American Morning

Tune in at 6am Eastern for all the news you need to start your day.
May 7th, 2009
09:23 AM ET

Erectile dysfunction ads too hot for TV?

Rep. Jim Moran wants to limit the time of day ads for erectile dysfunction medicine can air on TV.

Rep. Jim Moran wants to limit the time of day ads for erectile dysfunction medicine can air on TV.

From CNN's Bob Ruff

You’ve all seen them. Those ubiquitous TV ads where a simple little pill transforms a man suffering from erectile dysfunction, or ED, into a virile tiger who puts a smile on the face of his now beaming wife.

Well, Representative Jim Moran (D-VA) has seen them too, and you’d be hard pressed to see a smile on his face when he talks about the ads.
“A number of people,” he says, “have come up, including colleagues, and said I’m fed up. I don’t want my three or four-year old grandkid asking me what erectile dysfunction is all about. And I don’t blame them.”

Enter H.R. 2175. That’s a bill that Rep. Moran introduced last month that would prohibit any ED ads from airing on broadcast radio and TV between 6AM and 10PM. The bill advises the Federal Communications Commission to treat these ads as “indecent” and instruct stations to restrict their broadcast to late night and overnight hours.

So, could it be adios to all of those “Viva Viagra” commercials that play on network television on weekends and during the evening? Could the same be said for the Cialis couple sitting in outdoor tubs looking out at the sunset? And could Levitra also be shunned to the overnight hours?

CNN asked Pfzier, which makes Viagra, the first pill available by prescription to treat ED, what they thought of Rep. Moran’s bill.

"Pfizer is committed to responsible advertising... In line with our policies and the policies of the industry, Viagra advertising is aired in shows most likely to reach men suffering from erectile dysfunction. ED can be a signal for other serious medical issues, including high blood pressure, diabetes and cardiovascular disease."

We asked several people on the streets of Atlanta for their opinions.

Nikia Clark, a mother of a 2-year-old, thinks "it’s a great idea.” She’s concerned that as her child gets older, she doesn’t want him “seeing those kinds of commercials... on regular network shows.”

Janice Habersham agrees. She says while the “ads are tastefully done” they shouldn’t be aired at “the time when children are watching TV.”

On the other hand, Bruce Jackson says ED ads “should be run 24 hours a day.” And Louis Tesser says banning the ads “is clearly unconstitutional... it’s a viewpoint. It’s something that people are interested in, and you can’t change that.”

Rep. Moran does have some perspective on the issue. “While it’s not as important as the economy, or what’s happening militarily around the world, it is an intrusion into the quality of life that we like to experience.” He says that his bill is “a shot across the bow” of the drug companies. “You know enough is enough. This is inappropriate.”


Filed under: Controversy
soundoff (501 Responses)
  1. Eric

    This is another example of people shifting their responsibility as parents to other people. First we have to try to out-law porn on the Internet. Then we have to make TV G-rated from 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM. Now we have to censor commercials for legitimate medical conditions? I would argue that if your child is watching broadcast television at 9:30 PM on a school night, then your child is old enough to watch the commercial. And if your child asks, “What is ED” you can simply answer, “I’ll explain it when you are older.” If your child doesn’t know the meaning of the words, then why care if they hear them? If you are too embarrassed to listen to the words, TiVo everything (or use your VCR) and skip the commercials all together.

    Don’t infringe upon my rights to view the legal material I want just because you aren’t responsible enough to monitor your child’s activities. Don’t expect the government to be a surrogate parent.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:28 am |
  2. JJ

    ED television advertising is a disgusting vulgarity. I HIGHLY SUPPORT Rep. Jim Moran in his effort to get this removed from TV!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:28 am |
  3. JJ

    How about getting rid of all ads?

    In this day and age, who needs them? What's wrong with word of mouth. Most TV shows today only have about 10 minutes of content. The rest is either a product or service ad, a recap of the previous show or a preview of the next show.

