From PR Watch:
A coalition of unions, women's and health groups have been granted intervenor status in a case in which CanWest MediaWorks is seeking to overturn the Canadian government's ban on direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA). The groups argue that if CanWest is successful it would push up healthcare costs and undermine the sustainability of the Canadian healthcare system. CanWest is arguing that the ban on DTCA is a violation of their right to freedom of expression. In an analysis of the case, Colleen Flood and Michelle Zimmerman from the University of Toronto Faculty of Law, warn against assuming that the court won't decide in the media giant's favour. "In order for the current legislation to be upheld, courts will need to be persuaded that nothing short of the existing limits on DTCA would allow the federal government to achieve its other pressing societal concerns, such as protecting patient safety. This will be a difficult task," they wrote.
SOURCE: NewsWire, November 6, 2006
Drug ads generate billions of dollars in the USA, but at a cost to the public. Running the ads in Canada will benefit only the corporate interests of pharmaceutical companies and the giant media conglomerates who profit off of the advertising revenues. Let's hope the public interest wins out instead.
1 comment:
Here is one more example of that shameful fraud known as the corporation as "fictitious individual". Originally rights were only for genuine living beathing individuals, but then in the 1880's a fraudulent law was passed in the US by which corporations were now deemed as individuals and therefore had the same rights as you or me. Thus, these crooks could howl that their "rights" were being infringed upon if a government or sdome other agency tried to stop them from making publicity etc. One more thought. I remember hearing that about 50% of the costs of Big Pharma go to advertising. (No advertising cheaper drugs?)
Post a Comment