Pubdate: Fri, 21 Jan 2000
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Copyright: 2000 The Washington Post Company
Address: 1150 15th Street Northwest, Washington, DC 20071
Feedback: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/edit/letters/letterform.htm
Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Related: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n078/a02.html

TV AND PROPAGANDA (CONT'D)

IN A LETTER published on this page on Wednesday, Barry McCaffrey, head of
the Office of National Drug Control Policy, stated that "at no time has
this office vetoed, cleared or otherwise dictated the content of network
television or other programs." His office then issued guidelines stating
that it will no longer "review program episodes ... until after such
program episodes have aired or been published." In other words, we never
did it, and we promise not to do it again.

In either case, the new guidelines don't address the more fundamental
problem with White House efforts to affect media portrayals of drug use:
Whether the content review comes before or after a show is broadcast,
government has no business offering financial rewards to networks for
embedding messages within television shows.

There is nothing wrong with the government trying to discourage drug use
through advertising. Under a 1997 law, the government was authorized to buy
$1 billion in anti-drug advertising over five years as long as it could
receive two minutes of advertising time for each minute it bought.

The problem arose because the drug control policy director's office, to
encourage the networks to participate, began crediting them for having made
their matching contribution when they ran programs that showed drug use in
a negative light.

This effectively permitted the networks to resell time that had been
committed to the government, while allowing the government to decide how
much a show's message was worth.

No matter when this valuation takes place, it is an improper cooptation of
supposedly independent media. (The Post also sold space for anti-drug
advertising, but the editorial contents of the paper were never mixed up
with that deal.)

By all means, let the president push for responsible and accurate
portrayals of drug abuse.

Let the drug policy director provide information on the subject to those
who make television shows.

But the government crosses a line when it uses financial incentives to
influence or reward networks for the content of the shows themselves.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D