Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323152780
label
The American Spectator Annual Dinner 1/22/90 [OA 8309] [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323152780
contentType
document
title
The American Spectator Annual Dinner 1/22/90 [OA 8309] [2]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13701-004
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Chronological Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323152780
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
fdb2061eabcf14ec
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S; 2013-1261-F
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Backup Files
Subseries:
Chron Files, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13701
Folder ID Number:
13701-004
Folder Title:
The American Spectator Annual Dinner 1/22/90 [OA 8309] [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
19
5
7
PRESS RELEASE
Dr
THE VICE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF THE PRESS SECRETARY
FOR IMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: 202/456-6772
Wednesday, November 4, 1987
EXCERPTS FROM REMARKS FOR
VICE PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH
THE AMERICAN SPECTATOR
20TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION
WASHINGTON, D.C.
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1987
I'd like to talk to you tonight about a matter that is
affecting our ability to protect and advance our national
interests -- the struggle between the executive and legislative
branches States. over the conduct of the foreign policy of the United
The Iran-Contra affair, the events in the Persian Gulf, and
the debate over the interpretation of the ABM treaty all remind
us that this struggle continues, as it has for much of our 200
years. But is this competition healthy, and has it remained
within the bounds envisioned by our Founding Fathers?
My own view is that foreign policy is a shared power -- that
the founders intended the legislative branch to participate with
the executive in the broad formulation of foreign policy, but not
in the execution of that policy.
Time does not permit a thorough review of this subject. It
will be explored in depth this weekend at a conference of the
Federalist Society -- a group of outstanding young lawyers with a
day. talent for staging balanced debates on great legal issues of the
But let me say that the signals were quite clear. Hamilton
spoke in the Federalist Papers of the need to focus foreign
policy in one man SO that the nation could act quickly,
decisively, abroad. and, if necessary, secretly to achieve our goals
John Marshall spoke of the President as "the sole organ of
the nation in its external relations, and its sole representative
with foreign nations." And some of the founders who later became
President took an expansive view of the executive's powers when
they were in office, often acting without consulting Congress.
-more-
Pam young
-VA
am Spec
(Arlington)
)
financial supporters
Bush - nov. 1987
1983
Tom Wolfe -1988
2
Nevertheless, Congress has in recent years enacted scores of
statutes that regulate our foreign policy in the minutest detail.
The most egregious example of such intrusion on the President's
powers as Commander in Chief is the War Powers Resolution.
In the past 200 years we have sent U.S. troops overseas more
than 200 times without a declaration of war -- each time to
protect our national interests and national security. Should the
need arise, any President should do SO again -- without
hesitation. I would.
Vermont Royster, editor emeritus of The Wall Street Journal,
reviewed some of those executive actions and concluded, "In
nearly every case, had the President gone to Congress for
authority to do what he did, the result would have been a long,
drawn-out political battle. Think Libya. Think Grenada. In
some cases, even if the President had finally won congressional
approval, it would have come too late to make the action
effective, or even possible."
In my view, the War Powers Resolution is not only unwise but
unconstitutional, by limiting the President's ability as
Commander in Chief to respond flexibly when force is required,
and by restricting his actions without allowing for a
presidential veto.
In the War Powers Resolution Congress claims the power to
act by concurrent resolution -- that is, without presidential
approval. This the Supreme Court rejected as unconstitutional in
its Chadha decision.
These conflicts lead inevitably to efforts to drag the
judiciary into foreign policy matters, where it least belongs.
The recent lawsuit filed by 100 members of Congress, charging
that the President's actions in the Persian Gulf violate the War
Powers Resolution, is just one example. I do not believe the
founders envisioned any role for the judiciary beyond the
adjudication of certain disputes that might arise under treaties.
The War Powers Resolution is not the only example of
congressional interference in foreign policy; there are many
others -- from the Tunney and Clark amendments on Angola in the
'70s, to restrictions on arms exports, to a requirement that our
military bases overseas use coal shipped from the United States,
no matter what the cost.
A bill passed by the Senate last month went SO far as to
prohibit any reduction in our consulates and missions abroad, and
it earmarked funds for consulates in Salzburg, Strasbourg,
Goteborg, Lyon, Dusseldorf, Tangier, Genoa, Nice, Porto Alegre,
and Maracaibo.
-more-
3
As Senator Danforth asked during debate on the bill, "Does
the role of the U.S. Senate in foreign policy extend to
constantly tinkering with everything, fine-tuning everything?"
And he added, "I would submit that no reasonable person anywhere
in the world can predict how the United States stands on any
foreign policy issue.
T don't think it is an exaggeration to say that it is
getting as difficult to follow congressional directives on
foreign policy as it is to comply with the tax code. The two
branches spend almost as much time and effort trying to outfox
each other as they do to advance our national interests. This
can only embolden our adversaries to exploit our division.
The potential for harm is obvious. In the midst of
sensitive arms control negotiations, Congress has considered
amendments to legislate provisions of the SALT II treaty -- a
treaty that was proposed by a Democratic President and rejected
by a Democratic Senate. Some in Congress have tried and are
still trying to impose their own interpretation of the ABM
intelligence field.
treaty. Some have sought to cripple our flexibility in the
In Central America, the on-again, off-again effect of the
Boland amendment and other legislative actions has so tied up our
support of the freedom fighters that our national resolve has
remained in constant doubt.
Writing about this problem in the July Spectator, Jeremy
Rabkin observed that the President is left to "interpret
temporary legislative enactments when Congress itself is
uncertain and ambivalent about larger policy directions."
Tn effect, we have been operating with it wobbly wheel in
Nicaragua us. -- conveying a sense of instability to all who observe
I strongly support the freedom fighters, and I am concerned
about what will happen after the Guatemala Peace Accord takes
effect on Saturday. Daniel Ortega is returning from Moscow for
the event. He will boast of movement toward civil liberties in
Nicaragua, and many in Congress will accept his claim.
But what we must resist in Nicaragua is a sham -- an
illusion of progress that takes the pressure off the Sandinistas,
power. cripples the Contras, and strengthens the Communists' grip on
We are engaged in the support of courageous, patriotic
people fighting for freedom against an openly Marxist-Leninist
regime. We should not -- and in the years ahead, we must not --
simply cut and run.
-more-
4
You know, the 1964 edition of the congressional publication
called Legislation on Foreign Relations was a single 650-page
volume. By the middle of the '80s, that had grown to three
volumes of more than 1,000 pages each.
This is not policy making or oversight. Often, it is simply
meddlesome makework, intended to justify the growing staffs and
budgets of proliferating subcommittees.
In my view, turf warfare and competition for the camera
contribute as much to the conflicts between the branches as
politics and policy do. Some 23 committees and 84 subcommittees
claim some jurisdiction over international affairs, each of them
jockeying for a piece of the action and the spotlight. This
fragmentation strengthens the power of special-interest groups,
who in turn reinforce the divisions that already exist.
The challenge we face is to find a cooperative middle ground
-- one that respects the important constitutional role of the
legislative branch and leaves the executive free to respond
quickly and decisively to unforeseen circumstances and events.
Toward that end, I have called for creation of a Joint
Intelligence Committee -- a step recommended by the
Administration's Task Force on Combatting Terrorism, which I
chaired in 1985, and by the Tower Commission earlier this year.
Such a committee would build mutual confidence, streamline the
consultation process, reduce partisan tensions, and reduce leaks.
