E-mail this story to a friend Have comments? Send them to the editor. Printer Friendly Version Subscribe for Free!

Page 2 of 2

The Department of Advertising at the University of Texas at Austin, tells us, "…the First Amendment, places constraints on government repression of speech. Advertising is recognized by the courts as a form of 'commercial speech.' Commercial speech has been defined by the Court as speech 'which does no more than propose a commercial transaction.' Although the courts never have recognized it as being as valuable as some other forms of speech, commercial speech is protected by the First Amendment."

So, what to do about all this? Should the government ban all Direct To Consumer Advertising (DTC) of drugs? Unfortunately, that's not possible - because advertising is also considered free speech, and we can't deprive the drug companies of their right to speak, that is, to advertise.

If DTC advertising can't be banned, what can be done? Could the FDA counter the drug companies' hype by educating the public to the fact that most of what is beamed our way is not intended to educate, so much as to scare potential customers? I don't know, but my sense is, don't count on it.

Nothing sells like fear, and marketing drugs directly to consumers is based on fear.

---

NOTE: Read more of Harris Sherline's commentaries on his blog at "opinionfest.com."

--------------------

Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.

>> Back -- Page 1 2

++ Discuss this topic in The Forum

Current rating: 5.0 out of 5.0 (4 total votes)