Liquor Advertising Almost Makes It to Network Television

For more than five decades, distilled spirits were not advertised on television or radio because of a self-imposed ban by members of the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States (DISCUS). Council members agreed in 1936 to avoid radio

advertising and extended the ban to TV in 1948. But Seagram, the second-largest distiller in the world, ended the U.S. spirits industry's longstanding ban on broadcast advertising in June 1996 by airing commercials for its Crown Royal Canadian Whiskey brand on an affiliate in Corpus Christi, Texas.

Seagram issued a statement explaining that it was ending the liquor industry's decades-old practice of not advertising on TV because DISCUS's voluntary code of good practice placed spirits at a competitive disadvantage to beer and wine, which did not have any such restrictions. Seagram also argued that the ban had become outdated as radio and TV have become more targeted and the company could pinpoint its advertising message to people of legal drinking age.

Initial reactions within the liquor industry were mixed. A number of distillers, eager to turn around the long, slow decline in hard-liquor sales, watched Seagram test the water with its TV ads before rolling out their own commercials. Some held discussions with TV stations but waited for a formal amendment to the DISCUS code of good practice before proceeding. The amendment came on November 7, 1996, when DISCUS members voted unanimously to overturn the self-imposed ban on broadcast ads. The DISCUS president noted that spirits makers wanted to break down the public perception that spirits are stronger or more dangerous than beer and wine and thus deserving of harsher social and political treatment.

After the DISCUS ban was lifted, the four major broadcast TV networks as well as major cable networks such as ESPN and MTV continued to refuse liquor ads, prompting consumer and public interest groups to applaud their actions. In fact, it has been argued that it was really the refusal by TV stations and networks to accept liquor advertising, rather than the DISCUS code, that had kept the ads off the air. However, the major networks cannot control the practices of affiliate stations they do not own, and many affiliates began accepting liquor ads, as did local cable channels and independent broadcast stations. By fall 2001, DISCUS estimated that about

Continue reading here: Just For Feet Sues Its Ad Agency for Malpractice

Was this article helpful?