I am encouraged by the strong bipartisan support shown for
such a committee by members of the House, led by my good friend
Henry Hyde, and joined by Dante Fascell, Bill Broomfield, and 126
other cosponsors.
Congressional reform should go further than a joint
intelligence committee, however -- it should also lead to greater
consolidation of committee work touching on foreign policy.
The initiative for such reforms ultimately must come from
Congress itself, but I hope by my campaign for President to bring
this issue to the fore and speed the process along.
As a nation, we can deal most effectively with our
adversaries if we are united. I hope to encourage a new spirit
of bipartisanship on Capitol Hill -- not just on matters of
intelligence, but in foreign policy generally. The President and
Congress need to work together, and Congress needs to enact its
own reforms. We can do better, and we must do better -- our
national interest demands no less.
Thank you very much.
####
slam Q in front
Sununu deal
staying for dinner
15 min.
JAN 18 90 15:14
P. 1/ 4
= 2
PHILIP MORRIS WORLD HEADQUARTERS
120 PARK AVENUE
NEW YORK, NY 10017
14TH FLOOR
FAX NUMBER - (212) 986-6596
TO:
Ms. Peling Dooley
FROM:
WOOD - LIBERTAD
COMPANY:
LOCATION:
OLD EXEC. OFFICE BURDING
WASH D.C. 20500
CO:
FAX:
202 456 6218
10 PAGES TO FOLLOW
PM
SWILLE
JAN 18 90 15:20
P. 2/ 4
8.
"I seriously doubt whether suppression of Information con-
cerning the availa-
bility and price of
11 legally offered
product is ever " per
missible way for the
State 10 'dampen'
demand for or use of
" product."
Harry Blackmun
Associate/Justice, US Supreme Court
"I have in "y office " copy of " newspaper published without
ands. in " society we
wouldn't like here,
where the govern-
ment decides what
people may know
and not know The
paper is called
Pravda"
jerry W. Friedheim
Executive Director, American Newspaper Publishers Association
"In the last analysis, censorship of any kind by " government
evidences " lack of
confidence in the
judgement of its
citizens."
Alan Dershowitz
Professor, Harvard Law School
JAN 18 90 15:21
P. 3/ 4.
Pg. 9
HOW CAN YOU AND LIBERTAD WORK TOGETHER TO
PRESERVE AND PROTECT COMMERCIAL FREE SPEECH?
B
y choosing one of the three classes of LIBERTAD mem-
bership:
Associate membership. Associate members may join LIBERTAD
by contributing $250. Associate members will receive notifica-
tion of major LIBERTAD activities and will be invited to participate
in selected LIBERTAD events.
Contributing membership. Organizations may become con-
tributing members by donating $5,000 per year ($1,000 for
Individuals) to LIBERTAD. Contributing members will have access
to specialized LIBERTAD services at a reduced charge and will
receive free copies of all LIBERTAD publications and studies.
Sponsoring membership. Organizations may become spon-
soring members of LIBERTAD with a one-time donation of
$25,000 ($5,000 for individuals). Sponsoring members will
have access to all LIBERTAD services without charge and receive
free copies of LIBERTAD publications and studies.
In Conclusion
...
LIBERTAD is an idea that transcends languages. borders and
cultures. Its premise is as simple as It Is powerful: the viability of
our economic system rests on the right of business to advertise
its legitimate products and services without restriction or cen-
sorship; and that absolute vigilance is necessary In all sectors of
private enterprise to prevent the erosion or usurpation of this
right.
JAN 18 90 15:21
P. 4/4
Pg.10
LIBERTAD ADVISORY BOARD: VARIED BACKGROUND,
UNIFIED PURPOSE
L
IBERTAD brings together community leaders drawn from a
wide political spectrum. They share a common bellef in free-
dom of choice and free commercial speech.
The following
are the members of the LIBERTAD Advisory Board:
David A. Morse Esq.
Marvin Kalb
Chairman
Professor
John Kennedy School of Government
Senior Partner
Harvard University
Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue
Cambridge, MA. USA
New York, NY, USA
Juan Carlos Blanco
George Koch
President
Attorney
Grocery Manufacturers Association
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs &
of America
Ambassador to the United Nations
Washington D.C., USA
Montevideo, Uruguay
Dr. Kenneth Clark
Nan McEvoy
Chairman & CEO
Professor Emeritus
The San Francisco Chronicle Group
City College of the City
San Francisco, CA. USA
University of New York
New York, NY, USA
Jacques Seguela
Chief Executive Officer
Salustiano del Campo
Rouse, Seguela Cayzac & Goudard
Paris, France
Professor
Catedratico de Sociologia
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Alexander Buel Trowbridge, Jr.
Madrid, Spain
President
National Association of Manufacturers
Hanns Joachim Friedrichs
Washington D.C., USA
Chief Editor ZDF, Tagesthemen
Hamburg
Federal Republic of West Germany
Charlie Smith
Libertad -Am spee ? Libertod
how old - 2 yrs ?
kind of programs? austral, NK, UK, 7n, yes
hard Plumb? -actine member of Libertad
M
non-profect - 1st amendment
JAN 18'90 11:53
P. 1/11
PHILIP MORRIS WORLD HEADQUARTERS
120 PARK AVENUE
NEW YORK, NY 10017
14TH FLOOR
FAX NUMBER - (212) 986-6596
TO:
Ms. Peliay Dooley
FROM:
WOOD - LIBERTAD
COMPANY:
LOCATION:
OLD EXEC. OFFICE BURDING
WASH. D.C. 20500
CC:
FAX:
202 456 6218
10 PAGES TO FOLLOW
PM
AMILIN
JAN 18 90 11:54
P. 3/11
Pg. 2
DAVID A. MORSE, ESQ.
CHAIRMAN OF LIBERTAD. INC.
S
entor partner in the law firm ofJones, Day, Reavis & Pogue, with
offices throughout the United States and in several locations
overseas. Former Special Assistant to the Attorney General of the
United States; General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board;
Under-Secretary and Acting Secretary of Labor; Director.General of the
International Labor Organization from 1948-1970. Discharged from
the U.S. Air Force in 1945 as Lt. Colonel.
Member of the Bar
of the States of New York, New Jersey and District of Colum-
bia
Member of the Council on Foreign Relations; Board of
the Graduate Institute for International Studies in Geneva from 1962
to 1970; National Council of the United Nations Association of the
United States of America, American Arbitration Association, The
American European Community Association (USA) and Chairman of
the New York Society for International Affairs.
Graduated
Rutgers University 1929 and Harvard Law School 1932. Awarded bon.
orary degrees Rutgers University (Doctor of Laws) 1957; University of
Geneva (Doctor of Laws) 1962; University of Strasbourg (Doctor of
Laws) 1968; Laval University, Quebec (Doctor of Social Sciences)
1969; Brandeis University, Boston (Doctor of Humanities)
1971.
Awarded the United States Legion of Merit; the Order of
Merit of Labor of Brazil; Commander of the Equatorial Star of Gabon;
Grand Officer of the Federal Republic of Cameroon; Grand Cross
(Simon Bolivar) of the Republic of Colombia; Grand Officer of the
French Legion of Honor, Grand Officer of the Order of Merit of the
Republic of Italy (1971); and the "Gran Cruz de la Orden el Sol de
Peru." Recipient of the special commemorative gold medal award by
UNESCO and Human Rights Award of the International League for
Human Rights, 1970. Received the Nobel Peace Prize Award on behalf
of the International Labor Organization in Oslo, Norway on
December 10, 1969.
JAN 18 90
11:54
P. 2/11
Pgl
LIBERTAD, INC.
