‘Balanced’ Ads for Beer, Wine

The queasy feeling in my gut is not a hangover, but merely my reaction to The Times’ article of Aug. 5, “Broadcasters’ Sober Duty Is to Public on Alcohol Ads.” According to the writers, it is time for still more government regulation of the broadcasting industry to “balance” beer and wine commercials by mandating “equal time” for anti-alcohol messages.

Alcohol, used wrongly, can certainly be dangerous. So can automobiles, kitchen knives, microwave ovens and insect sprays. Should we balance the ads for all these items as well--in fact, for any item that ever has been or could be misused?

If so, who will pay for it? It is difficult, if not impossible, for a broadcaster to make a profit on a commercial if he is forced to balance it with a nonprofit message of the same length. Since the broadcaster must make a profit to stay in business, in most cases he will simply stop running that commercial--which is precisely the intent of this legislation’s sponsors and advocates. They seek not to “balance” but to censor.

Alcoholism is dangerous, but there is a greater danger in a government with the power to dictate what must--and must not --be aired on radio and television. Beer commercials, by themselves, do not matter much; the broadcaster’s right to air those commercials--and any other ads or programs that he cares to submit for the public consideration-- does matter, and must be protected.

DOUGLAS BORTON

Los Angeles