Why don't we require all media outlets to run a fixed number of political ads for each candidate for free?

Question

Since most of the money raised for elections is spent on TV advertising. Why can't we require that all TV stations in exchange for using the publicly owned airwaves run a certain number of ads for every candidate running. It would reduce the need to raise so much money if the amount of ads anyone could run was capped.

Answer 1

Or ban them all together and just have open forums on public access.

Answer 2

Because do you really want 1000 independent canidates taking away from those who actually have a shot.

You would have to give air time to the Communist Party, Green Peace, People for Pot.....ect.

Any real message will get lost in the shuffle.

When you don't have a real chance but now have free air time there's no reason to ever step aside.

When do you think the free ads should start airing? 6 months before the election? 1 year? Day 1 of the new President?

Would this free ads be just for President or for every possible elected office?

Why do you hate TV so much?

Answer 3

Which parties, which candidates, what offices? Right now there are currently about 125 people in the Presidential race and yes we have never heard of most them and these guys stand little or no chance.... but we can't say the big guys get a free shot at tv and the little guys get none and I dont want to see or hear from all of these people.

Plus why should a private media company be forced to run politol ads for free? If you owned a candy store wouldn't it be your business to sell as much candy as possible? So ABC wants to sell as much of it's services as possible. Besides media companies pay to use airwaves and bandwidth.
If you try to open a radio station the government will charge you for your frequencey range this is called licensing....they sell advertising to pay for this the cable and satelite companies have business agreements to broadcast.

Answer 4

The 2008 election will be historic for a number of reasons -- not the least of which is that it will almost certainly be the most expensive presidential race in history, with a price tag that some believe will top $1 billion.

Answer 5

Why hang the responsibility for campaign financing reform on the backs of free enterprise.

American business is what makes this a great and prosperous country .

Any move to socialism like this proposal would make the US as poor a country as France.

Answer 6

As a memeber of a union, $10 is going to percentfunds. regardless of 18,000 members contained domestically it may no longer purchase any candidate vs. electorate united. lots of the union refuse to make a contribution because of the fact it did little or no longer something to Pres. Obama or the democrats for our prioities. Your answer is the WI remembers. The bear in mind value the donations to enhance hundred fold over the unique election fees. And it quite is shown lots of the money grow to be from out of state. Or what share individuals stay pay verify to pay verify. they are in a position to no longer locate the money for to donate like U.S. Corprations optimal checklist ever revenue. Or U.S. firms sitting on on the factor of $4 trillion in money contained in the U.S. and in another country.

Answer 7

Advertisements of candidates on TV must be given equal airing times so that no one will be disadvantaged.

Answer 8

How would you determine which candidates get the free adds?

To be fair you would have to allow anyone who filled out the paper work to run free add time, we would spend the entire broadcast day watching political adds.

Then you would have to determine who got the prime time adds, and who got the 3:00AM adds.

and so on, and so forth...

Answer 9

free market and freedom of press.