WND: CBS Outdoor Bans Buys from $65,000 Billboard Initiative
As WorldNetDaily had begun their billboard campaign of buying up space to display the message, “Where’s The Birth Certificate?”, they now report that CBS Outdoor corporate has chosen to not accept money for billboard buys:
The company touting itself as the “world’s largest out-of-home media”enterprise has banned WND’s national billboard campaign that asks one simple question: “Where’s the birth certificate?”
CBS Outdoor, a division of CBS Corp. that sells more outdoor advertising than any other billboard company in North America, refuses to accept purchases of space on any of its 550,000 displays nationwide, media buyers for WND report.
The billboard campaign was begun last month by Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND, due to his frustration with media colleagues not giving attention to what he sees as critical questions about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility to serve as president.
“Here we have one of the largest media companies in the U.S. now not only refusing to allow news coverage of a vitally important national question being asked by millions of Americans, but one that won’t even permit the purchase of space to raise the question,” said Farah. “What is the value of a First Amendment in a country when this kind of self-censorship is at work – self-censorship specifically geared to stifle inquiry and debate about the most powerful person in the country.” …
CBS also owns one of the three major broadcast TV networks and radio networks, an online advertising division, television stations, Showtime and Simon & Schuster, one of the largest book publishers in the world. The billboard division manages $2 billion in annual revenues, according to company statements. It also boasts controlling more billboard space than any other company in North America, with 1,600 employees in more than 50 offices nationwide. It controls billboard space in every major American city.
“We are the premier out-of-home provider to outdoor advertising agencies in the United States,” the company’s website says. “In addition to our overall advertising agency client base, we also sell and service more out-of-home media to local clients than any other outdoor company. During the company’s seven decades, its sole focus has been providing the very best out-of-home media opportunities to marketers across the country.”
Farah says CBS obviously has a focus beyond making money by selling signs.
“CBS is a company that is not squeamish about feeding America’s children a steady diet of offensive movies, obscene rap music and even TV commercials that push the cultural and moral envelope,” said Farah. “But CBS is afraid to put up a sign containing four innocent words of constitutionally protected, non-inflammatory speech. You explain that to me. This is a giant media conglomerate unworthy of operating under the protection of the First Amendment.”
Nevertheless, Farah remains undaunted in his quest to post the eligibility issue on billboards across the country and insists CBS billboards are not needed to fulfill the mission. His media buyer, who had no opinion on the campaign when she became involved, says she has had her eyes opened.
“They (CBS) already knew about this campaign when approached,” she said. “Being involved in this campaign has not only opened my eyes but has disillusioned my faith in Americans standing up for what’s right and equal in the eyes of our forefathers who wrote the Constitution for this very reason. It has made me feel sad.”
The local account executive at CBS was shocked by the response from the top levels of the corporation.
“We just received an e-mail from CBS Corporate,” he wrote. “They are aware of this campaign and we are not allowed to install it. This came straight from corporate. Sorry!”
Launched just two weeks ago, the campaign has raised about $65,000 and begun erecting billboards that ask the question, “Where’s the birth certificate?” [emphasis mine]
At first glance, my libertarian streak compells me to say, “CBS Outdoor is a private entity and they have every right to choose the transactions in which they intend to do business.” On the other hand, businesses such as CBS Outdoor are facing certain ordinance fights over exactly how many billboards as well as what kinds of advertising they can put into a given geographical area.
So, even though CBS Outdoor can legitimately determine what ads they’ll allow, the real question is why they’re rejecting these buys. And if it is true that corporate was aware of this initiative, who else on up the proverbial food chain knew about this and maybe decided to squash it?
I agree with Mr. Farah and I’m glad he’s not stopping by any means. In fact, the billboard campaign is a very creative way to deal with a very controversial issue — controversial only for the fact that some do not believe this President should even be questioned. If there’s an encumbrance popping up here, we’ll find another way around it and proceed forward.
And in case you haven’t seen them yet, here’s the link to Mr. Obama’s background documentation that continues to be kept sealed from public view and here’s the link to what the eligibility issue is all about.
-Phil
HistorianDude,
I’m still awaiting the citations of law whereby the State Department grants presidential eligibility to candidates as a matter of course via a general election in America.
