Proposition 19, the proposed legislative changes that would legalize and tax cannabis in the state of California, is generating waves on the web, with some large media companies becoming embroiled in the debate by blocking certain advertisements relating to the issue.First up, social networking site Facebook recently banned ads from both the Just Say Now campaign group and the Libertarian party; advertisements which in both cases were supporting proposition 19. Facebook denies that it is taking a political stance on the issue and instead claims that the use of marijuana leaf images is against its policies. The groups involved have argued that use of the instantly-recognisable leaf in their adverts is not intended to encourage users to smoke or take drugs. Despite some groups claiming evidence of an anti-prop19 stance at Facebook, at the time of writing there still exist numerous prop 19 pages on Facebook, representing both the for and against camps.
Secondly, social news site Reddit clashed publicly with owners Condé Nast over adverts from the Just Say Now campaign. According to an account published on the site, Reddit staff were incensed when they received an edict from the 'highest levels' of their parent company, indicating that they should not run paid ads from the campaign group. By way of a response, they decided to run the ads for free instead, generating no end of publicity in the process (some good coverage at Wired).
Whilst the Reddit debacle may not have helped Condé Nast keep a low profile on this issue, the incident has shown just how fearful large corporations are of getting involved in the legalization debate. Facebook, for example, is hardly a conservative old-world company and it may seem incongruous that it should care enough to block adverts supporting contentious or sensitive issues. But large corporations such as Facebook also represent large, easy targets for media bile, blamed for everything from suicide to anorexia. Perhaps they just want to sit this one out and avoid getting blamed by the approximately 50% of the Californian electorate that are against prop 19.
Political campaigns have been using the media to broadcast their message since long before the web existed. TV channels in the US are full of poltical advertisements in the run up to elections. Media companies generally make a pretty penny from hot issues.
Narcotrends suspects that media companies would do better to stick to what they do best - serving up content and selling advertising space - rather than embarking on misguided damage-limitation exercises. Any decent media capitalist who had just taken money from a pro-legalization group for an ad campaign should go straight to the anti-pot groups and offering them an advertising slot? Unbiased coverage and profits. Let the voters decide on the issues whilst squeezing profit from both sides of the argument; it's the only way to be fair.
