TV Networks Refuse to Allow Discussion of Marijuana Laws
One of the few remaining tactics for effectively defending our marijuana laws is to prevent them from even being discussed:
Ack, we mustn't expose anyone to the crazy ideas of Rick Steves! Wait, isn't he that really nice Lutheran guy who hosts a popular travel show on public television? So then why should we be terrified of him?
Um, pardon me sir, but we're actually trying to massively reduce illegal activity. I wouldnât have thought this to be intellectually challenging, but if we were to change our marijuana laws, then it wouldn't be illegal. See? This doesnât promote illegal activity. Marijuana laws create illegal activity and we'd like to discuss that.
Of course, marijuana reformers are constantly accused of childishness. We are dismissed as self-interested hippies waiving the banner of personal freedom whenever it suits us, while refusing to engage in serious conversations about empirical data and sound public policy. Yet, what can be said about those who serve as gatekeepers in the marketplace of ideas and abuse their authority by arbitrarily blocking discussion of ideas they find objectionable?
In truth, it is often opponents of the reform argument who act childishly, feigning irrational concerns that simply permitting debate will somehow aggravate the drug problem. Such behavior must be recognized for what it is: a great insult to the intelligence of the public.
The TV program is titled "Marijuana: It's Time for a Conversation," but it's unlikely many viewers of network stations will be talking about it.
Of the three local network stations, only one agreed to run the show, produced by the American Civil Liberties Union and hosted by travel writer Rick Steves. [Seattle Times]
Ack, we mustn't expose anyone to the crazy ideas of Rick Steves! Wait, isn't he that really nice Lutheran guy who hosts a popular travel show on public television? So then why should we be terrified of him?
Jim Clayton, vice president and general manager at KOMO, the ABC affiliate, refused to sell time. The show, he said, promoted marijuana use.
"The last I checked, it's illegal," Clayton said. "We don't use our public airways to promote illegal things."
Um, pardon me sir, but we're actually trying to massively reduce illegal activity. I wouldnât have thought this to be intellectually challenging, but if we were to change our marijuana laws, then it wouldn't be illegal. See? This doesnât promote illegal activity. Marijuana laws create illegal activity and we'd like to discuss that.
Of course, marijuana reformers are constantly accused of childishness. We are dismissed as self-interested hippies waiving the banner of personal freedom whenever it suits us, while refusing to engage in serious conversations about empirical data and sound public policy. Yet, what can be said about those who serve as gatekeepers in the marketplace of ideas and abuse their authority by arbitrarily blocking discussion of ideas they find objectionable?
In truth, it is often opponents of the reform argument who act childishly, feigning irrational concerns that simply permitting debate will somehow aggravate the drug problem. Such behavior must be recognized for what it is: a great insult to the intelligence of the public.
