FC: Bob Barr attacked over online "animal porn," from Washington Post

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

Background on Bob Barr and that heated crush fetish debate:
http://www.politechbot.com/p-00574.html
http://www.politechbot.com/p-00667.html

-Declan

> From: [JL]
> To: <declan () well com>
> Subject: Would-be "Animal Pornography" Censors Attack Bill Barr
> Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 16:16:24 -0700
>
> Politics
> By Ben White
>
> Sunday , October 22, 2000 ; Page A18
> Drop in on most House races this year and you will encounter a familiar set
> of issues: prescription drugs, education, Social Security. But head down to
> Georgia's 7th District in suburban Atlanta, home to fiery Republican Rep.
> Robert L. Barr Jr., and you will find a far more unsettling matter under
> discussion: Internet animal pornography.
> The controversy began last October when Barr vocally opposed a federal ban
> on the sale of videos depicting animal cruelty. The measure, which passed
> overwhelmingly, was targeted at the online trade in "crush" videos, films
> depicting small animals stomped underfoot by women in high heels.
> Barr said such videos already are banned under state law and required no new
> federal regulation. Supporters of the bill said the videos are often sold on
> the Internet, to which state laws do not always apply.
> Last week, Humane USA, a political action committee affiliated with the
> Humane Society, bought $10,000 worth of time on Atlanta cable stations to
> air an ad criticizing Barr on the issue. The ad includes a snippet of a
> crush video in which a hamster nuzzles up against a woman's high heel.
> Atlanta cable stations refused to air the ad, saying viewers might find it
> offensive. At least one cable station also received a letter from National
> Republican Congressional Committee general counsel Donald F. McGahn that
> said running the ad might violate federal law. Which federal law exactly?
> The very one Barr opposed.
> "By continuing to air this ad, your network is placing footage of animal
> cruelty in interstate commerce, which appears to be illegal," the letter
> states. "As such, you may be held criminally liable."
> Reg Griffin, spokesman for AT&T Broadband, the largest cable provider in the
> district, said the ad was pulled for taste reasons, not because of the NRCC
> letter.

[snip]




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology
You may redistribute this message freely if it remains intact.
To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------