    With 200+ channels available it is still nearly impossible to find any decent content.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:28 am |
  4. John

    I agree, enough with these adds during prime time.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:28 am |
  5. Candace

    I find these ads ridiculous also. As a female, I am also offended by the female personal products commercials. They are embarrassing and offensive now. There is also a pregnancy test commercial that states that it is "the most advanced test stick you will ever pee on". That's not necessary and certainly NOT amusing. If the comercials need to be on tv, show them after midnight.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  6. Michelle

    I think ALL pharmaceutical ads should be banned from TV. Medical decisions should be made between a patient and doctor. Tell your Dr. your symptoms and let your Dr. decide what, if any, medicinal treatment is appropriate. If I need cholesterol medication, for example, why should I tell my Dr. I want Crestor (or whatever) just because the commercial "reached" me? Let my Dr. decide which one is most appropriate for me!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  7. UncleWalty

    2 wars with no end in sight and an economy that's cratering, and THIS is what the guy is upset about. Unbelievable.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  8. Jan

    I am appalled people are asking to legislate commercials to avoid having uncomfortable conversations with their children. Its your job as a parent, not the government's job, to raise your children properly. Your children, and mine, are constantly exposed to information we'd rather they weren't. Instead of trying to stick their heads in the sand, have open and honest conversations with them, spend time with them and teach them a strong set of values.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  9. sc

    wow, if this is the worst of your problems, you are one lucky person. How about focusing on an actual problem. And why are so many people against educating our children about normal human conditions? Children aren't stupid, they'll find out about these things before some parents want them to no matter how much they shield them. I'm for educating them so they can mature knowing real information to help them make the best choices. That seems a lot better than letting them practice what they hear through word of mouth with their friends. There are kids that believe that if you jump up and down after sex, then you are less likely to get pregnant......

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  10. Michael

    Fine if people want to whine and complain about ED commercials I want all the tampon and "Feminine itch" commercials gone to because I don't want to explain to my child why the nice lady on tv has an itch only a cream will solve....... Wake up people be more of a parent and monitor what your kids watch......last I checked there are no ED ad's on Nickelodeon or the Disney channel....

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  11. Rich

    This is the pressing issue in America that garners Rep. Moran's time? More government regulation?! 😐

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  12. Robert Selvam

    Its about time! The ads really disgust me. Hope this law passes. Damn the Pharmaceutical companies ? Have they lost their morals !

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  13. really offensive

    I agree with B Morris (May 7th, 2009 9:47 am ET) except for the "CHANGE THE CHANEL" part. I personally find most perfumes, including chanel, olfactory offensive and don't see how changing one brand of perfume would help avoid irritating commercials.

    Speaking of which, to be economically viable to the companies running them the commercials need to play during times when their target audience is watching so if you don't want your children watching potentially adult commercials, you shouldn't let them watch potentially adult television shows.

    But back to offensive things that need to be banned, can we do something about others olfactory offenses – I often times can't choose not to be around some of these people who bath in perfume – so, can we ban perfume?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  14. kay

    lol – Bill, I don't disagree with what you've written – parents do need to have a strategy in place for dealing with these things. But I have to tell you. DisneyTV, ABC Family, etc. are just as bad as the regular TV channels. There's no way I let my 6 year old watch ABC family in the evenings. Waaaayyy too much sexual content.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  15. Hoss

    I AGREE fully... i do not think that these ads should be aired... I have two daughters that are at the age of "questions". They and other kids should be thinking about growing and being kids. They should not be shown on TV thngs that (i feel) would cause them to grow up faster and get "curious" about things at a young age.
    I pray that this bill / law / ban gets passed.
    Thank you soooo very much...

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  16. Michael, Dutchess Cty, NY

    My God...this guy really thinks kids listen to these commercials?

    Why, even with his admitting that we have greater problems to face than this, is he trying to rule on something like TV ads about erectile dysfunction?

    The ads are as harmless and any tampon commercial. They show loving couples, not sex-starved individuals!

    Gimme a break, already!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  17. Dan D.

    A good idea – pass the bill.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:27 am |
  18. Babs

    I hate these ads. Every time I see one I get mad. Any Doctor can give a man enough information to deal with ED just as a woman's Dr. can give a woman the information needed to enhance their lack of sexual drive. But wait, is there as much help for woman as there is for a man? Heck no. Get these cry baby commercials off the air. It makes me sick to see these poor grown men whinning about their sexual disfunctions when woman are completely ignored. It's like it's only a man's world out there. What really ticks me off is the inference that if a man is up then automatically the woman is fullfilled. Let's look at the real picture in many cases. It's not just about the man. In all fairness woman should be demanding the same amount of attention for similar incapabilities. It's not just about men...woman count, too. Without us what would your Viagra be worth?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:26 am |
  19. Duane

    I fully and firmly agree with the idea to ban ads of this type. They are tasteless, offensive, should be for adult only audiences, and just one more reason to ban all ads in the field of pharmaceutical products. They do increase the cost, and deceive the public when added into the otherwise valid cost of research and development. Hah! Market development is not a valid part of their highly publicized work done for the benefit of all mankind. Ban them all. It was bad enough when only the doctors were the object of marketing efforts.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:26 am |
  20. James

