I don't see the big issue with this. Hulu isn't under any obligation to accept any content.
As much as I may agree/disagree with the topics of the campaign ads, I really don't think these (probably) polemic video snippets are as significant as the people pushing them pretend they are.
I think politicians need to stop demanding private companies allow them to say what they want, when they want, how they want. There are plenty of other advertisements that are rejected- companies have discretion over what they choose to accept, as they should.
Ultimately if politicians want to bring a subject to people, they should figure out other ways of doing so. Additionally, I really don't think anyone with or without a stance is going to be swayed by a 30/60/90 second ad. A short ad on a streaming platform also isn't going to bring discussion or encourage real responses from people besides (probably) irritation.
Ultimately regardless of the message contained, Hulu has the say over what content they want to be associated with. Maybe it isn't even about the topics presented, but about the politicians and political campaigns in general.
Personally I would be irritated to see campaign ads, from either duopolist party- I'd rather not watch it as none of them have anything worth saying most of the time. I wish they'd take their campaign money, use it elsewhere, and stop making a big ado about people not wanting to do what they want- that goes for both Democrats and Republicans- acting like there's some kind of persecution happening, while hypocritically at the same time both are doing their very best to stifle anything outside their big tents.
Sure, of course, I would guess that basically everyone agrees with your entirely non-controversial opinion that you don't like seeing advertisements... but why can't they say "climate change"?
You note "Maybe it isn't even about the topics presented, but about the politicians and political campaigns in general.", which could hypothetically be true in another instance... but in this specific instance they approved the same ad by the same politician after the phrase "climate change" was replaced with "democracy".
They specifically, explicitly, wanted the phrase "climate change" removed. In this instance, it is clearly not about the politician or political campaigns in general - it is about the specific phrase.
I strongly believe in Hulu's right as a private business to decide this.
The key here is that Democrats are outraged at Hulu, but they're not trying to change laws to force Hulu to carry these ads.
That is in contrast to the other side of this debate about deplatforming, which has repeatedly proposed laws that violate the First Amendment because the marketplace of ideas rejects their regressive propaganda.
I really feel like the "why" here should not be that hard.
They likely don't want to carry pro gun or anti-abortion ads and they are making the right choice to say they don't want to carry anti-gun or pro-choice either. Especially considering what Disney is currently doing for their employees to have access to proper medical care and abortions.
I am unclear on the laws regarding political advertising but I have to wonder if they allowed one (pro-choice) they would be in hot water if they blocked the other (anti abortion)?
What do the other platforms do for this case? The article is missing a ton of details here. It said they carried this ad, but do they carry anti-abortion ads?
...but what's the rationale behind banning "climate change"?
I checked for more info on this, and it seems like they really did ban the phrase "climate change".
> According to Patel, a Hulu representative called his campaign notifying them that the 30-second ad violated an “unwritten Hulu policy” related to “sensitive” content in political ads shortly after it was submitted to the platform on June 30th.
> “Hulu demanded we remove footage of Jan. 6 and the word ‘climate change’ from our ad as they were deemed ‘sensitive,’” Patel said on Twitter Wednesday.
> To appease Hulu, Patel’s campaign replaced the ad’s mention of “climate change” with “democracy” and replaced footage of the January 6th riots at the Capitol with images of protesters holding QAnon signs. That version of the ad was sent to Hulu on July 1st and approved on July 5th.
In both these articles Hulu repeatedly refuses to comment, which is unfortunate. I'd like to know why they don't want people to say "climate change" in political ads.
This is a good point for cultural issues, but the refusal to carry pro-environment ads can't be defended that way. There are no "both sides" to the issue.
> I have to wonder if they allowed one (pro-choice) they would be in hot water if they blocked the other (anti abortion)?
I don't believe so, unless they are selling that one below market rates (which makes it an in-kind contribution). I'm guessing this is more about "let's not take a side" than any legal requirement.
