Lobbying Ads or Commercials

Aardhart · #1 07-13-2006, 01:49 PM

Considering that the WSOP, WPT, Celebrity Poker, and other shows get great ratings, why aren't there commercials during televised poker advocating viewers contact Congresspeople. Every .net advertiser and the networks themselves should pay for the advertising, because they all have a lot to lose. If people can't access poker sites, the boom will dry up. For every 5 .net commercials, Party Poker or Full Tilt should pay for a PSA.

poorolrich · #2 07-13-2006, 01:57 PM

First of all .net sites are non-gambling sites so for them to get involved just might cause them problems from our Government in getting players to their .net sites. Lets face it, the only reason they advertise their .net sites is to get people to sign up at their .com (gambling) sites. Why cause potential problems??

Aardhart · #3 07-13-2006, 02:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Lets face it, the only reason they advertise their .net sites is to get people to sign up at their .com (gambling) sites.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's exactly right, but I don't see why that would make lobbying less likely rather than more likely. The websites advertise, and advertise heavily, to get people to sign up. They only profit from .com sites. If internet poker becomes illegal and can be stopped, the websites profits will drop drastically and they will stop advertising. If people can't play online, they will also watch less poker.

I doubt that anti-poker legislation can withstand an organized lobbying effort involving the viewers of TV poker. There is a lot of money behind TV poker. Why isn't any of it being used to mobilize the viewers? Three ads per broadcast saying "Congress is trying to outlaw internet poker; if you oppose this, please contact your Representative and Senators" would kill the legislation. Why isn't it being done?

poorolrich · #4 07-13-2006, 06:22 PM

can't answer that--Read Gamboolman's post on the relpies he received. I, personally, am waiting for the Senate to officially receive the bill then I will start writing my two Senators although I don't think it will do any good here in Texas. By the way, I read last week that the Committee Chairman as givine the O K to let the Bill go straight to the floor rather than spend time in the Committee. I hope this is not true because the more time this Bill takes to get to a vote the better shot we have that time will RUN out before Congress ajourns.

Benjamin · #5 07-13-2006, 06:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I, personally, am waiting for the Senate to officially receive the bill then I will start writing my two Senators although I don't think it will do any good here in Texas. By the way, I read last week that the Committee Chairman as givine the O K to let the Bill go straight to the floor rather than spend time in the Committee. I hope this is not true because the more time this Bill takes to get to a vote the better shot we have that time will RUN out before Congress ajourns.

[/ QUOTE ]
That makes it all the more important that we contact members of that Committee now! Hmm, where was that list? We should try to ensure enough interest in the debate at that level to hold it up. Surely that Chairperson doesn't have sole authority to send it straight to the floor?

I recall that Elizabeth Dole is on it, IINM. I'll be calling her tomorrow.

B.