LIBERTAD is a diverse coalition committed to preserve
and advance the dual freedoms of expression and choice. The basic
belief governing LIBERTAD is that these freedoms are indispensa-
ble to economic and social progress and opportunity, and that they
are too precious to abdicate to those who would encroach on them.
We believe that the history made during the year just ended
supports LIBERTAD's position beyond dispute. To the delight of the
Western World, the long-suppressed desire for freedom of expression
and freedom of choice burst forth to topple dictators and set millions
free.
Our question is this. While we in the West cheered, did we
also learn? While we cheered, did we look over our shoulder to see if
the same encroachments and restrictions that ultimately enslaved
millions in the East threaten the democratic West? Did we ask our-
selves if government is increasing its attempts to stifle our expression
and restrict our choices? Or if the zealots invoked by Justice Bran-
deis are trying in subtle ways to force free citizens to relinquish their
constitutional guaranteed right of freedom of choice?
The demise of flagrant tyrannies abroad distracts from the
emergence of more insidious encroachments on our individual free-
doms at home, giving LIBERTAD's mission of preserving and
advancing freedom of expression and choice a new urgency.
To achieve this mission, LIBERTAD has established three
basic goals: Educating government, business and the general public
to the importance of unrestricted commercial free speech; stimulat-
ing public debate about the dangers of government controls on free
speech; and ensuring that governments understand the conse-
quences of restricting free speech.
We ask you to join us in pursuit of those goals - and of free-
dom of choice and expression the world over.
JAN 18 90 11:55
P. 4/11
pg. $
WHY LIBERTAD?
S
ome governments are seeking to deprive consumers of
the Information they need to make their buying decisions.
They're doing this by attempting to restrict commercial free
speech with selective bans on advertising.
Such restric-
tions Inflict a sharp hurt on buyer and seller alike. They diminish
economic activity and cripple the entrepreneurlal spirit. And
they diminish the amount of information consumers receive
about legitimate products.
Efforts to restrict commercial
free speech are as repugnant and insulting as the restrictions
themselves. Those who would limit what a consumer has a right
to know are, in effect, forcing free citizens to relinquish their
constitutionally guaranteed freedoms to those who say they
know better.
This is censorship. and the appetite of the
censor is Insatiable. Today it's cigarettes. Tomorrow, wine and
beer. Next, it could be sports cars, steaks or skis.
We
formed LIBERTAD to preserve and protect the commercial free
speech that gives our society and economic system their voice.
JAN 18 90 11:55
P. 5/11,
19. 4
WHAT IS LIBERTAD?
L
IBERTAD is a diverse, international coalition of business,
academic and media leaders and organizations dedicated
to the protection and advancement of commercial free speech.
LIBERTAD. which was formed in 1986, is the first organiza-
tion of Its kind in the free world.
LIBERTAD exists to
promote the belief that the world's economic and social inter-
ests are best served by unrestricted access to information about
legally manufactured and marketed products.
WHAT ARE LIBERTAD'S OBJECTIVES?
L
IBERTAD has three basic goals:
To educate and persuade business, government and the
general public to the Importance of unrestricted commercial
free speech.
To stimulate public debate about the effects of government
controls on advertising and other forms of commercial speech.
To ensure that governments contemplating advertising
restrictions fully understand the implications of the measures
under consideration.
JAN 18 90 11:56
P. 6/11
Pg.5
WHAT IS LIBERTAD DOING TO REACH ITS OBJECTIVES?
L
IBERTAD is moving toward these goals with the develop-
ment and implementation of programs revolving around
advocacy, education, counseling and coalition building.
Advocacy
Sponsor advertising prepared for print and broadcast media in
International markets, focusing on the value of commercial free
speech as well as specific legislative and political matters relating
to these Issues.
Commission articles defending commercial free speech
aimed at high level audiences and distributed to influential publi-
cations in worldwide media markets.
Conduct seminars and conferences throughout the free world,
featuring prominent business and political figures and recog.
nized authorities on commercial free speech,
Education
Sponsor lectures and films on commercial free speech for
distribution to educational. civic, business and political organiza-
tions.
Maintain a speakers bureau consisting of practitioners of
advertising and other forms of business communication who
speak with eloquence and conviction about the significance of
- and threats to — commercial free speech.
Commission surveys and studies by prestigious public opinion
and policy research organizations that examine the legal, politi-
cal, economic and scientific ramifications of the commercial free
speech issue.
JAN 18 90
11:56
P.
7/11
a
4
Counseling
Retain communication consultants to help develop Issues
strategies, assist in preparation of advertisements, articles and
speeches and train and brief spokespersons in behalf of com-
mercial free speech.
Commission political consultants to advise on developing
and presenting legislative arguments in support of commercial
free speech in varying political environments and to help com-
mercial free speech advocates establish contact with influential
political figures.
Engage legal counsel specializing in commercial free speech to
assist with court cases and other relevant litigation and to help
interpret court rulings that affect advertising.
Coalition Building
Form attiances with all businesses, Industries, trade associa-
tions and other parties directly or indirectly involved or Inter-
ested in the promotion and preservation of commercial free
speech,
Establish media relations. utilizing press conferences and edi-
torial board meetings to acquaint media representatives with
the commercial free speech issue.
a Cultivate ciric and political leaders through frequent commu-
nication and personal contact in connection with commercial
free speech matters.
JAN 18 90 11:56
P. 8/11
Pg. 7
HOW REAL IS THE THREAT TO COMMERCIAL
FREE SPEECH?
L
isten to these impartial commentators. The danger Inher-
ent in the threat to commercial free speech is recognized
across the economic, social and political spectrum. The follow-
Ing are excerpts of comments by people closely concerned with
the issue of commercial free speech:
"If you can't trust a citizen to make " decision for bimself - if
you can't trust the
consumer after bes
been fully educated to
make the right deci-
sion- then you don't
Duive democracy."
Craig R. Smith
President, Freedom of Expression Foundation
"Censorship in any form is contrary to the basic freedom of
individuals to think
If you start baving one
n.
LIBERTAD
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
January 18, 1990
Advisory Board
David A. Morse Esq.
Chairman
Senior Partner
Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue
New York, NY, USA
Juan Carlos Blanco
Attention: Peggy Dooley
Attorney
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs &
Ambassador to the United Nations
Montevideo, Uruguay
Dr. Kenneth Clark
Professor Emeritus
City College of the City
Enclosed you'll find our two (2) brochures on
University of New York
New York, NY, USA
LIBERTAD and the description from the program.
Salustiano del Campo
Although you have received most of this
Professor
Catedratico de Sociologia
information by FAX on Thursday, I wanted you to
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Madrid, Spain
see our pamphlets and perhaps you can get some
Hanns Joachim Friedrichs
useful information from them.
Chief Editor ZDF, Tagesthemen
Hamburg
Federal Republic of West Germany
Marvin Kalb
If you have any questions or need more
Professor
information, please call Andrew Whist, President
John Kennedy School of Government
Harvard University
of LIBERTAD at 212/880-4009.
Cambridge, MA, USA
George Koch
President
Thanks for everything.
Grocery Manufacturers Association
of America
Washington D.C., USA
Nan McEvoy
Chairman & CEO
Sincerely,
The San Francisco Chronicle Group
San Francisco, CA, USA
Jacques Seguela
Chief Executive Officer
Roux, Seguela, Cayzac & Goudard
Paris, France
Donna Nonna Wood Wood
Alexander Buel Trowbridge, Jr.
