Are Viagra and other ED commercials offensive to you and do they need to be time censored?

[kid a]

There is Virginia legislation to ban ED commercials between 6am and 10pm.

I think these ads are already time and slot focused by the manufacturer anyway, and if parents have ANY communication and parenting skills and if their children are old enough to understand the content of the programming during which these ads run, they're old enough to understand sex and the difficulties some people have when attempting it.

Article: (I love the latent hypocrisy of the first comment!)

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/06/congressman-no-viagra-before-10-pm/

Congressman: No Viagra before 10 p.m.
Posted: 06:02 PM ET

From CNN's Charles Riley


WASHINGTON (CNN) - Former presidential candidate Robert Dole made headlines as a pitchman for Viagra, and now a decade later a Virginia congressman wants to limit the time when ads for this and similar products can air.

Last month, Democratic Rep. Jim Moran introduced the "Families for ED Advertising Decency Act," which prevents erectile dysfunction and male enhancement ads from appearing on radio and television between the hours of 6 a.m. and 10 p.m.

"This is an intrusion into our daily lives that I believe has become inappropriate." Moran said in an interview with CNN. "There is a saturation of the television airwaves with these E.D. ads, and they have gotten more pervasive, more blunt, and less subtle."

The bill currently has only one co-sponsor, Rep. Robert Brady, D-Pennsylvania, and there are currently no hearings scheduled on the issue. But a Moran spokesman said the congressman is actively seeking more support.


MORE:http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/06/congressman-no-viagra-before-10-pm/

[DainBramaged]

1. Psssssssssst

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5609864

[glowing]

2. I wouldn't mind a time limit on them. My 4 yr old doesn't understand or pay attention,

however, I don't enjoy seeing those elderly persons sitting around in the tub.

[madokie]

5. but that 4 year old will here in a few years

I'm still pissed about how the re:puke:s brought us "blowjob" to our evening news when newtie was running the rushlicans

[lazer47]

13. I got confused with Nancy Raygun and Just say No, and Viagra

I have been telling my wife NO for 5 yrs now. and the VA has been saying NO to Viagra for just about that length of time....

[seabeyond]

6. wait until he is 10 thinking about his 10 yr old size. and brunette gets fucked in elevator only to

have a blonde walk in next to get fucked

[kid a]

9. that sounds familiar (not in real life...ha!) but what commercial is that?

[seabeyond]

11. the 40'ish goofy looking guy with smile that cant get laid. the one that whistles the tune. history

channel, discovery channel.....

shows kids should be able to turn on.

[kid a]

7. they are annoying, for sure.

My opinion is a bit skewed.

I worked for Pfizer in the 90s and marketed Viagra, so my kids saw marketing materials around when they were young.
We told them what it was and now the commercials even more annoying to them.

[ShortnFiery]

3. Yes, seeing and hearing that crap, ruins my appetite during a late dinner ...

"and NOW low-dose Cialis for daily use." :wow: :puke:

[seabeyond]

4. people should say no and co. should listen. lets talk about all the sexist ads to women too.....

i am bothered that my young boys are being told over and over and over that their penis is not good enough.

i am also fuckin tired of women being shown over and over and over as a thing for male entertainment and our girls only worth male entertainment.

if you are going to be bothered by one then fuckin be bothered by the other. if the health of our male ego is at risk then the fuckin health of our female ego counts for something

but male ego trumps at all cost at all times.

it is companies not going over line. not to be legislated.

[kid a]

8. yep...well said!

:hi:

[Avalux]

10. I think all drug ads should be banned. We are inundated with them daily.

Nice music and pictures; soothing voice telling us to take their drug. In the background, under the nice music, the list of side effects is quickly rattled off. It's irresponsible on the part of pharmaceutical companies to market directly to patients but no one is going to stop them.

The drug ads are part of our society's need for instant gratification; a quick fix. Children are growing up with them and will become adults who believe there's a pill for everything, pushing us that much closer to a fully medicated society.

I don't agree with Moran's motive for wanting ET ads banned because of the sexual content.

[kid a]

It also wastes time in the doctors office!

My wife sees 16 patients a day - very time crunched and pushed by the admin to see more.

One of her main pet peeves is the "TV ad note-taker". They come in with notes from the Ambien commercial and DEMAND IT!!!

I hear it all night (until the Ambien kicks in) =)

[nxylas]

19. That's why God created DVRs

On the rare occasions when I watch a TV show live nowadays, I find myself instinctively reaching for the remote to fast-forward through the commercials, and getting very frustrated when I realize that I can't.

