Slog
News & ArtsThursday, April 28, 2011
City Anti-Israel Billboards Yanked by Clear Channel
Posted by Cienna Madrid on Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 1:13 PM
- The billboard on Elliot Avenue
“We are concerned by the apparent campaign to deny human rights organizations the right to air our views in the public arena,” said Ed Mast, a spokesman for the Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign, which rented the billboard space.
SeaMAC purchased the four month-long billboard ads after a failed campaign to spread their message—'Israeli War Crimes: Your Tax Dollars at Work' overlaying the image of a war-torn town—on King County Metro buses. Those bus ads were removed by KC Metro due to a perceived public safety threat, a decision a federal judge upheld in February.
Olivia Lippens, president of local Clear Channel, told SeaMAC members that the company "reevaluated" the billboards after several unnamed groups and individuals objected to them (Clear Channel declined to name the specific groups involved). The billboards will be removed as quickly as possible the SeaMAC's money—roughly $1,400 per billboard—will be refunded.
1
"you have the right to free speech... as long as you're not dumb enough to actually try it"
-j. strummer
-j. strummer
2
Hey Cienna, do you think you might consider changing the headline on this? I don't think the billboard is anti-Israel in substance or in spirit. Anti-occupation? Pro-Palestinian? Anti-Apartheid? I think any of these might be more accurate indicators of both the content and intent of the creators.
Just my 2 cents..
Just my 2 cents..
6
Your bias is showing. How about "pro-palestinian" instead of "anti-israel"? Also, it's nice to see that Clear Channel has decided to take public editorial advice on their billboards. Who wants to organize some "unnamed groups" (and individuals, of course) to force Clear Channel to take down some offensive anti-choice billboards?
7
Remember kiddies, Israel is always the innocent victim and the Palestinians are always the vicious unjustified terrorists. And if you EVER question that assumption all hell will come crashing down on your neck.
8
@2: Indeed. At most, it's anti-outside-funding-of-Israeli-military. Hardly anti-Israel, unless you accept that anyone who protests the American military is necessarily anti-American.
9
@5 fair enough, but "all hell will come crashing down on your neck" ≠ a multinational company declining your billboard advertising order.
10
Why did I have to stare at the pro-life baby for the better part of the year if I knew I could just call Clear Channel and scream at them? So much for that invisible hand everyone masturbates with...
11
10: "So much for that invisible hand everyone masturbates with... "
great quote, that is awesome.
great quote, that is awesome.
12
@1: This is not about free speech. No one's first amendment rights are being violated in the slightest. The Stranger would have the right to reject ads from ex-gay movements, right? Same thing.
14
The United States donates close to half a million dollars each year to the Palestinian Authority.
Raindrop's right, this isn't free speech infringement; it's commerce. The interesting thing to me is that the same billboard in Lake City that had the Israel-is-blahblahblah ad previously had the murdered-baby ad. Who knows what will be there next - but that's ClearChannel's right to decide, since they own the billboard.
Raindrop's right, this isn't free speech infringement; it's commerce. The interesting thing to me is that the same billboard in Lake City that had the Israel-is-blahblahblah ad previously had the murdered-baby ad. Who knows what will be there next - but that's ClearChannel's right to decide, since they own the billboard.
15
@12: exactly; if Clear Channel shows a propensity to listening to the public for what billboards to run, rather than having a strong internal policy for what to run (since they put up the pro-palestinian billboards, then took then down at the objections of "unnamed groups and individuals"), then that indicates that the policy of Clear Channel to run whatever they wish can be changed by concerted public effort. Seems like a bit of a slippery slope, but it's the slippery slope that they've chosen, so...
Let's get an effort together to get those damn anti-choice billboards pulled from the Seattle area, at least. They're deeply offensive and troubling. After all, Clear Channel has now shown that they're open to public input as to what billboards to run; I say, let's input away! (Can anyone find something offensive about "JoeTV"? I just don't like those billboards...)
Let's get an effort together to get those damn anti-choice billboards pulled from the Seattle area, at least. They're deeply offensive and troubling. After all, Clear Channel has now shown that they're open to public input as to what billboards to run; I say, let's input away! (Can anyone find something offensive about "JoeTV"? I just don't like those billboards...)
16
Before anyone jumps on it, I meant to type "close to half a billion dollars" in the previous comment.
18
@12
this has everything to do w/ free speech & censorship. free speech & censorship are only exceptionally rarely about official censors saying this or that cannot be expressed. censorship is about groups of people understanding what can & cannot be spoken of according to social norms & deciding not to do it, or not to allow it of their own volition. even in the soviet union this is how most censorship functioned. and clear channel allowing anti-abortion ads but not allowing these ads is very much an act of censorship. the norms they support allow one thing to be spoken of & denies the other.
this has everything to do w/ free speech & censorship. free speech & censorship are only exceptionally rarely about official censors saying this or that cannot be expressed. censorship is about groups of people understanding what can & cannot be spoken of according to social norms & deciding not to do it, or not to allow it of their own volition. even in the soviet union this is how most censorship functioned. and clear channel allowing anti-abortion ads but not allowing these ads is very much an act of censorship. the norms they support allow one thing to be spoken of & denies the other.
