For many years, I had gone without watching television shows. I would see clips of shows here and there when I would visit family and friends or happen to see random programs on at a tire shop, but none of them were appealing to me. And I had gone just as long not owning a television.
Some part of it had to do with the ubiquity of advertisements, but most of it just had to do with the content of the show.
So it was a bit ironic when, several years back, I got hooked on watching “Mad Men.” It is a great — and quite addicting — show (at least the seasons I have seen so far). Probably my favorite aspects include the individual character development, their interaction with each other and how the show sticks so well to capturing the feeling of the period. It’s just good.
Funny how little time, though, is spent showing the agency pitching themselves to clients. And even then, it’s clever.
Like I said at the beginning of winter term, I am not against advertising. I see its value, but on a tangential note, I think it has gotten out of hand in America. It’s too much.
I’ll give an example of what I mean.
When I landed in Norway, was picked up at the airport and was heading out, I was immediately struck by how there was no advertising along the highway. No billboards, no signs. Just farmland, hills, forests, cars and the road.
It was relief. I could finally breathe. There were no distractions from the beauty.
Sure, there were businesses off the highway in the towns and cities we drove through. But their signage was limited to their company name or logo on the side of their building.
Such a stark contrast from what can be found in the States. Billboard after billboard, excess signage, etc. I see it as another form of pollution, distracting the driver from the Oregon landscape around them.
But such limitation of advertising pollution is not just a Norwegian thing. Oregon had until a few years ago contributed greatly in this respect. And unfortunately, the state “lost” its fight. Rather, I think it capitulated.
I think the issue in this regard is what kind of values do we want to cherish and support in this topical area.
At least when it comes to freedom of speech, commercial advertising isn’t as protected as speech from individuals, particularly when individuals’ speech becomes political.
Back in 1976, the U.S. Supreme Court noted in Virginia State Board Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc. that commercial speech — outside of false/misleading or illegal goods/services — could be regulated if the regulation was based on time, place and manner restrictions (i.e., not based on the content of the message). @@http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=425&invol=748@@
And tucked away in Footnote 24, Justice Harry Blackmun wrote, “Since advertising is the sine qua non of commercial profits, there is little likelihood of its being chilled by proper regulation and foregone entirely.”
But such regulation of advertising could be applied beyond just Oregon’s highways. Take the University, or any school, for that matter. As public support for education diminishes, other forms of support are sought, which includes donations and advertising dollars.
Every time I think about that, I am reminded of a University of Oslo course I took on freedom of expression. In it, our instructor taught us how Norway, in 2004, had updated their freedom of expression clause (Article 100) in its constitution, which was originally crafted in 1814. @@http://www.stortinget.no/en/In-English/About-the-Storting/The-Constitution/The-Constitution/@@
In 1996, the government had appointed a committee to study the issue. Three years later, the committee reported back, its conclusions being largely adopted in 2004.
One of my favorite parts in the report was thus written: “Part of the problem associated with advertising is that it attempts to penetrate almost everywhere potential customers gather, regardless of the reason for their gathering there. It would not constitute a violation of freedom of expression to ban commercial utterance from the public spheres that should not be regarded as marketplaces.”
Quite an interesting juxtaposition between this and Blackmun’s opinion. It is certainly something to think about and, to me, support.