Legal Question - FCC Reg

[SkyHog]

Trying to figure this one out, anyone have an idea?

FCC regulations prohibit the consumption of alcohol during advertisements for alcohol. That's why during commercials, you will see them come close, but never actually drink beer.

But - watching the race today, Brad Keselowski won. He drives the "Blue Deuce" with the primary sponsor being Miller Light. After the race, he says "Feels good to win, now its Miller Time!" and proceeds to bring a bottle of beer up and takes a big ol' swig.

Doesn't that rise to the level of a commercial advertisement? He is contractually obligated to say certain things, and I'm sure that's one of his obligations.

Anyone know where I can find the actual regulation? I'm more curious than anything else...

 

[Sac Arrow]

I personally feel the rule to be bizarre, myself.

And as long as Brad Keseloski took that swig after the race and not before it, I don't see a problem.

 

[AdamZ]

Didn't see it Nick but my guess is that it was not a spot Miller Paid the Network for but rather paid the racer.

 

[poadeleted20]

I'm just guessing here, but I don't think that constitututes a commercial advertisement any more than someone pulling out a pack of cigarettes with the label in view and lighting one up (cigarette advertising being prohibited generally) while being interviewed on a news show, or a shot of a fan in the stands swilling a beer. I think that since Miller didn't buy time on ESPN specifically for that scene, ESPN hasn't aired a commercial advertisement, just covered a post-race interview.

But I sure hope Brad didn't get back in the Deuce and drive it to the hauler. :wink2:

 

[SkyHog]

Didn't see it Nick but my guess is that it was not a spot Miller Paid the Network for but rather paid the racer.

I'm just guessing here, but I don't think that constitututes a commercial advertisement any more than someone pulling out a pack of cigarettes with the label in view and lighting one up (cigarette advertising being prohibited generally) while being interviewed on a news show, or a shot of a fan in the stands swilling a beer. I think that since Miller didn't buy time on ESPN specifically for that scene, ESPN hasn't aired a commercial advertisement, just covered a post-race interview.

But I sure hope Brad didn't get back in the Deuce and drive it to the hauler. :wink2:

That must be the difference...interesting spin and way around the reg.

As far as driving off, id be more concerned with what that beer would do to vulcanized slicks at speed, since everyone around him sprayed the car with Miller Light in victory lane.

 

[wsuffa]

They seem to be more concerned about a nipple slip....

Seriously, though, I don't believe that there is an explicit FCC rule or law that prohibits consumption of alcohol on TV - even for commercials. IIRC, there are limitations regarding alcohol advertising during programs where minors are reasonably expected to be watching, and many program contracts (NCAA, NFL, etc) carry restrictions within the contracts. There have been various advertising codes (most now voluntary) that outline what is expected of broadcasters.

 

[Anthony]

No, because Miller isn't beer.

 

[poadeleted20]

As far as driving off, id be more concerned with what that beer would do to vulcanized slicks at speed, since everyone around him sprayed the car with Miller Light in victory lane.

No worries -- you drive pretty slow in there.

 

[N801BH]

.....
But I sure hope Brad didn't get back in the Deuce and drive it to the hauler. :wink2:

You are correct there......

All first place winning cars get "pushed" into the NASCAR hauler and taken to NASCAR's Concord NC shop for a "complete" teardown and inspection.

 

[DeeG]

No, because Miller isn't beer.

 

[steingar]

I find it unbelievable that such a ban is but a court case away from dismissal. I don't see who anyone can tell you what you can or can't drink, eat, or smoke in print, radio, TV or movies under the first amendment. That said, I'm no lawyer and didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn last night.

 

[airguy]

I heard an executive for a brewery talking to a group of people once about this, if my memory serves it was essentially a self-imposed ban that the industry agreed to accept in return for the FCC not getting involved to a greater degree in their advertising, and it eventually made its way into the written regs. Sorta like the self-imposed ban on hard liquor advertising that was in place for several years but was broken about 4 or 5 years ago, those continue today and we haven't seen any real pushback from the FCC.

I think they wanted to avoid what happened with the tobacco companies and the FCC involvement there. Sort of a "dial-it-back" approach from the brewers in response to a "Don't make me come over there" warning (real or perceived) from the FCC.

Could be wrong, just going off old fuzzy memory here. The brain cells responsible for that memory have been assaulted by good Canadian whiskey!

 

[geneseib]

Trying to figure this one out, anyone have an idea?

FCC regulations prohibit the consumption of alcohol during advertisements for alcohol. That's why during commercials, you will see them come close, but never actually drink beer.

I don't believe there is an FCC rule. The way I remember it, the beginning of this was an NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) policy.

 

[kgruber]

Just more government interference in our lives. My god, where will it end.

I was out at Blake Island yesterday, and boarding an inflatable when the county sherrif shows up in one of their 20 new boats. He reminded me that I didn't have my life preserver.

Thanks, I said "Thanks"..........and dove in and swam to shore.

Getting there is a sign on the outhouse....."No Smoking within 25 feet" Thank you mommy democrats government.