other broadcast groups, continues to ensure the appropriateness of such advertising, MDCD urges the members of this Subcommittee to find that there is no justification for legislative imposition of a ban or counter advertising measure on beer and wine ads.

MDCD would further direct this Subcommittee's attention to the experience of broadcasters, the Federal Communications Commission and the Courts in the cigarette advertising controversy of the late 1960's and early 1970's. In an unprecedented 1967 decision, the FCC held that the Fairness Doctrine, which requires that broadcasters ensure that the public will be informed of competing viewpoints, was applicable to cigarette advertisements. 2/ The Commission found that these commercials raised a "controversial issue," triggering the Fairness Doctrine, but stated that "cigarette advertising presents a unique situation" in which the product promoted is inherently dangerous when consumed amount. 3/ The courts rejected this limitation on the applicability of the Fairness Doctrine to ads as artificial, however, and the FCC was thereafter bombarded with requests, from all manner of advocacy groups, for counter advertising. 4/ For example, associations demanded presentation of waste recycling ads to counter trash compactor commercials, environmental conservation ads to counter car, gasoline and

in any

detergent promotions, and

2/ Television Station WCBS-TV, 8 FCC 2d 381 (1967); stay and reconsideration denied, 9 FCC 2d 921 (1967).

3/ Id. at 943.

4/ Banzhaf v. FCC, 404 F.2d 1082 (D.C. Cir., 1968).

anti-Vietnam War announcements to counter Armed Services recruitment ads. 5/ Realizing it had opened a veritable "Pandora's Box" with its 1967 decision, the Commission reversed itself in 1974, stating: "we believe that standard product commercials, such as the old cigarette ads, make no meaningful contribution toward informing the public on any side of any issue." 6/ It concluded that the obligation of a licensee to address issues, such as health and smoking, arises from "public interest responsibilities, and should not grow out of a tortured or distorted application of fairness doctrine principles to announcements in which public issues are not discussed."

Some ten years later, this reasoning is still sound. Standard beer and wine commercials do not inform viewers, one way or the other, on an issue of public importance. Current efforts to legislatively mandate counter advertising to such ads thus fly in the face of the Commission's well-reasoned 1974 decision to leave to the discretion of the broadcast licensee selection and airing of public service announcements. Should Congress not heed the Commission's example, it will soon find itself inundated with demands for legislatively mandated counterads to almost every product that is the subject of commercial advertisements.

Now), FCC 8330-N WNBC-TV, June 18,

5/ John S. McGinnis (Citizens Arise (1971); FCC Ruling on WCBS-TV, WABC-TV and 1971. See also Peter C. Herbst, FCC 8330-0, March 16, 1971, and Fran Lee, FCC 8427-C, September 17, 1972.

6/

Fairness Doctrine and Public Interest Standards, 48 FCC 2d 5 (1974), aff'd sub nom, NCCB v. FCC, 567 F.2d 1095 (D.C. Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 926 (1978).

MDCD would also urge the Subcommittee to recognize that broadcasters have long acknowledged and acted upon their public interest obligation to address the dangers of alcohol abuse. Most recently, the MDCD membership has been participating in the NAB-sponsored effort "Drunk Driving: Operation Prom/Graduation." This program, consisting of public service announcements and promotional materials targeted to high school students and their parents, advises of the dangers of alcohol-impaired driving during the celebratory prom and graduation season. MDCD also continues to participate with Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) in public awareness campaigns. See MDCD Brochure submitted herewith as Attachment A. The public service efforts of MDCD on this score were recently cited by the Honorable Michael N. Castle, Governor of Delaware, who praised MDCD for contributing to safer state highways during the 1984 Holiday season. Washington area MDCD members also annually participate in the Washington Regional Alcohol Program (WRAP), sponsors of the successful "designated driver" and "dial-a-ride" programs during Holiday

seasons.

In fulfilling their responsibilities as public trustees, broadcasters have sponsored public service announcements and participated in community public awareness efforts that address the problem of alchol abuse. Unlike cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption is not inherently dangerous and the broadcast efforts have thus been geared towards educating the public about responsible and appropriate use of alcohol. The beer and wine adver

6

tisements similarly do not encourage overconsumption or condone misuse, but depict the products' use in a reasonable and responsible fashion. To restrict or ban such advertisements thus would be detrimental to public education about responsible alcohol use and would once again surround the issue of alcohol-related problems with a disturbing and unhealthy silence. The alternative of mandated counter advertisements would replace licensee discretion in fulfilling public service responsibilities with an unwarranted and unworkable Congressional mandate. In the absence of any link between responsible beer and wine advertisements and alcohol abuse, there is no justification for legislative adoption

DID YOU KNOW...

ATTACHMENT A