-Phil
Phil:
I have been consistent since at least August of last year that the US State Department were the official arbiters on issues of American citizenship, that they had published the standards for citizenship at birth years ago, that those standards were available to anyone who wanted to see them, and that Obama’s COLB met them perfectly.
The response to Strunk merely took this from being a general truth concerning COLBs to a specific truth regarding Obama’s COLB.
“Allegedly?” Forgive mefor asking, Phil. But have you not bothered to read the DoS response to Strunk? You published the link yourself. There is nothing “alleged” about what the DoS said. They said it. They said it under oath.
And this is where one starts to get the impression that you do not particularly care what is true. All that you seem to care about is maintaining a set of stock objections in order to sustain the illusion that Obama is not eligible. I have answered this objection no less than a dozen times by now.
The State Department has the authority to determine citizenship status. Presidential eligibility simply is an automatic side effect of that determination.
I will continue to make that point just as often as you continue to pretend it has not already been made.
HistorianDude,
Let’s say for the sake of discussion that somehow, some way, the State Department held the actual law that enforces presidential eligibility.
Why did you not share this long before the DoS’ response to Mr. Strunk’s lawsuit?
Frankly, I find it very convenient that you’re holding on for proverbial dear life to what the DoS allegedly said regarding the President’s background information only when this suit occurred.
So, since I really don’t think you know what you’re talking about, why don’t you simply produce the law that states that the DoS has the power and authority to determine presidential eligibility. That way, this entire issue can be settled once and for all and we’ll even have a law to which we can all point, to boot.
-Phil
Phil:
There does not need to be a “controlling legal authority enforcing the eligibility clause” to prove citizenship and birth. Because there already is a controlling legal authority for proving citizenship and birth, completely independently of anything having to do with POTUS.
That authority is the US State Department, and you know full well that:
1. Obama’s COLB absolutely and perfectly meets their standards to prove citizenship at birth.
2. They have also gone on record under oath saying that not just about COLBs in general, but about Obama’s COLB in particular in their response to Strunk.
That you are trying to deceive these nice people with this verbal shell game is indefensible.
Phil, I was not trying to enforce the eligibility clause. I believe that citizenship was already answered by the Supreme Court in Wong vs. Ark. My point is that the COLB is issued by the state of HI in order to prove birth and other vital statistics, and the information was gathered from a Birth Certificate that they have on file. Since Obama’s COLB indicates that he was born in HI, then he is a US citizen. I am not a constitutional scholar but I always believed that all US citizens born in the US were eligible to be President…
(Quote from the US State department website…)
“*A certified birth certificate has a registrar’s raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal, registrar’s signature, and the date the certificate was filed with the registrar’s office, which must be within 1 year of your birth.”
I believe that the COLB Obama presented has met the qualifications above which would make him eligible for a US Passport.
According to HI law 338.13 for legal purposes all certified copies are valid and what is states is prima facie evidence in a court of law.
President Obama has presented a COLB, which is a computer-generated document consisting of selected information from an original document that would have been filed around the time of birth, numbered and certified by the Hawaii Department of Health. The COLB is the “certified copy” form for live births currently issued by the State of Hawaii. Such forms are called a “certified copies” because the State adds a seal and signature certifying that the document is a true copy. This is just my 2 cents…
Good for CBS. They won’t promote lies even if they do lose some income. Good for them.
Black Lion,
Since there is no controlling legal authority currently enforcing the eligibility clause, I’m not sure how you made that determination.
-Phil
[...] CBS Denies Billboards Tags: birth certificate billboard campaign, Citizenship, Citizenship, Government, US Political News [...]
Civis naturaliter natus, let us examine your comments further…
It is obviously inaccurate, because no one even has offered to show a Birth Certificate. Yes, Farah was on a learning curve and back then did not even know the difference between a BC and COLB.
How do you know it is inaccurate? WND themselves stated that the COLB was legitimate. So is WMD lying? Or did they make a mistake? They have never issued a retraction to that article so we can only assume that they stand behind the claims they made in it. Farah was not on a learning curve back then. That was only 9 months ago. WMD has been in existence for a while, at least 5 years. There is no difference between a BC and a COLB according to the state of HI. Their statute states that if you request a BC all you will get is a COLB, which is the “certified legal equivalent.”