19
@14: Is anyone saying Clear Channel doesn't have the right to decline to run the billboard? I haven't seen that opinion expressed. People are saying it's wrong of them to do so, but you seem to be arguing against yourself here.
That said, we all have a right to be upset with Clear Channel for making transparent political decisions in the ads they choose to accept, and to think that the company is accepting the idea that "equal rights for Palestineans" is an anti-Israeli sentiment. Which is bizarre, stupid, and noteworthy.
That said, we all have a right to be upset with Clear Channel for making transparent political decisions in the ads they choose to accept, and to think that the company is accepting the idea that "equal rights for Palestineans" is an anti-Israeli sentiment. Which is bizarre, stupid, and noteworthy.
20
@14- "The United States donates close to half a million dollars each year to the Palestinian Authority. "
Half a million vs. 3 billion? While I agree this isn't an infringement of free speech, but your opening line doesn't help your case. Or seem to be relevant at all to the discussion.
But if you want to go there, it's also worth mentioning that the 3 billion in aid to Israel is almost all military Aid (Israel is in the top 20 for strongest economies and certainly doesn't need the cash for humanitarian purposes) And that $3 billion comes with untold amounts of diplomatic support, which may not have a quantifiable dollar amount but certainly helps facilitate the occupation and prevent international scrutiny of Israel's human rights violations against the Palestinians.
Half a million vs. 3 billion? While I agree this isn't an infringement of free speech, but your opening line doesn't help your case. Or seem to be relevant at all to the discussion.
But if you want to go there, it's also worth mentioning that the 3 billion in aid to Israel is almost all military Aid (Israel is in the top 20 for strongest economies and certainly doesn't need the cash for humanitarian purposes) And that $3 billion comes with untold amounts of diplomatic support, which may not have a quantifiable dollar amount but certainly helps facilitate the occupation and prevent international scrutiny of Israel's human rights violations against the Palestinians.
21
Only Corporations have the right to Free Speech in America.
Didn't you read the disclaimer on your user agreement, Serfs?
Didn't you read the disclaimer on your user agreement, Serfs?
22
@18: You've conflated the first amendment ("CONGRESS shall make no law"), which is generally referred to as "free speech" in the U.S., with the broader concept of censorship. Maybe go back to philosophy school?
23
what a headache you people must be. nothing a glass of red wine can't fix!
http://www.1521second.com/testimonials.p…
http://www.1521second.com/testimonials.p…
24
@18: You're perfectly welcome to call it censorship in a philosophical, or even practical sense, but would it wouldn’t stand up in that court because that billboard is the private property of Clear Channel.
25
@Cienna: I have to echo the same about your use of "anti-Israel." This has been used twice about the same ad, which indicates a likely bias on your part--or at least a predilection to category errors, not being able to comprehend the difference between a state, its people and its actions, etc. The largest font of the ad you display is not even anti- anything.
I'd like to point out that I am pretty sure that America is guilty of war crimes and I want to stop funding those as well. Does that make my message/opinion anti-American [to a rational, sane being]?
I'd like to point out that I am pretty sure that America is guilty of war crimes and I want to stop funding those as well. Does that make my message/opinion anti-American [to a rational, sane being]?
26
@2, I just sent you an email! But, to whit: I refer to the SeaMAC campaign in this post (and in previous posts) as anti-Israel because their goal is to end US funding of the Israeli military by criticizing Israel's military policy. That is where they're spending their energy--and money. Take a look at their website--their message to the public is, loosely restated, "the Israeli army commits war crimes, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, so we need to stop funding them." On the website, and through their messaging, being pro-Palenstine has taken a back seat to being anti-Israel. Which makes sense, given their goal.
Anyway, that was my thought process.
Anyway, that was my thought process.
27
Fuck Dow Constantine.
Fuck Clear Channel.
Fuck anyone who thinks the risks of condeming war crimes are worse than funding war crimes.
Fuck Clear Channel.
Fuck anyone who thinks the risks of condeming war crimes are worse than funding war crimes.
29
@26 This is not a reason to call it anti-Israel. Anti-Israel sentiments would call for the destruction of the state of Israel and/or it's people. This is just calling for the end of funding of the Israeli army and it's policies by the United States because of alleged war crimes largely funded by that tax money.