President
National Association of
Manufacturers
Washington D.C., USA
DW gvb
enc.
LIBERTAD Inc. 599 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 888-9522
LIBERTAD, INC.
LIBERTAD is a diverse coalition committed to preserve
and advance the dual freedoms of expression and choice. The basic
belief governing LIBERTAD is that these freedoms are indispensa-
ble to economic and social progress and opportunity, and that they
are too precious to abdicate to those who would encroach on them.
We believe that the history made during the year just ended
supports LIBERTAD's position beyond dispute. To the delight of the
Western World, the long-suppressed desire for freedom of expression
and freedom of choice burst forth to topple dictators and set millions
free.
Our question is this. While we in the West cheered, did we
also learn? While we cheered, did we look over our shoulder to see if
the same encroachments and restrictions that ultimately enslaved
millions in the East threaten the democratic West? Did we ask our-
selves if government is increasing its attempts to stifle our expression
and restrict our choices? Or if the zealots invoked by Justice Bran-
deis are trying in subtle ways to force free citizens to relinquish their
constitutional guaranteed right of freedom of choice?
The demise of flagrant tyrannies abroad distracts from the
emergence of more insidious encroachments on our individual free-
doms at home, giving LIBERTAD's mission of preserving and
advancing freedom of expression and choice a new urgency.
To achieve this mission, LIBERTAD has established three
basic goals: Educating government, business and the general public
to the importance of unrestricted commercial free speech; stimulat-
ing public debate about the dangers of government controls on free
speech; and ensuring that governments understand the conse-
quences of restricting free speech.
We ask you to join us in pursuit of those goals - and of free-
dom of choice and expression the world over.
LIBERTAD, Inc.
Libertad, Inc. was formed in 1986 by an international,
non-partisan coalition of civic and business leaders, aca-
demics, media leaders, and organizations interested in
promoting and preserving freedom, our most precious com-
modity, worldwide. The philosophy of Libertad is simple:
Freedom of speech, communication, and expression, which to-
gether form the basis of freedom of choice, are fundamental
to the survival of our political and economic structures,
indeed to the survival of all truly democratic systems.
Those who would place restrictions and conditions on these
freedoms threaten the viability of our system. Libertad's
mission is to oppose the imposition of restrictions that in-
hibit free political and economic activity.
Through services and programs designed to educate gov-
ernment officials, businessmen, and the general public on
the importance of free speech, Libertad underlines the ef-
fects that limitations on free speech can have on a society
that too often takes its freedoms for granted. At both the
national and international level, Libertad sponsors ad-
vertising promoting the value of free speech, commissions
articles defending freedom of expression and distributes
them to influential publications, and conducts seminars and
conferences featuring noted authorities on freedom of commu-
nication. The organization also commissions studies by
prestigious research organizations to examine the legal,
political, economic, and scientific aspects of free speech,
and distributes lectures and films to educational and
political groups. Communication specialists, political con-
sultants, and legal counsel employed by Libertad all work to
develop strategies for overcoming impediments to free
speech.
American members of Libertad's distinguished advisory
board include Dr. Kenneth Clark, professor emeritus of the
City College of the City University of New York; Marvin Kalb
of the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard Univer-
sity; Nan McEvoy, chairman and CEO of the San Francisco
Chronicle Group; and Alexander Buel Trowbridge, Jr., presi-
dent of the National Association of Manufacturers. They,
like other Libertad members, understand that without freedom
of speech, without access to the information that enables
citizens to make choices, democracy cannot flourish.
Libertad has taken on the task of protecting freedom at home
and advancing it abroad because if this nation allows its
freedoms to erode, it cannot serve as an example. Libertad
is ensuring that we not only guard our own interests, but
also serve as a model to those nations now struggling for
democracy.
LIBERTAD ADVISORY BOARD: VARIED BACKGROUND,
UNIFIED PURPOSE
L
IBERTAD brings together community leaders drawn from a
wide political spectrum. They share a common belief in free-
dom of choice and free commercial speech.
The following
are the members of the LIBERTAD Advisory Board:
David A. Morse, Esq.
Marvin Kalb
Chairman
Professor
John Kennedy School of Government
Senior Partner
Harvard University
Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue
Cambridge, MA, USA
New York, NY, USA
George Koch
Juan Carlos Blanco
President
Attorney
Grocery Manufacturers Association
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs &
of America
Ambassador to the United Nations
Washington, D.C., USA
Montevideo, Uruguay
Nan McEvoy
Dr. Kenneth Clark
Chairman & CEO
Professor Emeritus
The San Francisco Chronicle Group
City College of the City
San Francisco, CA, USA
University of New York
New York, NY,USA
Jacques Seguela
Chief Executive Officer
Salustiano del Campo
Roux, Seguela, Cayzac & Goudard
Professor
Paris, France
Catedratico de Sociologia
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Alexander Buel Trowbridge, Jr.
Madrid, Spain
President
National Association of Manufacturers
Hanns Joachim Friedrichs
Washington D.C., USA
Chief Editor ZDF, Tagesthemen
Hamburg
Federal Republic of West Germany
20
DAVID A. MORSE, ESQ.
CHAIRMAN OF LIBERTAD, INC.
S
enior partner in the lawfirm of Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue, with
offices throughout the United States and in several locations
overseas. Former Special Assistant to the Attorney General of the
United States; General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board;
Under-Secretary and Acting Secretary of Labor; Director- General of the
International Labor Organization from 1948-1970. Discharged from
the U.S. Air Force in 1945 as Lt. Colonel
Member of the Bar
of the States of New York, New Jersey and District of Colum-
bia
Member of the Council on Foreign Relations; Board of
the Graduate Institute for International Studies in Geneva from 1962
to 1970; National Council of the United Nations Association of the
United States of America, American Arbitration Association, The
American European Community Association (USA) and Chairman of
the New York Society for International Affairs.
Graduated
Rutgers University 1929 and Harvard Law School 1932. Awarded bon-
orary degrees Rutgers University (Doctor of Laws) 1957; University of
Geneva (Doctor of Laws) 1962; University of Strasbourg (Doctor of
Laws) 1968; Laval University, Quebec (Doctor of Social Sciences)
1969; Brandeis University, Boston (Doctor of Humanities)
1971.
Awarded the United States Legion of Merit; the Order of
Merit of Labor of Brazil; Commander of the Equatorial Star of Gabon;
Grand Officer of the Federal Republic of Cameroon; Grand Cross
(Simon Bolivar) of the Republic of Colombia; Grand Officer of the
French Legion of Honor, Grand Officer of the Order of Merit of the
Republic of Italy (1971); and the "Gran Cruz de la Orden el Sol de
Peru." Recipient of the special commemorative gold medal award by
UNESCO and Human Rights Award of the International League for
Human Rights, 1970. Received the Nobel Peace Prize Award on bebalf
of the International Labor Organization in Oslo, Norway on
December 10, 1969.
2
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
CONDITIONS
ESTRICT
THOUGHTS ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH
By
David A. Morse, Esq.
And
Barry Lynn
LIBERTAD
CONTENTS
Commercial Speech As A Basic Freedom
3
By David A. Morse, Esq.
Free Speech: The Basis Of A Free Society
13
By Barry Lynn
How Real Is The Threat To Commercial Free Speech?
18
LIBERTAD Advisory Board
20
THOUGHTS ON
FREEDOM OF SPEECH
By
David A. Morse, Esq.
