 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| jeff bland, chronic, developmental expression, fat naked girls , hcc, fat ass white girls , jsonline.com, journal, vitamine, transplantation, hepatitis b, raw eggs, real plump , immunodeficiency, cytosolic protein, sports, judith s. stern, recruit, united, plump breasts , yolk lipids, december 2003 report: can we end the heart disease epidemic?, acute clinical mastitis, omega 3, | The U.S. Supreme Court has explicitly rejected a broader "right of reply" as inconsistent with the First Amendment. Nestle likewise suggests an "equal time" requirement for "eat less, move more" messages, but she and Brownell both would prefer a complete ban on advertising aimed at children, for any product (not just food) bipolar in any medium. While Brownell does not even acknowledge that bipolar such a ban would raise First Amendment issues, Nestle tells me, "It’s very hard for me to believe that the Founding Fathers bipolar intended the First Amendment to apply to commercial speech." (By contrast, presumably, they did intend the Constitution to authorize a federal war on obesity.) Aside from a narrow view of the First Amendment -- which, after all, says nothing about a distinction between "commercial" and "noncommercial" speech -- this enthusiasm for banning ads reflects the complaint that companies foist their products on an unwilling yet malleable populace. |
Best Fat Paysites
|
| quite low cost." Yet 24 pages later, she suggests that "the prices of fruits and vegetables...could be subsidized to compensate in part for the low economic added value of these foods -- just as is journal already done through price supports for dairy foods and sugar." Price supports, of course, make prices higher, not lower, but you get the idea. Force-Fed Fatties If economics is not the forte of Brownell and his allies, neither is constitutional law. To combat ads for fast food and sugary treats, Brownell and Horgen want to journal revive the "fairness doctrine," under which the Federal journal Communications Commission required broadcasters to provide time for opposing views when they covered controversial topics. The FCC abandoned the policy in 1987 after concluding that it had a chilling effect on speech, encouraging TV and radio stations to steer clear of controversy. Brownell and Horgen not only ignore that concern but propose "requiring advertisements for healthy foods or spots discouraging consumption of unhealthy foods" in every medium, even though the original fairness doctrine hinged on the special status of broadcasters as custodians of "the public airwaves." |
|
Looking for real sex? Find someone now on the
largest sex personals network.FREE signup! Post a FREE erotic ad w/5 photos, flirt in chatrooms, view explicit live Webcams, meet for REAL sex! 30,000 new photos every day! Find SEX now 
|