Any document forgery expert who examined the COLB could only determined if it was an authentic COLB, which says nothing about the authenticity of the information therein.
If the COLB is authentic then the information contained in it is also authentic. You can’t have it both ways. It was certified by the state of HI, signed by the Supervisor of Vital Records, and had the stamp of the Seal of the state of HI. So they are certifying that the information is correct.
But any expert who sees as COLB and says its a BC is an ignoramus…
Then you need to speak to the US State Department and the Department of Motor Vechicles for all 50 states, because a COLB is all one needs to prove citizensip and birth.
Phil, Good rebuttal. I can accept your point that it all hinges on the COLB being legitimate. I only wanted to point out that WND did make the statement that the COLB was legitimate. So as far as WMD is concerned I have an issue with their new initiative.
CBS Outdoor’s refusal will raise more $$ for the campaign. Hopefully Mike Savage will mention this on his program.
Black Lion,
I’ll start in reverse order and then go from the top…
I’ve already stated that WND can speak for themselves regarding anything they’ve posted; I merely state my opinion on my blog.
Please see above.
This is, of course, assuming that the COLB is legitimate. There are also questions of who requested the certification and when (it would be great to see the record of the transaction).
Let’s assume for the sake of discussion that the COLB is legitimate. I would say that while a COLB is perfectly useful for certain purposes in the United States, I don’t think it provides detailed enough information to determine presidential eligibility.
Assuming that the COLB is legitimate, I would agree. However, the question isn’t one of differences; it’s one of the amount of information available.
Firstly, I have a copy of an arbitrary 1961 Hawaiian birth certificate and it shows far more information on it than a current 2007 COLB shows. Secondly, the State of Hawaii doesn’t just go about producing documentation for the sake of producing documentation, what with privacy laws and such. Someone at some point requested the COLB; I’d like to know who did.
-Phil
Jon Galt,
The point of the link was to show that companies such as CBS Outdoor are actively fighting for the right to expand their ad presence however they can. Therefore, the idea that they’d reject an ad buy is highly likely to be a political and not a financial push-back.
-Phil
Phil, I am not sure of what you mean in your response. I mean WND claimed that the COLB was legitimate, meaning that the information on it is legitimate and correct. Are you saying they were wrong? The COLB states that he was born in Honolulu, meaning he is a US citizen. A COLB is a state issued summary of an individuals birth certificate. Plus according to the law of the state of HI you can only get your COLB as proof of birth. The 1961 BC cannot show any differences because the COLB is a summary of what is on the actual BC. So the 1961 birth certificate does not matter because the COLB is the same as the 1961 long form for legal purposes and WND did claim that the COLB is “authentic”.
Phil remember they wrote that. They never retracted the story. So they must stand behind what they wrote back in August. Now they are behind this campaign to ask the President to produce a document that they have already authenticated (the legal equivilent) as legitimate.
You cannot know if there are any differences because you have not seen the 1961 BC. However the State of HI has and they have issued a COLB with all of the necessary information for us to know if Obama was born in HI or not. The points in your argument of the differences do not take into account that the state of HI issued the COLB and it states that he was born in HI. I will keep repeating that point because WND has already said that the COLB is authentic.
WND are either the worst news agency around because they don’t know what they are writing or they are lying. Either way I would not rely on any truthful information from them. Phil, I know you like a debate but even you cannot defend them on that one.
Regarding the old WND report:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=73214
It is obviously inaccurate, because no one even has offered to show a Birth Certificate. Yes, Farah was on a learning curve and back then did not even know the difference between a BC and COLB.
Any document forgery expert who examined the COLB could only determined if it was an authentic COLB, which says nothing about the authenticity of the information therein.
But any expert who sees as COLB and says its a BC is an ignoramus…
Black Lion,
In my opinion (and WND can speak for themselves), WND is going after the original 1961 birth certificate for the purposes of helping people decide on whether or not the President is eligible for the office.
However, any comparison between a given 1961 Hawaiian birth certificate and the online/paper certification of live birth will show obvious differences in information available.
Again, as I have repeatedly pointed out on my site, there are differences between a 1961 birth certificate from Hawaii and the alleged 2007 certification of live birth.