And
Barry Lynn
LIBERTAD
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
Liberty to Advertise
1
DAVID A. MORSE, ESQ.
CHAIRMAN OF LIBERTAD, INC.
S
enior partner in the law firm of Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue, with
offices throughout the United States and in several locations
overseas. Former Special Assistant to the Attorney General of the
United States; General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board;
Under-Secretary and Acting Secretary of Labor; Director-General of the
International Labor Organization from 1948-1970. Discharged from
the U.S. Air Force in 1945 as Lt. Colonel.
Member of the Bar
of the States of New York, New Jersey and District of Colum-
bia.
Member of the Council on Foreign Relations; Board of
the Graduate Institute for International Studies in Geneva from 1962
to 1970; National Council of the United Nations Association of the
United States of America, American Arbitration Association, The
American European Community Association (USA) and Chairman of
the New York Society for International Affairs.
Graduated
Rutgers University 1929 and Harvard Law School 1932. Awarded bon-
orary degrees Rutgers University (Doctor of Laws) 1957; University of
Geneva (Doctor of Laws) 1962; University of Strasbourg (Doctor of
Laws) 1968; Laval University, Quebec (Doctor of Social Sciences)
1969; Brandeis University, Boston (Doctor of Humanities)
1971.
Awarded the United States Legion of Merit; the Order of
Merit of Labor of Brazil; Commander of the Equatorial Star of Gabon;
Grand Officer of the Federal Republic of Cameroon; Grand Cross
(Simon Bolivar) of the Republic of Colombia; Grand Officer of the
French Legion of Honor; Grand Officer of the Order of Merit of the
Republic of Italy (1971); and the "Gran Cruz de la Orden el Sol de
Peru." Recipient of the special commemorative gold medal award by
UNESCO and Human Rights Award of the International League for
Human Rights, 1970. Received the Nobel Peace Prize Award on behalf
of the International Labor Organization in Oslo, Norway on
December 10, 1969.
2
COMMERCIAL SPEECH AS A BASIC FREEDOM
I
n all free societies, we have come to expect, indeed we nearly take
for granted, such basic rights as freedom of association and
assembly, free speech and a free press. In the United States and Great
Britain, as in many other western nations, these freedoms are consti-
tutionally guaranteed, and fall under the watchful eye of the judiciary.
In other countries, however, these freedoms are at the core of a very
different political process between government and citizen, as the
remarkable recent events in Beijing, Moscow and Eastern Europe will
attest.
I see these freedoms as all emanating from the core
democratic principles that form the tree of life. These freedoms, or
branches if you will, need pruning from time to time. Indeed, each
freedom is constantly being reshaped and defined through public
debate, as well as through administrative and judicial interpretation.
But the tree must be allowed to grow and flourish; it must be strong
enough to withstand the daily attempts of outside forces to stunt its
growth or to sever one of its limbs, and thus deprive it of the light and
air that are essential to its life.
In considering the branch of
the tree called free speech, we are used to defending this right in the
spheres of politics, religion and the arts. There appears to be general
agreement that a substantial public interest must be at stake before a
government should be permitted to muzzle speech in one of these
spheres. But as we look more closely at this branch, we find that
another type of speech has received less attention and, unfortunately,
less protection, but which is very much a part of our daily lives. That
speech is commonly called commercial speech.
The U.S.
Supreme Court has considered the question of commercial speech
on several occasions in recent years, starting with a 1976 decision
invalidating a statewide ban on pharmaceutical advertisements. Said
the Court, "people will perceive their own best interest if only they are
3
nouncements extolling the virtues of a free flow of commercial infor-
mation.
I mention these American cases as a backdrop to the
issue at hand, which is the extent to which any government should
have the right to restrict commercial speech because of the content
of the commercial message. Should a government be permitted to
attempt to protect its citizenry by somehow screening or restricting
the flow of otherwise truthful advertising about products and services
legally offered for sale? It would be presumptuous of LIBERTAD, as a
relatively young organization, to take a stand on the regulation of par-
ticular forms of commercial speech without a great deal more study
and analysis. However, as a lifelong civil libertarian, I do not think it
presumptuous for me to endorse - or for me to urge that LIBERTAD
endorse - the basic principle that the presumption must always be in
favor of a free flow of ideas, be they commercial or otherwise, and
only for the most compelling reasons should that presumption be
overcome. Just as we need a free flow of political ideas to ensure a
smoothly functioning democracy, so we need a free flow of commer-
cial information - on prices, quality, and consumer practices - to
ensure a smoothly functioning economy where consumers make
intelligent choices before spending their money on food, clothing,
household products, or even luxuries. While we all have our individual
prejudices as to the extent to which we would like advertising to
touch our lives, it cannot be denied that commercial information
serves a very necessary role in educating the public about new prod-
ucts and about competing claims of competitors.
In most
instances, restrictions on the flow of commercial information are justi-
fied on the basis of paternalism - that a government has the right, if
not the obligation, to protect its citizenry from information harmful to
its well-being. For example, many governments have established
6
advertising regulations in order to protect children. But should adults
be treated similarly to children with regard to advertising - - are we
truly worried that exposure to all available commercial information
requires similar controls? I think the answer must be no. Widespread
regulation of commercial speech shows that government takes a
rather low if not demeaning view of its citizenry — a citizenry unable
to make informed choices on its own. As Justice Blackmun of the U.S.
Supreme Court has noted in criticizing such a view, restrictions on
commercial speech often involve (and I quote) "a covert attempt by
the state to manipulate the choices of its citizens, not by persuasion
or direct regulation, but by depriving the public of the information
needed to make a free choice.
[T]he State's policy choices are
insulated from visibility and scrutiny and the conduct of citizens is
molded by the information that government chooses to give
them."8
Whenever possible, therefore, an individual should
be permitted to make as informed a commercial decision as he or she
chooses, with access to as much non-misleading commercial infor-
mation as he or she wishes to receive. Governmental efforts to pre-
vent such information from reaching the populace, either through
restrictions on the content of advertising, or through attempts to set
standards or norms by which advertising will be permitted, ordinarily
should be resisted. Restrictions of these types merely serve to substi-
tute the values of government officials for the values of consumers
themselves. Moreover, such restrictions leave consumers with a false
impression of decision-making control, when in fact that process is
effectively controlled by others.
7
The Need For LIBERTAD In Europe
Although most people broadly endorse the principle of free com-
mercial speech, few have looked closely at the way in which commer-
cial speech is being regulated in our ever-changing environment.
Indeed, both in America and in Europe, we found no organization
dedicated to the study and analysis of issues relevant to the regula-
tion of commercial speech. LIBERTAD, a diverse, international coali-
tion of business, academic, legal, civil rights and media leaders, was
formed in 1986 in order to fill this void. It is the first organization of its
kind in the free world dedicated to the protection and advancement
of commercial speech. It asks one basic question: when goods and
services at issue are legally available for sale, under what circum-
stances, if any, should government be permitted to limit an adver-
tiser's access to the media or to regulate the content of an
advertiser's message?
Nowhere today is this question being
debated more urgently than in Europe, where we are not dealing with
a single Supreme Court interpreting a single body of federal constitu-
tional law, but where there is both national and supranational law
interacting in an environment of intense political pressures that is part
and parcel of the drive toward the European Economic Community of
1992. Advertising norms will be no exception to the ongoing process
of rationalizing and harmonizing conflicting national laws, and a seri-
ous question exists whether that process will lead to the free move-
ment and expression of ideas. That concept, as we all know, did not
emanate from Lord Cockfield's proclamation of the Europe of 1992.
