In Depth: Ad Wars…

Ok, yes I’m late to covering this. Online traffic school pre-empted most of my afternoon and evening (though I did put up the Brian Mooar video because it was quick to do). So I’m now turning my attention to the case of FNC’s “he said/she said” 9/12 rally ad. I’m not going to debunk the ad since so many already have. CNN pushed back hardest against the FNC ad with multiple press releases coming out today addressing the FNC ad. CNN PR isn’t normally so predisposed to getting down into a street fight with FNC, something which I think has at times been a tactical mistake on their part. But this time they came out guns blazing. The best rebuttal went to CNN’s Rick Sanchez which included a very pertinent observation…

OK. Pay attention to that picture right there on the right. That’s the ad that they took out saying we didn’t cover the event. All right. Now keep an eye on that picture right there.

You see the Canadian flag?

That’s on their ad.

You see the Canadian flag right there at the bottom?

All right, let me show you this.

You see the thing on the left now?

That’s our tower cam shot of the event that we used repeatedly throughout those shows.

Funny how you could say that we didn’t cover an event while using that picture — that picture that looks an awful lot like our tower cam shot, doesn’t it?

Ok, FNC has a long and distinguished history of provocative advertising; advertising meant to stir the pot. But usually the advertising is so subjective and ambiguous that you can’t pin it down in definable terms of correct or incorrect. Not this time. This time it was patently obvious to anyone not working for FNC that the ad rang hollow. Was it a lie as Sanchez claimed? The case could be made as such.

This is underscored by the statement given to TVNewser by FNC’s Vice President of Marketing, Michael Tammero, to address the ad controversy

Generally speaking, it’s fair to say that from the tea party movement … to Acorn … to the march on 9/12, the networks either ignored the story, marginalized it or misrepresented the significance of it altogether.

This is about as evasive and unconvincing as Joel Cheatwood’s unconvincing defense of Glenn Beck and FNC getting had by an ACORN employee saying she killed her husband. Not only does Tammero bring in non-sequiturs like ACORN, he skirts the fundamental issue: Was the ad accurate? Did ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, and CNN miss the 9/12 story? The answer is no. They didn’t miss the story. They were all there.

Did they marginalize or misrepresent the story? That depends greatly on your ideological point of view and what your barometer is for marginalization and misrepresentation and I’m not going to open that Pandora’s box. Ultimately though, it’s an irrelevant point because the ad never talks about whether they marginalized or misrepresented the story. The ad only asks why they missed the story. And, as has been shown, they didn’t. It’s bad enough that FNC put out an ad that was inaccurate. It’s worse to then try and shift the discussion to something that has nothing to do with the original story.

FNC doesn’t usually let its executives hang themselves out to dry like that. They’re usually much smarter than to try and finesse a story that’s on such shaky ground (unlike some of their competition which have well documented tendencies to crawl even further out on that tiny branch, regardless of how much more foolish it makes them look). But between Cheatwood’s and Tammero’s statements this week, it seems something is slipping over there right now.

7 Responses to “In Depth: Ad Wars…”

  1. Story or no – Rick Sanchez is an idiot, a drama-queen if you will. They may have been there but from what I hear, their story on-air was all about Joe Wilson, not the 9/12 project. Fox was the only one who gave this story proper coverage – no matter how many words you write about CNN’s people being there; they basically ignored the whole thing.

  2. Story or no.

    So it doesn’t matter if FNC lied about CNN because you’re still not happy with the coverage they did give it. Facts are facts. CNN was there. They covered it.

  3. I wish “Hit and Run” Sanchez would explain why CNN refused to cover the Van Jones and Acorn stories only until FOX exposed for the 9/12 protest..yea they were their but only to briefly cover them and then only to try to carry the party line that the “Teabaggers” were only a fridge group…when they covered the Anti-Bush protests they gave them a whole 2hrs to push their agenda and made sure not to so any of the Bush is Hitler signs and worse.

    What is making CNN and “Hit and Run” Sanchez so mad is that along with the rest of the MSM have been shown to be such Obama cheerleaders that viewers are going to FOX to get the other side of the Obama story.

    Maybe if the MSM would stop cheerleading and start actuality covering Obama and asking hard questions about his policies they might get viewers again.

  4. You really need to think twice about the term “teabaggers.” Even this Democrat will tell you it’s offensive and they don’t deserve it. Tea Party, my brutha.

  5. That’s why put “teabaggers” in “” I was just making the point that that’s the way the MSM thinks about the Tea Party Protesters and why FOX was right when they asked how they could miss the story about them..because they don’t want to honestly report about them but just to put them down as freaks.

  6. ^
    I probably should have a cup of coffee before posting. I see what you were getting at, now.

  7. bushleaguer Says:

    claudiva – I don’t know “what you heard,” but I saw CNN’s coverage in the morning and they didn’t have reporters standing outside in DC amidst protesters talking about Joe Wilson. The coverage I saw was fair.
    What’s more, I caught an episode of Hannity where he showed Griff Jenkins giving the viewers a tour of the “tea party express” bus, and while he was making his way through he pointed out a CNN reporter who was reporting from the bus.

    Bottom line – Fox’s attempt to paint the rest of their competition as having completely “missed” the 9/12 protest was completely false.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: