TV Networks Fight Drug-Ad Measure

Recently, proposals have been made to "tax" advertising of prescription pharmaceutical drugs. Said to aid the economy in its current state of recession, the plan to eliminate advertising as a deduction for large companies is seen as a threat to American jobs by the major television networks.

Networks argue that eliminating such deductions will amount to millions of Americans losing jobs and result in a tax on advertising.

The House Ways and Means Committee Chairman, Charles Rangel (D., N.Y.), backs the plan and argues that if it is not accepted, the U.S. will be further indebted $37 million over the next ten years.

If companies across the nation, or even the globe, decided to reduce advertising on a grand level, we'd find a large sum of money available for problems plaguing lower and middle-class people, and the starving and sick.

With the issue of the cost of pharmaceutical advertising spurring from a failing or swaying economy, it is easy to take a step back and examine the wide world of media, marketing and advertising.

Especially in the United States, extreme emphasis is placed on developing and maintaining clientele and profit. The executives and presidents of large companies should place less weight on selling for a dollar, and more weight on making a difference in the world in the form of research, contribution and proactive intervention.

Understandably, it is childish or naive to assume that advertising agencies will utilize payroll in underdeveloped countries in the sake of humanity. But it is insightful and logical to assume that these companies can cut down on advertising and focus more on the well being of mankind.

After all, becoming more involved in the community creates good press and will be remembered. Sometimes good deeds can go further than a flashy package or catchy jingle.