31
@22 @24
the two issues are inextricably linked to each other. the public space/private space divide shrinks daily (think of the transition from the commons to the shopping mall), so what corporations allow us to say or not say becomes an issue of free speech & censorship. legal definitions of censorship are irrelevant to me. this isn't about bring a case, this is about describing the events & what is driving them. and censorship is driving the events. and 'also,' i see you graduated from asshole school. congrats.
the two issues are inextricably linked to each other. the public space/private space divide shrinks daily (think of the transition from the commons to the shopping mall), so what corporations allow us to say or not say becomes an issue of free speech & censorship. legal definitions of censorship are irrelevant to me. this isn't about bring a case, this is about describing the events & what is driving them. and censorship is driving the events. and 'also,' i see you graduated from asshole school. congrats.
32
Here's Ed Mast's recent comments on the Libyan government's voience against its own people: " ".
Here's Ed Mast's recent comments on the Syrian government's voience against its own people: " ".
Here's Ed Mast's recent comments on the Bahrainian government's voience against its own people: " ".
Here's Ed Mast's recent comments on the Iranian government's voience against its own people: " ".
He's nothing but an anti-Semite, PR whore.
Here's Ed Mast's recent comments on the Syrian government's voience against its own people: " ".
Here's Ed Mast's recent comments on the Bahrainian government's voience against its own people: " ".
Here's Ed Mast's recent comments on the Iranian government's voience against its own people: " ".
He's nothing but an anti-Semite, PR whore.
34
@25, 26: This is a very different ad from the one they wanted to put on Metro buses. That one specifically accused Israel of committing war crimes.
35
@31:
Well, once you say that there's no sense in continuing to argue with you.
legal definitions of censorship are irrelevant to me.
Well, once you say that there's no sense in continuing to argue with you.
36
the struggle for the mind of north america will be fought on the billboard arena...
Citizens of the World Man the Pumpkin Cannons! DEATH TO BILLBOARD SPAM!
http://comics.feedtacoma.com/tacomic/tac…
Citizens of the World Man the Pumpkin Cannons! DEATH TO BILLBOARD SPAM!
http://comics.feedtacoma.com/tacomic/tac…
38
@32- The Libyan, Syrian, Bahraini and Iranian governments do not, even combined and multiplied by a factor of 100, receive the amount of US military aid that Israel does. While those acts are certainly horrific and deserve nothing short of full-throated condemnation, the Israeli government's actions against the Palestinians are funded, defended and perpetuated by US policy, US tax dollars and by every single US President since Israel became a country. It isn't anti-semitic for an American (Ed Mast or otherwise) to argue that we don't want any part in funding these actions. Denouncing one nation's brutality against another does not require denouncing every act of brutality ever committed.
41
@Cienna, many others have voiced this, but I checked the organization's website, and their bottom line states, verbatim, "Stop spending our tax dollars on war crimes, apartheid and ethnic cleansing." Their mission is not against Israel but the acts perpetrated by Israeli forces on Palestinian populations. I imagine that they are deliberately making that distinction themselves, and it would be appropriate to portray them accordingly.
45
The irony about proponents of Israel is that they threaten boycotts against others while opposing boycotts of Israel, claim that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East and then engage in acts of rampant suppression of free speech. See for instance the denial of tenure for Finkelstein as well as the suppression of his original manuscript for UC Press, the inability to purchase ads, the inability to even have a debate in Congress. It is one of the most clear topics in which the public sphere in the US simply will not tolerate dissent, except at the margins.
46
These billboards were taken down because of pressure from a NYC jewish woman and zionist, Pamela Geller, who is the executive directer of the American Freedom Defense Initiative, an anti-muslim, anti-arab hate group with a nice patriotic name.
This is a systematic plan on their part to silence voices that are opposed to possible war crimes and human rights violations inflicted upon the palestinian people.
For what it is worth, I am an Irish Catholic and am unaffi;liated with any organisayion.
This is a systematic plan on their part to silence voices that are opposed to possible war crimes and human rights violations inflicted upon the palestinian people.
For what it is worth, I am an Irish Catholic and am unaffi;liated with any organisayion.
47
The funny thing is that if they'd just left the billboards, and bus signs, up then only a handful of Seattleites would have seen them. I, in MN, never would have heard of it. By blocking these things they've made it a national story.
48
@26:
So then, protesting the American invasion of Iraq is therefore Anti-American?
Protesting any specific actions of any government is the same thing as being anti-(insert country)?
So then, protesting the American invasion of Iraq is therefore Anti-American?
Protesting any specific actions of any government is the same thing as being anti-(insert country)?
49
@26: I guess I see what you're thinking is, but I agree with dirac et. al. that opposing some practices of a part of a government doesn't make one anti-state (I mean, I object to both Israel's and USA's use of torture, suspension of due process, invasive searches, and thought policing, but I don't consider that anti-Israel nor anti-USA; I'm just anti-war-crimes and anti-human-rights-abuses).
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-WY) Says Members of His Party Have Rocks for Brains by Charles Mudede
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (49) RSS