SKIP THE 1ST AMENDMENT, JUST GIVE 'EM THEIR PROFITS

Media: Look At Bottom Line To See Why Tv Networks Let The Nation's Drug
Czar Play Critic.

The admission that White House drug czar Barry McCaffery reviewed and
influenced scripts written for prime-time television represents one of
the boldest government peacetime intrusions into a free media in U.S.
history. Shocking, but then again, the drug czar acts as if our basic
freedoms may be sacrificed to win the drug war.

Most disturbing is that this secret arrangement was honored by all the
television networks. Many executives, producers and writers were in on
the scandal involving more than a hundred TV episodes, yet no one blew
the whistle until the online magazine Salon reported this egregious
violation of the spirit of the 1st Amendment last week.

While network executives are quick to invoke the 1st Amendment's
guarantee of a free press if it comes to preserving their right to
exploit the extremes of sex and violence for ratings' profits, they
seem all too eager to surrender that protection if it enhances their
bottom line.

That's the real issue in this scandal. The networks meekly submitted
scripts for the drug czar's approval in order to be released from the
obligation to run public interest advertisements at reduced rates, and
instead be able to sell that time for greater profit. They sacrificed
artistic integrity in order to garner what has been estimated at $20
million in increased advertising revenue.

In the midst of merger mania involving the broadcast industry, the
drive to improve the bottom line becomes all-compelling, and the fact
that no one from the writers and producers on "ER" or "The Cosby Show"
up to the top network executives dared to publicly criticize this
practice suggests that the corruption is widespread. Clearly these
people have no respect for the rights of viewers to know when
government propaganda has been mixed into programs they are watching.

More troubling is the failure of the network's news programs to
uncover and report on this story. Or are they too blinded by their
parent companies' grasp for profit?

As for the government, which is supposed to protect our freedoms, the
official drug war propagandists blithely insist on their right to save
us from ourselves. "I guess we plead guilty to using every lawful
means of saving America's children," said Bob Weiner, a drug office
spokesman. His defense is that his office only makes suggestions, and
he proudly boasts that they do not engage in outright prior
censorship, which is clearly unconstitutional.

But at the very least, if we are getting government propaganda mixed
in with our entertainment or news programs, shouldn't it be clearly
labeled as such? That's what newspapers call the difference between
advertorial and news copy, and when they cross that line, they are
severely criticized. But the insertion of the drug czar's propaganda
into entertainment programming is a far more egregious violation of
the spirit of a free press because it involves government, rather than
private industry, manipulation of the media.

The protections of the 1st Amendment are directed at
government--"Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of the
press." This secret government manipulation of the media was paid for
by Congress. House Appropriations Committee Chairman Jim Kolbe
(R-Ariz.) defended provision of funds for this concealed official
propaganda on the grounds that it is efficient, which deception often
is. "Certainly some questions have been raised," he said. "But we want
to get the message out to young people." Then do so honestly and say
that this is a government-sponsored message. Don't sneak it into
ordinary program content, which is the practice of totalitarian
governments.

The drug warriors in the White House are obsessed with saving us from
ourselves even at the expense of our most precious freedoms. They
alone know the truth, and it will set us free. But as with an earlier
campaign to prohibit alcohol sales, their war ends up being
counterproductive and destroying our freedoms.

That is the dark side of the war on drugs: The hypocrisy and
shallowness of its message equates all illegally used drugs but
soft-pedals alcohol, which is a staple of television advertising. The
war fills our jails with black youth for crack cocaine possession
while going easy on suburban whites who prefer powdered cocaine. As a
result, we have the largest jail population in the world filled with
nonviolent prisoners who have hurt only themselves.

Will a television industry that seeks the approval of the drug czar in
order to be rewarded with more advertising revenue tell this other
side of the drug story? Will it report the truth about medical
marijuana, which the government doesn't want you to hear? It hasn't
done much of that. Now we know why.