Comments on: NorCal Radio Station Refuses to Run Yes on 8 False Advertising http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/29/5510 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Sat, 25 May 2013 02:47:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: AJD http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/29/5510/comment-page-1#comment-20490 AJD Wed, 29 Oct 2008 19:01:00 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=5510#comment-20490 I often write about the FTC going after drug companies for making misleading claims in their advertising as part of my job, and I've always wondered: If you have to be 100 percent honest when advertising a product, then why shouldn't you have to be 100 percent honest when advertising a political cause? The thinking is that an Adam Smith-style invisible hand sorts this all out in the "marketplace of ideas," but that invisible hand often isn't there. Prop. 8 is an excellent example: Much of its support comes from its ability to tell one lie after another and the gullibility of the people who believe those lies because of their underlying biases. If Prop. 8 does pass, it's logical to presume that it will have passed because of its proponents ability to lie with impunity. I think there should be a law against lying in political advertisements. If it's not a violation of the First Amendment to ban lying in product ads because of the potential effects of people using unsafe products, then I don't see why it would violate the First Amendment to ban lying in political ads, considering the damage a ballot initiative or constitutional amendment can potentially cause. I often write about the FTC going after drug companies for making misleading claims in their advertising as part of my job, and I’ve always wondered: If you have to be 100 percent honest when advertising a product, then why shouldn’t you have to be 100 percent honest when advertising a political cause?

The thinking is that an Adam Smith-style invisible hand sorts this all out in the “marketplace of ideas,” but that invisible hand often isn’t there. Prop. 8 is an excellent example: Much of its support comes from its ability to tell one lie after another and the gullibility of the people who believe those lies because of their underlying biases. If Prop. 8 does pass, it’s logical to presume that it will have passed because of its proponents ability to lie with impunity.

I think there should be a law against lying in political advertisements. If it’s not a violation of the First Amendment to ban lying in product ads because of the potential effects of people using unsafe products, then I don’t see why it would violate the First Amendment to ban lying in political ads, considering the damage a ballot initiative or constitutional amendment can potentially cause.

]]>