http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/ ... ard21.html


Billboard owner bars ad targeting McCain

Jon Kamman
The Arizona Republic
Apr. 21, 2005 12:00 AM

A national organization that campaigns against illegal immigration wants to post a billboard in Phoenix to object to Sen. John McCain's stance, but the owner of the board has rejected the message as "bashing" the Arizona Republican.

The ad, sponsored by ProjectUSA, would say: "Sen. John McCain supports amnesty for illegal aliens." Whether those words are factual depends on the viewer's point of view.

"Obviously, it's not true," McCain's communications director, Eileen McMenamin, said Wednesday. "Senator McCain does not support amnesty." advertisement

"Oh yes he does," ProjectUSA Director Craig Nelsen insisted, pointing to five bills the senator has sponsored or supported in recent years that provide opportunities, however limited, for undocumented workers to qualify for permanent legal residency and eventual citizenship.

The most recent example was McCain's support for the so-called AgJobs bill, which died Tuesday in the Senate. The bill would have made an estimated 500,000 undocumented agricultural workers eligible for legal standing.

ProjectUSA, a not-for-profit organization, has been an uncompromising opponent of illegal immigration since 1999. Its placement of billboards across the country, some targeting members of Congress and many proclaiming the negative effects of such immigration, have been denounced as racist and unfair.

Nelsen said the group sticks to the facts and brings its messages to the public "to raise the issue, get it out in the open, get people to talk about it."

The group defines amnesty as "any policy that would release a class of illegal aliens from whatever the penalty is for violating U.S. immigration laws." In contrast, recent immigration-reform bills and their supporters generally refer to such forgiveness as "earned legalization," "earned adjustment" or "rehabilitation to legal status."

Nelsen said his group would pay to submit the definitional question to a certified board of mediators if McCain would agree to abide by the result.

But before the offer was even made, McMenamin said, "We're not going to get into semantics."

The ad was aimed for a billboard at Central Avenue and Indian School Road owned by the global communications and entertainment company Viacom.

Nelsen said a salesman for Viacom Outdoor in Phoenix told him that company higher-ups rejected the text because it was "bashing" McCain.

Marty Schwarzkopf, general manager, said ProjectUSA's wording did not meet Viacom's guidelines on political advertising. Those say the company can reject text that "personally attacks an individual; is obviously false, misleading or deceptive; relates to an illegal activity; and offends local standards of decency and good taste."

Nelsen suggested that political contributions to McCain's 2004 re-election campaign had something to do with the rejection. Viacom's political action committee, company executives and their family members gave McCain's fund nearly $68,000, the fourth-largest amount from a single interest, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Asked which specific guideline was unmet by the McCain ad and whether campaign support influenced the rejection, Schwarzkopf referred questions to an executive in New York who did not return a phone call.

Schwarzkopf said Viacom would be glad to work with the advertiser to find acceptable wording. Nelsen said the language can't be changed, in part because it was the text shown supporters who "voted" to target McCain by making $25 donations over the Internet.

Nelsen said Viacom's rejection was an abridgement of free speech. He said it likely was illegal, but the director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Arizona disagreed.

Except in rare circumstances, a private company has no obligation under the First Amendment to publish materials it finds objectionable, Eleanor Eisenberg said.