Disclaimer: For the benefit of the "What is this Earth thing called humor?" crowd, my subject line is tongue in cheek, and I'm fully aware that DVRs were invented in the '90s by some Californian dudes and not actually created ex nihilo by God.

[gblady]

33. I agree....

there is no earthly reason for drugs to be advertised.

[havocmom]

12. I hate them on TV, but hate censorship more

What I would like banned is such ads in MY internet INBOX. (I spend much more time on the computer than watching TV)

And, where can I get a device for my phone that instantly traces down robo calls
and blows up the phone at the other end? :nuke:

[CTyankee]

14. The ads don't bother me. Some of them are kinda funny, like that Viva Viagra ad a while back.

They don't bother me as much as the overtly sexist ones do. ED ads basically acknowledge that aging has an impact on a man's sex life. While I think we should have more discussions about what aspects of men's lives that they themselves can control (such as avoiding excessive weight gain and alcohol consumption) I don't think it is a bad thing that they can have sex with their wives again. Many of the ads seem to portray that, and I think that sex is important in a relationship.

[Cresent City Kid]

15. What I find offensive...

is that the profit driven drug companies spend money they could be using for research on ads.

[get the red out]

23. That issue is the "Elephant in the living room"

that we often overlook. When I read about that it irritates me. So much of the pharmaceutical companies overhead is for advertising and wooing doctors as opposed to research and development.

[Occam Bandage]

27. I don't think you've thought that all the way through.

Advertising produces a return on investment. If an advertisement does not result in increased sales to the effect of the company having more money than they would have had they not run the advertisement, then the advertisement is considered a failure. After years and years of these, I'm pretty sure they're successful (or they would have been axed), meaning the companies have more money for research than they otherwise would.

Big Pharma is a lot like Hollywood. A ton of money gets poured into projects that never get off the ground (or end up being flops), and most of the things they release only barely make enough money to pay for development cost. They rely on a handful of extraordinarily profitable releases to pay for their ongoing operations. Without those tentpoles, they couldn't function to the same extent they do now.

It's unfortunate that drug companies are profit-driven, and that so much research is performed by drug companies and not by the public sector. Yet for all the problems that causes, America is the source of the majority of the world's pharmaceutical development, just as Hollywood is the source of the lion's share of the world's film income.

[Cresent City Kid]

44. There is validity to your point

However, the outlays for the ads, in both production values and the sheer number of slots they buy exceed necessity, in my opinion. There's no easy fix as long as pharmaceuticals, and health care in general put our health second to profit in priority. Maybe your right about the ads, but I still think the whole thing stinks.

[riderinthestorm]

16. We're so puritanical. Look it's a biological factor and we're humans.

Do you want to censor Depends ads? How about ads for tampons? Where do you draw the line?

We're humans with all the attendant biological functions and non-functions. I don't watch teevee so I can't comment on the repetition of the ads but frankly, it doesn't bother me to have to discuss any aspect of our bodies.

[seabeyond]

17. when it was addressed in that manner, as age, and just bioligical thing wasnt offensive

when it got to the point saying to satisfy a woman, at any age, when there isnt a problem, just that your penis isnt good enough to satisfy a woman it has gone over the line. when they have a 40 something old man in an elevator to fuck a twenty yr old, and then anothher twenty yr old walks in to be fucked and is given to kids over and over and over, it is offensive. these things go into kids heads. to suggest it doesnt effect or influence is bullshit. hence money on fuckin ads.

does it mean legislation, NO. does it mean a responsibility to the public. hell yes. i am tired of the free for all mentality without decency, without integrity, regardless of the harm and using the excuse of puritan fuckin nation when sex is every second of every day in this country. wtf do you mean puritan nation. absurd.

[dysfunctional press]

18. no more so than commercials for feminine hygiene sprays and tampax

:shrug:

[leftofthedial]

20. for pete's sake.

flaccid pecker syndrome can strike any time of the day.

[AngryOldDem]

21. There's one running now that I absolutely hate.

For something called Ex-cite or something (sounds like a scam to me, but what do I know)? The ad is really, really cheesy and chock-full of REALLY bad puns and non-sequeturs.

[get the red out]

22. No and no

If Michael Savage and his ilk can spew all the hate they please then no one should censor something as benign as an ED medication ad.

Why is sex considered so much worse than hate in our society?

Two people holding hands in separate bath-tubs vs. violence in so much TV programming and "if it bleeds it leads" on the 6PM news; and I'm supposed to find the couple planning to copulate offensive? A guy putting his arm around a woman talking about "when she gives me that look" vs. Glen Beck stepping right up to the line of calling for a revolution and take over of our elected government? Yea, I don't want anyone to see that guy put his arm around that woman, that's so offensive!