Rather, it was codified in the early post-war years in Article 10(1) of
the European Convention on Human Rights, which categorically pro-
claims that "[e]veryone has the right to freedom of expression." It
goes on to say that t]his right shall include freedom to hold opinions
8
cerns, both at the national and the European level. At the national
level, advertising is often a sensitive issue because of state support, or
even ownership, of broadcast and other media. At the supranational
level, members and staff of the European Commission and the Euro-
pean Parliament are frequently lobbied by business, environmental,
health and consumer groups, and thus operate in an environment of
constant pressure regarding the appropriate level of regulation. In
this regard, a broadcasting directive has just been adopted by the EC
ministers after considerable debate. While programming content is
its primary focus, the directive is also noteworthy for its statements
regarding European advertising. The directive notes in its preamble
the basic principle of freedom of expression enshrined in Article 10 of
the Convention on Human Rights, and cautions that television adver-
tising should be subject only to a minimum of rules and standards.
However, the directive does place an absolute ban on television
advertising and sponsorship of television programming by pro-
ducers of tobacco products, and creates a more qualified set of
restrictions on advertising of alcoholic beverages. It remains to be
seen how these advertising norms will be interpreted in the first
instance at the national level and then at the European
level.
For the near future, we can expect increasing discus-
sion of the regulation of print media and labeling for products such as
food, pharmaceuticals, candy, fertilizers, sanitary products and toys,
as well as for services of many kinds. At the same time, there will likely
be increased European movement toward codes of conduct and
other forms of self-regulation, as evidenced by the recent agreement
between the French Government and the syndicate of French auto-
mobile manufacturers prohibiting advertising campaigns which
might encourage irresponsible driving. As Community rules are now
10
subject to more detailed national implementation by each of the
Community members, and as the pan-European markets at stake are
enormous, a great need exists for clarity and precision on this subject.
In order to serve as a focal point on these issues, LIBERTAD has
formed a separate entity entitled LIBERTAD (Europe). Together,
LIBERTAD and LIBERTAD (Europe) will sponsor meetings where the
views of business leaders, journalists, attorneys, government officials,
labor leaders and parliamentarians will be welcome. We will continue
to do what we can to help define the debate so as to ensure a contin-
uing commitment to one of our fundamental freedoms - the free
flow of ideas and information.
¹Virginia State Board of Pharmacy V. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U.S. 748, 770, 96 S. Ct. 1817,
1829 (1976).
2Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. V. Public Service Commission of New York, 447 U.S. 557, 100 Ct. 2343
(1980).
3Bolgerv. Youngs Drug Products Corp., 463 U.S. 60, 103 S. Ct. 2875 (1983).
4Posadas de Puerto Rico Associates V. Tourism Co. of Puerto Rico, 478 U.S. 328, 106 S. Ct. 2968 (1986).
5478 U.S. at 358, 106 S. Ct. at 2986.
6Board of Trustees of the State University of New York Fox,
U.S.
109 S. Ct. 3028 (1989).
7
U.S. at
109 S. Ct. at 3035.
⁸Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp., 447 U.S. at 574-575, 100 S. Ct. at 2356 (dissenting opinion).
⁹The Sunday Times Case, judgment of 26 April 1979 of the European Court of Human Rights, at paragraph 62;
Handyside Case, judgment of 7 December 1976 of the European Court of Human Rights, at paragraphs 48-50.
10Liljenberg V. Sweden, decision of 1 March 1983 of the European Commission of Human Rights, at page 15;X and
Church of Scientology V. Sweden, 16 D&R 68, 73 (1979), decision of the European Commission of Human
Rights.
11
BARRY W. LYNN
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
B
arry W. Lynn is Legislative Counsel for the American Civil Lib-
erties Union in Washington, DC. He lobbies Congress on behalf
of the A.C.L.U.'s unswerving support for First Amendment principles.
He has also become what one magazine called "the most recognized
advocate of free speech in America," as a guest on countless radio and
television programs including Today, Good Morning America,
Nightwatch, Meet The Press, Nightline, The McNeil-Lehrer Report,
and Crossfire. His national effort to discredit the Attorney General's
Commission on Pornography earned bim the 1987 First Amendment
Award. In recent years, bis articles and interviews have appeared in
publications as diverse as Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law
Review and the Penthouse Forum magazine.
Lynn is an
ordained minister in the United Church of Christ. He was also the first
national chairperson of the Committee Against Registration and the
Draft. Lynn is a frequent lecturer and debater on such topics as por-
nography, separation of church and state, compulsory national ser-
vice, AIDS and constitutional history.
Mr. Lynn is also the
co-bost, with Pat Korten, of Battleline, a daily two-bour debate pro-
gram developed by WNTR-AM (Silver Spring/Washington).
12
FREE SPEECH: THE BASIS OF A FREE SOCIETY
B
asic to every free society is the guarantee of freedom of
speech. Uncensored communication is a prerequisite to the
achievement of progress, democracy, peaceful social change and
human dignity. It is through the free play of ideas that material, artistic
and scientific progress are possible.
A government that cen-
sors the free flow of ideas and information loses the moral legitimacy
that allows democratic governments to rule over a free people. As
young children we were taught that it was impolite to interrupt some-
one who was speaking. At home it was taught to us in terms of "good
manners," when we got out into the world we realized that the good
manners our elders ingrained in us are not some quaint custom, but
rather, the basis of freedom.
.
[T]he suppression of speech is an
assault on the human dignity of the speaker and listener alike."¹
Peaceful social change can only be achieved through free
speech. The civil rights and anti-war movements in the United States
were not only exercises in free speech but the means by which those
who were dissatisfied with the existing social structure aired their
grievances. Free speech is also the means by which society as a whole
can be made aware of its shortcomings and remedy them without
resort to violence.
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitu-
tion, and similar guarantees of free speech in the constitutions of
other democratic nations, are necessary to protect those whose
views are unpopular. Someone whose views are in the mainstream
of accepted popular views needs no protection; since most
people agree with him, no one is likely to attempt to shut him
up.
When we think of freedom of speech, we generally tend
to think of speech about religion, politics, science or art. There is,
however, another form of speech which is as vitally important: com-
13
consumer why they should purchase a particular product, but also
provide a social service. For instance, advertisements for toothpaste
remind consumers to practice good oral hygiene: to brush and floss
daily and see a dentist regularly. Similarly, ads for health spas and
gyms emphasize the importance of regular exercise; ads for some
food products stress the importance of a well-balanced diet; and ads
for suntan products caution against overexposure to the sun's ultravi-
olet rays.
Were it not for the information that advertisements
make available to the general public, consumer choice and competi-
tion would be severely restricted. Ultimately, without this advertising-
driven competition the most successful manufacturers would be
those who already enjoyed a large share of the market, or whose
brand reputation is maintained regardless of whether the consumer is
knowledgeable about the product.
Despite its importance,
commercial speech is not generally free from censorship. Govern-
ments in many countries have banned advertisement of particular
products for many reasons. The government does have a role to play
in protecting the public from advertisements which may be untruthful
or misleading. Rationing information may be acceptable in the case of
children, whose trusting nature makes them needy for protection
from things they cannot yet understand or interpret.
How-
ever, the adult population has the capability and the responsibility to
make personal decisions based on all available information. By cen-
soring advertising governments reduce adult consumers to hearing
only what is suitable for children, and deny them the information that
can help them make informed choices.