As I’ve demonstrated, I think you’re operating based on a faulty premise. Further, if people were arrested for fraud based on knowingly promulgating alleged dis/mis-information, the Judiciary in this country would be tied up for the next 100 years purely based on such cases.
-Phil
Jon Galt,
However unfortunate that it may be, there is nothing unconstitutional about a President being a Marxist, Communist, or what not, as these conditions are not part of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5. Furthermore, Congress and the President can pass pretty much anything they want; until someone actually enforces the Constitution via the Judiciary, it is still law, even if you or I think something is unconstitutional.
-Phil
On the other hand, businesses such as CBS Outdoor are facing certain ordinance fights over exactly how many billboards as well as what kinds of advertising they can put into a given geographical area.>>
=============
Baloney and not applicable
1. Not all of the “Where’s The Birth Certificate” billboards are digital
2. Los Angeles is banning only new ones. That means no more building of billboards. It does not mean that when billboard space becomes available that they will not try and fill an existing blank billboard. During these tough economic times I have seen a number of blank billboards generating no revenue.
Phil, you do know it is disingenous to quote World Net Daily as a legitimate source of any kind of information. They verified Obama’s Birth Certificate back on August 23, 2008 in a article by Drew Zahn link below. I have exerpted a portion of the article:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=73214
“A separate WND investigation into Obama’s birth certificate utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic. The investigation also revealed methods used by some of the bloggers to determine the document was fake involved forgeries, in that a few bloggers added text and images to the certificate scan that weren’t originally there.”
So the organization that is behind the billboard initiative back in August indicated that the Birth Certificate was authentic. It seems to me that Mr. Farah and his WND bunch is lying. Most of the stuff that they write on that site is misleading at best, but mostly wrong. But to act like they never wrote this aricle is ridiculous. It seems to me since they are soliciting donations for this initiative, which they know is untrue, maybe they should be arrested for fraud. BEcause if they authenticated the BC, then they know that he is eligible and that they know where the BC is. I would like to see someone defend WND on that one.
I don’t care if he is Muslim. Marxist ideals >>
==============
Phil:
By the very fact that Hussein is a Marxist he is implementing programs and doing things while stting as POTUS that are unconstitutional.
So how can you care whether he is Constitutionally eligible to sit as POTUS but not care that what he is doing as POTUS because he is a Marxist is unconstitutional?
To quote Jim Healy “you have a hole in your screen door”
Pete,
Fundamentally, as John Adams (I think) once said (in my own words), the Constitution was created for a righteous People; it is wholly inadequate for any other type.
That being said, I’ve noticed that we Americans generally have two sets of qualifiers for a President — one is practical, the other is constitutional.
For the practical qualifications (this is typically what the press in the way-past used to be very good at vetting and would typically lead to the other qualifier type), we would ask about issues such as what you bring up. Then, the American people would decide whether or not they wanted a person of such-and-such morals/ethics/life experience background to represent them.
For the constitutional qualifications, virtually every election has had someone who is (1) at least 35 years old; (2) a 14-year resident; and (3) a natural born citizen.
The constitutional qualifications have conventionally been almost assumed. Since it is next to unheard-of that someone would challenge the presidential eligibility clause, virtually all major political parties simply have a one-page document that simply allows the candidate to merely state that they are eligible.
Obviously, the big issue is why is the press so afraid (or insert favorite descriptive term here) of questioning this politician.
-Phil
As posted everywhere possible on the Internet today:
Get this out to everyone you know!! TODAY!!!
http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6216
What are you waiting for??
(And YES, this includes YOU – Hannity, Boortz, Beck, O’Reilly, Limbaugh)
And also everyone reading this, yet not acting, not talking, not getting this information out.
PLEASE bombard your local small town newspapers with this, your small local radio stations, your big city newspaper editorial pages, letters to ALL editors, anything AND everything you can do – and that you MUST do if we are to save our nation!
Please don’t just rely on others like http://www.800poundgorillamedia.com/ or even Ed Hale on Plains Radio – HELP them, and do everything YOU can think of, get creative, and get this ACCOMPLISHED!
Now, this week, immediately!
Stand up and speak out in your church this week, post this in every church bulletin, make a flyer and put in on cars in parking lots, and STOP this unlawful theft of our country!
