Federal Law Forces Airing of Anti-Abortion Ads During ‘The View’ \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ A controversial anti-abortion ad aired during “The View” this week, attacking the show’s hosts and various celebrities while drawing attention to FCC regulations that require broadcasters to air political ads from qualified candidates. Longtime anti-abortion activist Randall Terry, behind the campaign, used graphic imagery and harsh comparisons, sparking criticism. While the ad met FCC requirements, networks like ABC distanced themselves with warnings. Critics, including the National Organization for Women, voiced concerns over the manipulation of free speech laws.
Anti-Abortion Ads Leveraging FCC Rules Raise Concerns Quick Looks:
- An anti-abortion ad aired during “The View,” criticizing celebrities and displaying graphic images, citing FCC rules that broadcasters cannot reject political ads from qualified candidates.
- The ad, created by anti-abortion activist Randall Terry, attacks personalities like Whoopi Goldberg and Taylor Swift and compares them to Nazi figures Joseph Goebbels and Leni Riefenstahl.
- ABC displayed a disclaimer distancing itself from the ad, while CNN refused to air similar content, calling it “outrageous, antisemitic, and dangerous.”
- Terry, a fringe presidential candidate, exploits the FCC’s rules to air ads across states with abortion-related measures on the ballot.
- Critics worry the ads are exploiting political candidacies to spread hate speech, with National Organization for Women’s president calling it a manipulation of free speech laws.
Deep Look:
A controversial anti-abortion ad aired this past week during the daytime talk show “The View,” attacking both the show’s hosts and well-known celebrities, while leveraging Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules that prevent broadcasters from rejecting political ads from legally qualified candidates. The ad, produced by longtime anti-abortion activist Randall Terry, was the latest move in his campaign to spread his message using the protections afforded to political candidates under federal law.
The ad begins with a narrator expressing disdain for “stupid celebrities and lying journalists,” while images of “The View” hosts, including Whoopi Goldberg, flash on screen alongside celebrities such as Taylor Swift, Oprah Winfrey, Robert De Niro, and others. In a particularly controversial move, the ad compares these figures to notorious Nazi propagandists Joseph Goebbels and Leni Riefenstahl, before displaying graphic images of aborted fetuses.
The advertisement stirred controversy not just for its inflammatory content but for the fact that networks were required by law to air it. Under FCC regulations, television stations cannot censor or reject political ads paid for and sponsored by legally qualified candidates for federal office. Randall Terry, a fringe presidential candidate representing the Constitution Party, has qualified for the ballot in a dozen states, thus meeting the FCC’s criteria to run his ads.
ABC, which aired the ad, made it clear that it did so under legal obligation. In a disclaimer displayed during the ad, the network stated: “The following is a paid political advertisement, and the ABC television network is required to carry it by federal law. The advertisement contains scenes that may be disturbing to children. Viewer discretion is advised.”
Randall Terry’s Strategy
Terry, who has long been an outspoken anti-abortion activist, is no stranger to using FCC rules to his advantage. His presidential candidacy allows him to bypass traditional advertising restrictions, giving him a platform to air his graphic commercials. “This is the last bastion of free speech,” Terry said in an interview. “The only place that you can still have free speech is on a licensed station as a federal candidate.”
While traditional political organizations and advocacy groups are subject to more scrutiny in terms of what content can be aired, candidates for federal office enjoy more protections. The FCC regulations do not apply to cable networks or digital platforms, such as podcasts or streaming services, which explains why CNN declined to air Terry’s content. In a statement, CNN described Terry’s ads as “outrageous, antisemitic, and dangerous.”
Terry’s strategy has been to focus on running his ads in states where abortion-related measures are on the ballot, seeking to influence voters. Although Terry acknowledges he has no realistic chance of winning the presidency, his true goal, as he stated, is to “cause Kamala’s defeat,” referring to Vice President Kamala Harris. The majority of his ads are critical of Harris, with only a brief mention of his own candidacy appearing on screen.
Public Reaction and Concerns
Terry’s latest ad campaign has sparked backlash from various advocacy groups. Christian F. Nunes, president of the National Organization for Women (NOW), expressed deep concern over the manipulation of FCC regulations to air such divisive content. “It’s definitely concerning,” Nunes said. “No one should be able to use running for office as a free pass in order to spew hate speech.”
Critics worry that Terry is exploiting free speech laws designed to protect political discourse in order to promote harmful, inflammatory rhetoric. Jack Goodman, a Washington-based lawyer and former general counsel of the National Association of Broadcasters, noted that Terry has likely been more attuned than any other activist to the FCC’s rules, understanding exactly how to work within them to achieve his goals.
While networks are unable to censor the content of political ads, they are allowed to include disclaimers to distance themselves from the material. In this case, ABC displayed a warning prior to airing the ad, cautioning viewers about disturbing content. Terry himself expressed no objection to such warnings, acknowledging that networks are simply doing what they feel is necessary to protect their brand.
However, the limits of FCC rules have not been fully tested, particularly when it comes to controversial ads. While obscenity laws could potentially come into play, they have yet to be enforced in these specific cases. One of Terry’s upcoming ads targeting CNN anchor Jake Tapper contains language that could be deemed offensive, though Terry has indicated he will likely air a cleaner version for television.
Will Terry’s Strategy Backfire?
Some believe that Terry’s aggressive advertising tactics could ultimately backfire, particularly among female voters. Nunes pointed out that while the ads may appeal to a narrow base, many women are likely to find them offensive and may be motivated to vote against the agenda Terry is advocating. “I suspect this will drive more women to the polls,” she said.
Despite the controversy, Terry remains determined to continue airing his ads. He has already produced 40 local ads and several national spots, focusing on states where abortion is a key issue. His target audience, he says, is older voters—particularly those aged 50 to 80, Catholics, and Black Americans, who are more likely to watch traditional broadcast television.
As the 2024 election season progresses, the legal and ethical questions surrounding political ads like Terry’s will likely continue to be debated. For now, however, his campaign serves as a stark reminder of how federal regulations can be used in ways that challenge the boundaries of free speech and political discourse.
Federal Law Federal Law