[+] [-] fritztastic|3 years ago|reply
As much as I may agree/disagree with the topics of the campaign ads, I really don't think these (probably) polemic video snippets are as significant as the people pushing them pretend they are.
I think politicians need to stop demanding private companies allow them to say what they want, when they want, how they want. There are plenty of other advertisements that are rejected- companies have discretion over what they choose to accept, as they should.
Ultimately if politicians want to bring a subject to people, they should figure out other ways of doing so. Additionally, I really don't think anyone with or without a stance is going to be swayed by a 30/60/90 second ad. A short ad on a streaming platform also isn't going to bring discussion or encourage real responses from people besides (probably) irritation.
Ultimately regardless of the message contained, Hulu has the say over what content they want to be associated with. Maybe it isn't even about the topics presented, but about the politicians and political campaigns in general.
Personally I would be irritated to see campaign ads, from either duopolist party- I'd rather not watch it as none of them have anything worth saying most of the time. I wish they'd take their campaign money, use it elsewhere, and stop making a big ado about people not wanting to do what they want- that goes for both Democrats and Republicans- acting like there's some kind of persecution happening, while hypocritically at the same time both are doing their very best to stifle anything outside their big tents.
[+] [-] AftHurrahWinch|3 years ago|reply
You note "Maybe it isn't even about the topics presented, but about the politicians and political campaigns in general.", which could hypothetically be true in another instance... but in this specific instance they approved the same ad by the same politician after the phrase "climate change" was replaced with "democracy".
They specifically, explicitly, wanted the phrase "climate change" removed. In this instance, it is clearly not about the politician or political campaigns in general - it is about the specific phrase.
https://archive.ph/VNGYQ
[+] [-] GoodJokes|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] randrews|3 years ago|reply
Also perhaps I'd be more sympathetic to the Democrats here if exactly this sort of deplatforming hadn't been part of their own playbook for years.
[+] [-] smt88|3 years ago|reply
The key here is that Democrats are outraged at Hulu, but they're not trying to change laws to force Hulu to carry these ads.
That is in contrast to the other side of this debate about deplatforming, which has repeatedly proposed laws that violate the First Amendment because the marketplace of ideas rejects their regressive propaganda.
[+] [-] DerpyBaby123|3 years ago|reply
Can you source this, repeated examples of Democratic policies to deplatform ideas?
[+] [-] Overtonwindow|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nerdjon|3 years ago|reply
They likely don't want to carry pro gun or anti-abortion ads and they are making the right choice to say they don't want to carry anti-gun or pro-choice either. Especially considering what Disney is currently doing for their employees to have access to proper medical care and abortions.
I am unclear on the laws regarding political advertising but I have to wonder if they allowed one (pro-choice) they would be in hot water if they blocked the other (anti abortion)?
What do the other platforms do for this case? The article is missing a ton of details here. It said they carried this ad, but do they carry anti-abortion ads?
[+] [-] AftHurrahWinch|3 years ago|reply
I checked for more info on this, and it seems like they really did ban the phrase "climate change".
> According to Patel, a Hulu representative called his campaign notifying them that the 30-second ad violated an “unwritten Hulu policy” related to “sensitive” content in political ads shortly after it was submitted to the platform on June 30th.
> “Hulu demanded we remove footage of Jan. 6 and the word ‘climate change’ from our ad as they were deemed ‘sensitive,’” Patel said on Twitter Wednesday.
> To appease Hulu, Patel’s campaign replaced the ad’s mention of “climate change” with “democracy” and replaced footage of the January 6th riots at the Capitol with images of protesters holding QAnon signs. That version of the ad was sent to Hulu on July 1st and approved on July 5th.
https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/13/23207499/hulu-disney-sura...
In both these articles Hulu repeatedly refuses to comment, which is unfortunate. I'd like to know why they don't want people to say "climate change" in political ads.
[+] [-] smt88|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] HWR_14|3 years ago|reply
I don't believe so, unless they are selling that one below market rates (which makes it an in-kind contribution). I'm guessing this is more about "let's not take a side" than any legal requirement.