Censoring of com-
mercial speech shifts the power of economic decision making from
the individual consumer to the elite that controls the flow of informa-
15
HOW REAL IS THE THREAT TO COMMERCIAL
FREE SPEECH?
L
isten to these impartial commentators. The danger inherent in
the threat to commercial free speech is recognized across the
economic, social and political spectrum. The following are excerpts
of comments by people closely concerned with the issue of commer-
cial free speech:
"If you can't trust a citizen to make a decision for himself - if you
can't trust the con-
sumer after be's been
fully educated to make
the right decision -
then you don't have
democracy."
Craig R. Smith
President, Freedom of Expression Foundation
"Censorship in any form is contrary to the basic freedom of indi-
viduals to think. If you
start having one kind
of censorship, where do
you stop?"
Kenneth B. Clark
Noted Educator and Former Distinguished Professor of Psychology,
City University of New York
"In the last analysis, censorship of any kind by a government evi-
dences a lack of confi-
dence in the judgement
of its citizens."
Alan Dershowitz
Professor, Harvard Law School
18
"I seriously doubt whether suppression of information concern-
ing the availability
and price of a legally
offered product is ever
a permissible way for
the State to 'dampen'
demand for or use of
a product."
Harry Blackmun
Associate Justice, U.S. Supreme Court
"I have in my office a copy of a newspaper published without ads, in
a society we wouldn't
like here, where the
government decides
what people may know
and not know. The pa-
per is called Pravda."
Jerry W. Friedheim
Executive Director, American Newspaper Publishers Association
"Once you start down the road of regulation of speech, you may think
you're giving the government power just to censor your favorite evil
but in fact you are
giving government the
power to censor what-
ever it wants to
And
that power, once un-
leashed, is very difficult
and perhaps impossi-
ble to limit."
Ira Glasser
Executive Director, American Civil Liberties Union
19
LIBERTAD ADVISORY BOARD: VARIED BACKGROUND,
UNIFIED PURPOSE
L
IBERTAD brings together community leaders drawn from a
wide political spectrum. They share a common belief in free-
dom of choice and free commercial speech.
The following
are the members of the LIBERTAD Advisory Board:
David A. Morse, Esq.
Marvin Kalb
Chairman
Professor
John Kennedy School of Government
Senior Partner
Harvard University
Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue
Cambridge, MA, USA
New York, NY, USA
George Koch
Juan Carlos Blanco
President
Attorney
Grocery Manufacturers Association
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs &
of America
Ambassador to the United Nations
Washington, D.C., USA
Montevideo, Uruguay
Nan McEvoy
Dr. Kenneth Clark
Chairman & CEO
Professor Emeritus
The San Francisco Chronicle Group
City College of the City
San Francisco, CA, USA
University of New York
New York, NY, USA
Jacques Seguela
Chief Executive Officer
Salustiano del Campo
Roux, Seguela, Cayzac & Goudard
Professor
Paris, France
Catedratico de Sociologia
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Alexander Buel Trowbridge, Jr.
Madrid, Spain
President
National Association of Manufacturers
Hanns Joachim Friedrichs
Washington D.C., USA
Chief Editor ZDF, Tagesthemen
Hamburg
Federal Republic of West Germany
20
If you think freedom of expression is important, please contact:
LIBERTAD, Inc. 599 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 888-9522
LIBERTAD
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
LIBERTAD, Inc. 599 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212)888-9522
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
CONDI IONS
LIBERTAD
"Informed choice is the essence of our economic system as well as
our political system, and advertising is a fundamental part of
the process by which consumers become informed."
Daniel Oliver
Former Chairman U.S. Federal Trade Commission
LIBERTAD
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
Liberty to Advertise
1
WHY LIBERTAD?
S
ome governments are seeking to deprive consumers of
the information they need to make their buying decisions.
They're doing this by attempting to restrict commercial free
speech with selective bans on advertising.
Such restric-
tions inflict a sharp hurt on buyer and seller alike. They diminish
economic activity and cripple the entrepreneurial spirit. And
they diminish the amount of information consumers receive
about legitimate products.
Efforts to restrict commercial
free speech are as repugnant and insulting as the restrictions
themselves. Those who would limit what a consumer has a right
to know are, in effect, forcing free citizens to relinquish their
constitutionally guaranteed freedoms to those who say they
know better.
This is censorship, and the appetite of the
censor is insatiable. Today it's cigarettes. Tomorrow, wine and
beer. Next, it could be sports cars, steaks or skis.
We
formed LIBERTAD to preserve and protect the commercial free
speech that gives our society and economic system their voice.
2
WHAT IS LIBERTAD?
L
IBERTAD is a diverse, international coalition of business,
academic and media leaders and organizations dedicated
to the protection and advancement of commercial free speech.
LIBERTAD, which was formed in 1986, is the first organiza-
tion of its kind in the free world.
LIBERTAD exists to
promote the belief that the world's economic and social inter-
ests are best served by unrestricted access to information about
legally manufactured and marketed products.
WHAT ARE LIBERTAD'S OBJECTIVES?
L
IBERTAD has three basic goals:
To educate and persuade business, government and the
general public to the importance of unrestricted commercial
free speech.
To stimulate public debate about the effects of government
controls on advertising and other forms of commercial speech.
To ensure that governments contemplating advertising
restrictions fully understand the implications of the measures
under consideration.
3
WHAT IS LIBERTAD DOING TO REACH ITS OBJECTIVES?
L
IBERTAD is moving toward these goals with the develop-
ment and implementation of programs revolving around
advocacy, education, counseling and coalition building.
Advocacy
Sponsor advertising prepared for print and broadcast media in
international markets, focusing on the value of commercial free
speech as well as specific legislative and political matters relating
to these issues.
Commission articles defending commercial free speech
aimed at high level audiences and distributed to influential publi-
cations in worldwide media markets.
Conduct seminars and conferences throughout the free world,
featuring prominent business and political figures and recog-
nized authorities on commercial free speech.
Education
Sponsor lectures and films on commercial free speech for
distribution to educational, civic, business and political organiza-
tions.
Maintain a speakers bureau consisting of practitioners of
advertising and other forms of business communication who
speak with eloquence and conviction about the significance of
— and threats to - commercial free speech.
Commission surveys and studies by prestigious public opinion
and policy research organizations that examine the legal, politi-
cal, economic and scientific ramifications of the commercial free
speech issue.
4
Counseling
Retain communication consultants to help develop issues
strategies, assist in preparation of advertisements, articles and
speeches and train and brief spokespersons in behalf of com-
mercial free speech.
Commission political consultants to advise on developing
and presenting legislative arguments in support of commercial
free speech in varying political environments and to help com-
mercial free speech advocates establish contact with influential
political figures.
Engage legal counsel specializing in commercial free speech to
assist with court cases and other relevant litigation and to help
interpret court rulings that affect advertising.
Coalition Building
Form alliances with all businesses, industries, trade associa-
tions and other parties directly or indirectly involved or inter-
ested in the promotion and preservation of commercial free
speech.
Establish media relations, utilizing press conferences and edi-
torial board meetings to acquaint media representatives with
the commercial free speech issue.
Cultivate civic and political leaders through frequent commu-
nication and personal contact in connection with commercial
free speech matters.
5
HOW REAL IS THE THREAT TO COMMERCIAL
FREE SPEECH?
L
isten to these impartial commentators. The danger inher-
ent in the threat to commercial free speech is recognized
across the economic, social and political spectrum. The follow-
ing are excerpts of comments by people closely concerned with
the issue of commercial free speech:
"If you can't trust a citizen to make a decision for himself - if
you can't trust the
consumer after he's
been fully educated to
make the right deci-
sion - then you don't
have democracy."
