My friend Dominic’s argument is fair. After all when you start censoring speech, the slope gets pretty slippery.
However, this is not censorship. I’m simply calling the question, should for profit corporations profit from ads that cause real harm to real people. These are not a crappy made-for-TV infomercials. These ads are blatant lies about a protected class of people in Washington State that cause real harm. I don’t think the TV stations should run them. The FCC says they have a right to choose which issues based ads they run. This would not be the only editorial decision made by our local stations. Local TV stations make editorial decisions every day.
Newspapers make editorial decisions every day too. The Seattle Times certainly hasn’t been shy about their support for marriage. Neither has the Stranger. Would the Stranger be willing to run anti-gay ads? What’s the difference between a newspaper making it very clear newspapers have an opinion about a basic human right and asking a television station to make their position clear by drawing a very exceptional line in the sand? Personally, I don’t see much of a difference.