Stand up for America, and speak out!
We have to get this DONE and NOW is the time, not next week, not next September or in 4 years, but NOW, this week!
Let’s have a real July 4th celebration!
Please, patriots, please…..
And whatever you’re already doing, thank you, but you know you can do more, and NOW IS THE TIME!
Last night, Hannity spoke out finally and vehemently that Obama IS destroying America, so let’s get this to the next step, without any further delay, and every one of you reading this CAN do something to help.
You know you can, so do it.
Let’s get this ACCOMPLISHED!
Maybe the next effort should be sky writing it might be not last as long as the billboard but I know I go by billboards and not read them but I will always try to read what has been written in the sky, as I am always looking for signs.
Phil,
CBS has the right to not do business with anyone. That being said, refusing to do business with individuals because they believe the POTUS may not be eligible says everything. Party and POTUS before Country and Constitution. Every American, and I do mean EVERY American, should support that documents be released to settle this issue.
I will make a prediction here, that the Democratic party ideals of: Party and POTUS before Country and Constitution, and win at all costs even with foriegn money, will result in the inevitable destruction of the United States. The continued escalation and further slide into the abyss has begun. I will further predict that this will probably be a violent end, with significant bloodshed.
The news media has become nothing but propaganda, more and more people sense this. The exposure of Obama’s records is a fulcrum point for those still patriotic to the ideals of freedom and the Constitution, and those that believe in control of the masses. No rational person would have refused release if the documents were available.
That is why I don’t really care if Obama is homo, bi, or heterosexual. I don’t care if he smokes pot and does cocaine in the past. I don’t care if he is Muslim. Marxist ideals annoy me, but if a Constitutionally controlled country, it can only go so far. I do care if he is Constitutionally ineligible for the office that he holds.
The news should be just that, the news. Obama’s background is the NEWS and CBS, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, NY Times, LA Times Reuters, and FOX should be out getting and presenting the news. Suppression, spin, and withholding information is propaganda. Propaganda exists to keep corrupt governments in power, NOT for ‘we the people’.
I think all government officials should submit to drug tests…starting with the phony president on down.
I think we should boycott any company that uses CBS outdoor. They think they can just keep putting the screws to us and we will get mad, get over it, and go on with our lives like nothing happened and we will continue to make them richer. They need to see that there can be consequences for their actions. They have the money and influence but there are a lot more of us than there are of them.
How sad this has become. This is a complete media blackout and is getting scary.
No TV or disinformation
No Radio
No Print
not even billboards
the internet is getting scrubbed daily and he has passed executive orders to protect his bona fides.
the msm is not allowed to ask him questions. And he has even made his own news to give out to the media.
If they go for the fairness doctrine we will be in complete control.
To top it all off, our own DOJ has decided that it is illegal to not allow illegal aliens to vote in GA. And they are trying to get a sherrif for enforcing the law.
What has become of our country? Is there anyone out there except the Constitution loving tinfoil hat wearers that care?
How many readers here think that an impartial observer, who knows that CBS is banning these adds, that the White House Website for comments on eligibility is erasing threads on this issue, and that O’s lawyers refuse to cough up a Birth Certificate and that O’s own spokesman refuses to answer directly a question about the BC refering himself only to the COLB, calling it a BC, would make this impartial observer doubt the citizenship of the President.
If it was only a case of the NBC controversy, I myself do not think that would justify all this obfuscation, because those who hold that O meets that requirement could argue that there is no binding definition or legal regulatory authority. No it must be more than that to merit such obfuscation….
I ASKED A FRIEND OF MINE WHO OWN’S A SMALL
RESTAURANT THAT HAS A SMALL “LIGHTED” BILLBOARD
IN THE FRONT IF HE WOULD “ADVERTISE”.. “TEA PARTY SPECIAL”
ON MONDAY’S PAY ONLY 1/2 TAX.
IT WORKED GREAT FOR HIM… HE SAID HE MADE OUT WELL, AND THAT
MANY CUSTOMER’S WERE CURIOUS WHAT IT WAS ALL ABOUT..
I’LL ASK HIM TO TRY PUTTING ON HIS SIGN, “WHERE’S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?……AND SEE WHAT HAPPEN’S….