Thanks to the Supreme Court's Citizen's United ruling in January, the money is really starting to pour in for the Republicans. The airwaves are being flooded by attack ads funded by secret organizations and individuals hell-bent on electing candidates and passing inititiatives that will set America so far back it will be impossible to recover. It's money that's not accountable, coming from who knows where. How do we deal with this?
I've been following the California Governor's race rather closely and I came across an interesting tactic by Negative Meg Whitman. Her high priced lawyers threatened to file a lawsuit against Comcast if they ran an ad by the California Teacher's Association. Comcast pulled the ad.
I believe that, rather than focusing on the secretive organizations laundering the money, we should focus our attention at the messengers, the people delivering the advertising, the broadcasters and media outlets taking the money and running the ads.
The first thing to do is contact the media outlets in our communities and ask them not to run political ads which don't have full disclosure of who is funding them. The more people that do this, the better. Democrats in Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Washington need to be especially energized, as they are right in the middle of this political storm. This is a very fair request.
These broadcasting companies are in the business of serving and informing the public, it's hard to imagine this request being denied. It seems to me the duty of the media to honestly inform the electorate.
Secondly, there's a chance that some television, radio and other media outlets will be so desperate for advertising revenue that they will disregard the best interests of their viewers, readers and listeners, and run the secretly funded ads anyway. What to do then? It's unpleasant to talk of this, but considering the seriousness of the issue-- secret ads with secret funders and secret agendas-- it needs to be addressed. Legal action needs to be pursued.
I am not a lawyer, so I will defer to more knowledgeable people on this subject, but I believe that a broadcasting company that airs material without fully vetting its source is potentially liable for every item in those ads. Without any way of following the money trail, the consumer of information is basically relying on the broadcasting outlet to account for the ad's veracity. For all the consumer knows, the ad may be paid for by foreigners, terrorists, or criminal elements. So in the event that a polite request not to run ads without full disclosure is ignored, serious minded lawyers need to send out letters threatening legal action if the ads aren't removed.
I believe what I've recommended here is a very civil approach. The marketplace of ideas needs to be open and accountable. When you go to the airport, for example, you'll hear, "Do not leave your bags unattended," and they'll ask you if anyone packed your bags. And do you know why they do this? Because if they find a bomb or drugs in your luggage-- you will be held accountable. Shouldn't our media be equally accountable?
Remember, the last week of the election is when the dirt really starts to fly-- you ain't seen nothin' yet-- so everyone act now. You can follow my efforts at Facebook.