I just can't see the frantic attitude over something so natural as sex while screaming for freedom for hate speech or violence.

Let the ED ad makers' free speech reign free.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. Apparently, Moran has yet to figure out the intricacies of the remote control.

One of the truly beneficial technological achievements of the 20th century.

But, his crusade will get him a few votes from the terminally prudish.

[rvablue]

25. What I don't get is what kind of return do these companies actually get on these ads at this point?

They run two, three or four times on each of the network channels during the news hour every single night.

Doesn't every single man in the country know these drugs are now available to them by now?

And one has to wonder, why aren't the same types of drugs that are made for women not advertised?

And yes, in comparison, I do find them offensive, more so than a swear word blurted out late at night on an awards show or a 1/4 second shot of a boob during a half-time show.

[backscatter712]

26. Not for the penis innuendo, but because pharmaceuticals shouldn't be advertised like that.

So it's not just the penis pill ads, but the antidepressant ads, the cholesterol drug ads, all the pharmaceutical ads that bug me.

Pharmaceuticals really shouldn't be marketed that way, and in other countries, they're not allowed to be marketed that way.

And I'm tired of the whole "Side effects may include nausea, drowsiness and demonic possession. Ask your doctor if Makabuk is right for you!" schtick.

[Occam Bandage]

29. I completely agree. Consumer-directed advertising simply should not be allowed. nt

[sinkingfeeling]

28. No more offensive that other medical commericals and those for 'female' problems. I wish they were

all banned from TV, like they were years ago.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

30. Legs on furniture offend me.

They should be covered with skirts lest our children's minds are sullied.

[mitchum]

47. Limbs not legs, you sick fuck!

[krabigirl]

31. No, but honestly, do they NEED to be on TV?

[Kansas Wyatt]

32. They need to BAN all prescription drug commercials!

Pharmaceuticals charge us high prices for alleged research, yet they spend more money on advertising than they spend on research.

[kid a]

35. good point! as sales rep access to Drs fizzles, direct consumer marking will increase

[quiller4]

34. They don't bother me any more than any other drug commercials

and I wouldn't support any commercial ban. I support free speech--even commercial speech.

[Vinca]

36. I don't have little kids to try to explain them to, but I can see

why people who do would object. (Actually, I'd like someone to explain the sexiness of the 2 bathtubs in the Cialis ads to me.) IMHO, prescription drugs of any kind should not be advertised on television. It shouldn't be up to Joe Dimwit to decide what kind of prescription he needs.

[Overseas]

37. The antidepressant ads are worse for kids, since they can induce suicidal thoughts

If Republicans (who condemn "The Nanny State" except when it pertains to sex) want to push those ads for erectile dysfunction pills off til later at night, how about all those antidepressant ads on prime time TV?

Many of those antidepressants warn about an increase in thoughts of suicide among younger people who take them. And there have been suicides in youth prescribed antidepressants.

Aren't those ads saying a simple pill can make them happy again more dangerous to our youth than seeing some older guy making eyes at his wife and then sitting in separate bathtubs in a field?

[azmouse]

38. I wonder why the Cartoon Network feels the need to run those ads?

Is ED a problem among 6 year olds?

[malaise]

39. I hate them and wonder why Janet Jackson's boob is

an issue but advertising for permanent hard ons is no biggie. I guess the Supremes use Viagra.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

40. No big deal, but I'm still trying to understand ...

the appeal of "his and hers" bathtubs. Outside.

I must be missing something.

:hi:

[Touchdown]

41. Not as much as yeast infection commercials during lunch.

"What could be worse that a yeast infection????"

Hearing about it while I'm trying to eat a cheese sandwich!!!!:grr:

[TexasObserver]

42. They're aimed at middle aged men and women.

They tend to be placed in programs that draw a middle aged crowd, such as cable news. I don't recall ever seeing one on MTV, or Nick, or Disney, or Family channels.

Like many drug commercials, they can be annoying, but that's no reason to censor them.

[seabeyond]

43. the only two channels my kids watch is history and discovery.

rest of tv is pure crap. lol

and those are full of em

[mitchum]

45. I find all commercials to be offensive

[Sebastian Doyle]

46. What I really don't get are the late night penis pump commercials

They're clearly marketing this device to older men as an alternative to pills, which in and of itself is reasonable, but they're only showing the ads after midnight - when their target audience has already been asleep for hours! :rofl: