“Battling for America’s soul”: the ad

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

A two-page ad in Thursday’s print Times has brought more than 50 e-mails and calls of protest. ‘Battling for America’s Soul,’ said the headline from the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property (or TFP). The organization’s ad went on to describe its topic as ‘How homosexual ‘marriage’ threatens our nation and faith -- the TFP urges lawful and conscientious resistance.’

In 10 columns of text on pages A11 and A12 the ad -- which ran also in the New York Times -- outlined the ‘battle’ it says is going on nationally, from Point A (‘The acceptance of same-sex ‘marriage’ is incompatible with Christianity’) to Point E (‘We are opposing the homosexual ‘moral revolution’ ’).

Reader Randall Gellens in San Diego wrote: ‘I was dismayed to see that The Times accepted and printed a two-page ad from ‘TFP’ calling on Californians to oppose same-sex marriage. Would The Times have done so if the ad attacked equal rights on the basis of skin color or religious preference, or is only sexual orientation fair game?’

Nick Duretta of Pasadena wrote: ‘How jarring it was to see in my morning Times, between the usual Macy’s and Verizon ads, a two-page paid diatribe essentially calling for the denial of my rights and devaluation of my very existence. I wonder if you’d run a similar paid ad from a Holocaust denial or white supremacist group attacking other disenfranchised minorities (with appropriate Biblical justification). Probably not. Gays and lesbians are truly the last group in our country that it’s still okay to hate.’

Jack Klunder, who as Los Angeles Times president oversees the advertising department, wants to make this clear: The Times’ decision to publish an ad does not mean the Times supports or endorses the ad’s point of view.

Ads that weigh in on controversial issues are allowed, though, and the one from the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property was such an example. (The newsroom doesn’t approve ads but typically editors are advised of unique or controversial ones.)

Says Klunder, ‘It is a long-standing policy to not reject ads simply because their message is controversial or might offend some people. Even though some readers may personally disagree with an ad’s position, we do not reject it solely on that basis.’

Klunder emphasizes that hate speech isn’t allowed, and says The Times would not “knowingly accept an ad from the KKK or a Nazi group.”

Also prohibited, says Klunder, are ads promoting issues or objects that are illegal or discriminatory.

There are other, subjective factors on which ads are evaluated before being published: Ads are judged for taste -- both visual and written -- and some elements (partial nudity, or a vulgarity) might make an ad inappropriate for a general-interest newspaper.

And The Times’ ad department requires a point of contact be included: In this case the advertisement had TFP’s address in Pennsylvania, its phone number, e-mail and website.

Klunder’s department felt that the two-page spread did not cross the line to hate speech or attacks on individuals, but rather saw it as taking a stand on a controversial, topical issue and giving TFP’s reasons for why it opposed same-sex marriage.

A box in the middle of the ad’s first page says in part, ‘Taking a principled not a personal stand: In writing this statement, we have no intention to defame or disparage anyone. We are not moved by personal hatred against any individual.’ The organization’s website describes itself this way: ‘Founded in 1973, the American TFP was formed to resist, in the realm of ideas, the liberal, socialist and communist trends of the times and proudly affirm the positive values of tradition, family and property.’ It identifies itself as ‘but one of many autonomous TFPs that now exist around the world dedicated to the same ideals and at the service of Christian Civilization.’

Ultimately, says Klunder, the TFP ad was an opinion piece that showed how ad space can serve as ‘a marketplace of ideas.’

Along those lines, reader Jeanette Hanisee Gabriel of San Pedro wrote: ‘My first response at seeing the TFP ‘ad’ opposing gay marriage was to cancel The Times for printing such tripe. Then I realized that by printing it, The Times was demonstrating its advocacy of precisely the personal rights that the TFP suggests we abolish.’