the GOP's, here's a link.
Horace said...
"Its the same as a newspaper offering an editorial ... or running a column or excerpt from a book on their editorial pages ... to advance an issue."
Even while I believe Mr. Sykes has the right to say or run whatever spot he so chooses, his ad against Governor Doyle is not the same as an editorial in a newspaper. If there was a disclaimer, such as the following is an editorial or the opinions expressed by, etc. then it would qualify as an editorial, such as a newspaper has.
When you read an editorial in a newspaper, you know it is an opinion. An editoral wouldn't be put on the front page and passed off as a true news story. Nor, would an advertisement be placed on the front page without notification that it is an ad.
Post a Comment
<< Home