- Joined
- Mar 11, 2013
- Messages
- 3,092
NFL Right To Ban This Super Bowl Commercial?
- Thread starter LosAngelesRams
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
LesBaker
Mr. Savant
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2012
- Messages
- 17,460
- Name
- Les
I'm kinda anti gun, but banning that commercial is wrong. If in fact they did it, I don't know that the NFL actually did and just because someone on the Internet says they did doesn't make it true. It kinda had a low budget feel to it so I'm a skeptical.
In any event if it wasn't offensive so it shouldn't have been banned.
In any event if it wasn't offensive so it shouldn't have been banned.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2010
- Messages
- 18,185
- Name
- Haole
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2010
- Messages
- 34,827
- Name
- Stu
I like the video and I agree with it. I am very Pro 2nd Amendment and my home and family is protected by it. That being said, I do doubt the commercial was ever proposed or refused as a Superbowl commercial. I get these kinds of things all the time and research them to keep my dad from forwarding them to the world (no offense Dad if you're reading this). Most of the time - they're false. And I don't just go to Snopes in case yawlz is wondering.
Now that being said about that, I will forward this video along with the disclaimer that I haven't researched its veracity. But I agree with its points. The NFL itself may not have come out publicly as anti-2nd Amendment but it sure has allowed Costas, Olberman, and their ilk a bully pulpit to slam it.
Now that being said about that, I will forward this video along with the disclaimer that I haven't researched its veracity. But I agree with its points. The NFL itself may not have come out publicly as anti-2nd Amendment but it sure has allowed Costas, Olberman, and their ilk a bully pulpit to slam it.
bluecoconuts
Legend
- Joined
- May 28, 2011
- Messages
- 13,073
Meh, I don't really care. Personally I felt the commercial was pretty stupid. However I can see why the NFL would want to ban that commercial, especially after they've had issues with guns themselves, and the fact that the nation was still in shock over a bunch of 6 and 7 year old's getting gunned down. Turning that commercial down is far less trouble than having it air and dealing with that controversy.
bluecoconuts
Legend
- Joined
- May 28, 2011
- Messages
- 13,073
If there was a debate about them, probably. Why should they get in the middle? They're not a political organization.
brokeu91
The super shrink
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2010
- Messages
- 5,546
- Name
- Michael
First of all, can the NFL ban a commercial? Seriously, I don't know? I would think it would be the network that would have to ban it. The NFL already sold their rights to the game, it's the network that accepts money for the commercials, not the NFL. Maybe the NFL has some rule where they can ban certain commercials, but I haven't heard of that before (not that it isn't true)
I don't care if the network doesn't play a commercial or not. It's their company and if they feel that playing it would hurt their bottom line then why is it any of our business whether it is played or not.
I don't care if the network doesn't play a commercial or not. It's their company and if they feel that playing it would hurt their bottom line then why is it any of our business whether it is played or not.
Thordaddy
Binding you with ancient logic
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2012
- Messages
- 10,462
- Name
- Rich
And FWIW the constitution isn't a political document, it's a statement of the rights of man but people politicize it to gain power over the same,so did they censure Bob Costas,tell him to shut his yap,I hadn't heard
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2010
- Messages
- 34,827
- Name
- Stu
To be honest and to put this out there. The NFL could be sued on First Amendment grounds if they blocked or discriminated against a commercial due to content unless it was due to decency laws or on a few other narrow interpretations. Goodell no doubt knows these laws. I really doubt the NFL banned a commercial based on content regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the message. My guess is that this outfit has no where NEAR the advertising budget it takes to run a SB ad. Seems like it doesn't pass the BS test. Y'all probably know where I stand on gun rights but can we just let this one go as being internet lore?
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2013
- Messages
- 3,092
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #16
Everyone reporting on it says the NFL banned it.
NFL bans gun seller's gun-free ad from Super Bowl: Watch, weigh in
http://www.latimes.com/nation/share...efense-20131203,0,3233881.story#ixzz2mZ7NSDJE
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 29,932
The NFL isn't a governmental organization. They are a business. The First Amendment protects against government suppression of free speech. It's how the NFL can get away with fining coaches and players for talking bad about the referees.
But I do agree with you, I doubt that Daniel Defense had the money to run a Super Bowl ad unless it was local.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2013
- Messages
- 3,092
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #20
According to these sites below (I don't know how legit the info is, just a quick Google search) Daniel Defense had $32 Million in estimated annual revenue (Actual data) and CBS charged 3.8 - 4 million a slot last year, so if this data is correct money shouldn't be the issue. there can be multiple reasons why they wouldn't air it, who knows.
http://companies.findthecompany.com/l/11411966/Daniel-Defense-Inc-in-Black-Creek-GA
http://www.ibtimes.com/how-much-do-...ad-prices-continue-rise-still-bargain-1057574