On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 3:02 PM, David Bruggeman <[email protected]> wrote: > http://goldmanmccormick.com/prinsight/2011/01/24/ptc/ > Maybe I've just been reading this list since forever, but none of the > suggestions seemed particularly novel or new.
Having read the article and having experience in grassroots campaigns, I think that was a horrible article and the steps to follow would be attacking the PTC at their strengths and the losses would strengthen them further. First, they are not brilliant at what they do. The NRA is brilliant at what they do. The NRA have complete control of their agenda and there are people who will cast their votes at election time based only on that one issue, even for a candidate who is obviously incompetent. The PTC has nowhere that much power. They got through to the FCC once or twice 7 years ago (Janet Jackson's boob, Nicole Richie's fleeting expletive at some awards show) and the Jackson case has still not been resolved. They haven't been able to build on those successes in the following years. They show no signs of either being a growing movement or having more influence over programming. Pick a baseline point - 5, 10, or 20 or more years ago, and compare programming content from then and now. The trend is to slowly get taboo subjects into dramas and sitcoms. You can make an argument that the PTC is slowing the trend, but you can't claim that they are reversing it. To the points of how to fight the PTC: 1. Making the point that parents know best how to raise their kids: an untold number of parents are concerned about content on their TVs even if they don't belong to the PTC or know or agree with the PTC's platforms. So network executives know that if 12000 PTC members get in touch with them about a certain program or scene (not just the organization saying they represent those 12000), it means that many other parents are just as concerned, just not as vocal. So simply saying parents know what's best doesn't actually attack or take away the PTC's power. 2. Personal attacks against PTC board members: people who have concerns about programming content don't care about who runs the organization or who is making the case. If something truly scandalous were to emerge from in-depth research, a staff member or board member could resign and the organization could continue in its mission. Attacking personal morality does nothing to weaken the organization. 3. Attacking the sponsors: you have to be organized in order to make a credible threat against a business. Boycotts only work when a large, disciplined group of people go to a business, demand a change in the business's policy, and let the business know that they will not do business until the policy is changed. It has to be understood that the boycott ends when the business changes its policy and the former customers will return. The business has to understand that they will lose a lot of money from a large group of people and changing their policy will avert that loss. Nobody has any interest in organizing a large group of people against PTC sponsors and so the sponsors will not be moved. 4. Complain about the PTC to the FCC: the FCC has no grounds to act and the PTC can use it in their own PR to show how irrational their opponents are. That's what I mean by playing to the PTC's strengths. The networks seem to have developed the best strategy for taking on the PTC: work slowly and deliberately to make changes without choosing direct confrontation. When enough members see that the PTC isn't making any real headway they'll figure out they have a better use for their time and money and move on. -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