Craig R. Smith
President, Freedom of Expression Foundation
"Censorship in any form is contrary to the basic freedom of
individuals to think.
If you start having one
kind of censorship,
where do you stop?"
Kenneth B. Clark
Noted Educator and Former Distinguished Professor of Psychology,
City University of New York
"Once you start down the road of regulation of speech, you
may think you're giving the government power just to censor
your favorite evil
but in fact you are
giving government
the power to censor
whatever it wants to
And that power,
once unleasbed, is
very difficult and
perhaps impossible
to limit."
Ira Glasser
Executive Director, American Civil Liberties Union
6
"I seriously doubt whether suppression of information con-
cerning the availa-
bility and price of
a legally offered
product is ever a per-
missible way for the
State to 'dampen'
demand for or use of
a product."
Harry Blackmun
Associate Justice, U.S. Supreme Court
"I have in my office a copy of a newspaper published without
ads, in a society we
wouldn't like here,
where the govern-
ment decides what
people may know
and not know. The
paper is called
Pravda."
Jerry W. Friedheim
Executive Director, American Newspaper Publishers Association
"In the last analysis, censorship of any kind by a government
evidences a lack of
confidence in the
judgement of its
citizens."
Alan Dershowitz
Professor, Harvard Law School
7
HOW CAN YOU AND LIBERTAD WORK TOGETHER TO
PRESERVE AND PROTECT COMMERCIAL FREE SPEECH?
B
y choosing one of the three classes of LIBERTAD mem-
bership:
Associate membership. Associate members may join LIBERTAD
by contributing $250. Associate members will receive notifica-
tion of major LIBERTAD activities and will be invited to participate
in selected LIBERTAD events.
Contributing membership. Organizations may become con-
tributing members by donating $5,000 per year ($1,000 for
individuals) to LIBERTAD. Contributing members will have access
to specialized LIBERTAD services at a reduced charge and will
receive free copies of all LIBERTAD publications and studies.
Sponsoring membership. Organizations may become spon-
soring members of LIBERTAD with a one-time donation of
$25,000 ($5,000 for individuals). Sponsoring members will
have access to all LIBERTAD services without charge and receive
free copies of LIBERTAD publications and studies.
In Conclusion
LIBERTAD is an idea that transcends languages, borders and
cultures. Its premise is as simple as it is powerful: the viability of
our economic system rests on the right of business to advertise
its legitimate products and services without restriction or cen-
sorship; and that absolute vigilance is necessary in all sectors of
private enterprise to prevent the erosion or usurpation of this
right.
8
LIBERTAD ADVISORY BOARD: VARIED BACKGROUND,
UNIFIED PURPOSE
L
IBERTAD brings together community leaders drawn from a
wide political spectrum. They share a common belief in free-
dom of choice and free commercial speech.
The following
are the members of the LIBERTAD Advisory Board:
David A. Morse Esq.
Marvin Kalb
Chairman
Professor
John Kennedy School of Government
Senior Partner
Harvard University
Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue
Cambridge, MA, USA
New York, NY, USA
Juan Carlos Blanco
George Koch
President
Attorney
Grocery Manufacturers Association
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs &
of America
Ambassador to the United Nations
Washington D.C., USA
Montevideo, Uruguay
Dr. Kenneth Clark
Nan McEvoy
Chairman & CEO
Professor Emeritus
City College of the City
The San Francisco Chronicle Group
San Francisco, CA, USA
University of New York
New York, NY, USA
Jacques Seguela
Chief Executive Officer
Salustiano del Campo
Roux, Seguela, Cayzac & Goudard
Professor
Paris, France
Catedratico de Sociologia
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Alexander Buel Trowbridge, Jr.
Madrid, Spain
President
National Association of Manufacturers
Hanns Joachim Friedrichs
Washington D.C., USA
Chief Editor ZDF, Tagesthemen
Hamburg
Federal Republic of West Germany
When she lays the egg, she deserves to cackle
When manufacturers produce a legitimate
right of the consumer to receive sufficient information
product, they deserve to advertise.
to make sound choices.
But that's not the way it is.
Libertad was formed to expose censorship.
Certain products are now totally or partially
We're here to defend the right to choose. The
banned from media outlets.
freedom to advertise our legally produced and lawfully
Why? Censorship.
distributed products without restrictions or barriers.
Censorship attacks two of our most cherished
Because in business, as in everything else, we
freedoms: The right of the producer to speak. And the believe in freedom of expression. You deserve it.
LIBERTAD
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
:
Does reading an ad take
more wisdom than voting
for the president?
98
This voter is 30 years old.
Well, not everybody. Certain people have
He has voted three times for the President.
determined what kind of advertising he should see.
He was in the army. He graduated from college.
And what he shouldn't see.
He's married with two kids.
Even though all the products involved are legally
He has a job. He's a taxpayer.
manufactured and sold.
He has a bank account and some credit cards.
Certain people decided to protect him.
Everybody think he's a sensible man, able to
Certain people don't trust his wisdom.
make his own decisions.
Certain people are still afraid of freedom.
LIBERT AD
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
Lock step and locked lips
In some countries there is no such thing as
Some people think that freedom of advertising is
freedom of speech.
not an essential freedom. But there are no "big" and
Where freedom is scarce, there is no free
"small" freedoms. All freedom is essential.
competition. Market laws are dictated by ruling
Sound, sensible companies who pay taxes and
bureaucracy. Every form of expression is
provide jobs for thousands of people must be allowed
severely controlled.
to advertise their legally manufactured products.
In our country, freedom is our right. It's part of our
Freedom of advertising is our right, an important
lifestyle. Naturally, we are concerned about restricting
freedom.
the freedom to advertise.
LIBERT AD
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
Censorship
extinguishes
the flame of freedom
Freedom is our most precious commodity.
Sadly, there are people who think they must
Freedom of speech. Freedom of communication.
control our freedom. They are imposing restrictions.
Freedom of expression. The essential ingredients for
Certain products that are lawfully produced and legally
freedom of choice.
distributed cannot be advertised in all media.
But censorship denies our freedoms. It limits our
Are you willing to compromise your freedom of
freedom of choice.
communication? Or would you rather be fully informed
Today we are at risk of losing our freedom of
on subjects that interest you?
choice because freedom of communication through
Join with Libertad. Our purpose is to brighten
advertising is threatened.
freedom of choice in advertising.
LIBERT AD
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
Censorship dims the mind
Daniels
The strength of a democracy lies in its informed
Censorship is insidious. It can begin with restric-
citizens.
tions on advertising.
Censorship - of any kind - weakens the fabric of
Be aware. It is happening now. Some products
a nation. Decisions are made for the people rather than
cannot freely advertise through all media although they
by the people.
are legally produced and lawfully sold across the nation.
Businesses reduce productivity.
Join with Libertad to brighten the light for free-
Innovators remain silent.
dom of choice!
Even artists hesitate to create.
LIBERTAD
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
Censorship hides under many names
CONDITIONS
Call it Restrictions.
Placing conditions on the type of media that can
Call it Conditions
accept legally produced and distributed products is also
It means Censorship.
censorship.
Restricting law abiding manufacturers and
Do not hide behind silence. Join with Libertad to
legitimate products from advertising is censorship.
remove censorship in advertising.
LIBERTAD
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
LIBERTAD
FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE
LIBERTAD 599 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 888-9522