    If you have an erection lasting more than 4 hours, seek immediate medical attention. Lol.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:26 am |
  21. maria

    I agree with we don't need to see these commercials. There are plenty of others we don't need to see either. Like the feminine products. All women know they need them they don't need an advertisement to let them know.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:26 am |
  22. Mike@suckstobeyoublog.com

    I am a liberal and open-minded as they come. But I wholeheartedly agree with the passage of this bill. I can't even watch a football game with my son without getter nervous about one of those spots coming on.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:26 am |
  23. Liz M

    You know what fun is...........getting rid of these ads. No matter how
    classy or ragged the ads they are just plain annoying. We got it, okay.
    There are pills for everything and this topic seems more appropriate
    in private with a doctor. Get rid of them, pleeez.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:26 am |
  24. Kevin

    Count me in for support! Far too often during morning TV programs or early evening TV programs I've had to quickly turn the channel because an ED commercial has come on while my young sons are in the room. The commercials are usually subtle about the benefits of the medication, but not so subtle that an intelligent kid will start asking "what's that". Those are questions that my young boys shouldn't have yet.

    If one were to believe all the commercials we see, almost every man has some form of sexual dysfunction and needs a pill, you have high cholesterol and unless you take this new drug you could croak at any minute, or medication X will make your life free of allergies. Wow, we must all be completely miserable if we need this many pills just to stay alive and enjoy life!!!!!!

    Personally, I feel that prescription medication advertising should occur between the drug companies and medical professionals. I think patients should be informed, but it seems preposterous for a patient to walk into the doctors office and tell the professional what he/she should prescribe. I'm biased on this topic because in the early 80's my father died while talking a drug called Oraflex, which was the first drug ever marketed directly to the consumer. Oddly enough, that drug was pulled from the shelves 6 months after it's introduction due to multiple medical complications and deaths. Let the medical professionals decide what the patient needs, not the influence of TV commercials.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:26 am |
  25. barbara

    I don't like the ED ads any more than I like the sanitary napkin ads. Let's do away with both.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:26 am |
  26. Louis

    Why not ban tampons ad, dog food ads, anything PMS, baby food ads. Do you get the idea? Let's keep everybody in the dark and vote Republican. Many guys have benefited from ED meds and ladies wipe the goofy smile !

    May 7, 2009 at 10:26 am |
  27. Will

    I notice he didn't say anything about all the Victoria Secret ads on TV.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:26 am |
  28. Scott

    It is a medical condition. I don't see what the problem is.

    I don't want to see those ads with the crusty old woman and their calcium supplements.

    Not really, but its the same thing. If your kid asks, tell them its an illness that older adult males get. The end. And by the time they are six or so, they will know all about getting erections.

    Ban them from time slots designed for children programming. This is a free country. If a company wants to advertise for a legal and safe medication, then we should not be able to stop them.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:26 am |
  29. Kita - Miami, FL

    TO PJ:

    PJ, that's the whole point: there are people who are not grown up and are exposed to these commercials. And liberal as I am, I do think they should be limited to appropriate times.
    Now then, I absolutely agree that there are more important issues at hand but government doesn't work on one issue at a time; by definition, government is the ultimate multi-tasker, so don't worry about the important issues – they are not being neglected.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:26 am |
  30. Tom, Long Beach, California

    and the birht control ads

    May 7, 2009 at 10:25 am |
  31. j2

    There are only 2 countries on the planet that legally allow pharmaceuticals to be advertised on broadcast media...New Zealand and the US. Perhaps it is time for us to pull ALL pharmaceutical ads from broadcast, like the rest of the civilized AND uncivilized world and stop marketing these to "end users" of pharmaceuticals thus compromising our already fragile health care system. If a person is so convinced that he or she needs a drug that they see on TV, they will continue to seek out a doctor who will prescribe it, causing more claims to be filed, more office visits to pay and higher and higher premiums. does anyone ever remember seeing ads for rosuvastatin (crestor)-like drugs in the 1980's? Nuvarings, ED, hell, even preparation H, etc are inappropriate for broadcast media at all times, as they are in 99.5% of the rest of the world. Stop marketing pharmaceuticals to the self-diagnosing, self-medicating hypochondriacs that we have become, and let our actual trained health care specialists actually dispense them as needed to where needed as most countries do.

    my $.02

    May 7, 2009 at 10:25 am |
  32. Mary McQueen

    Thank God I'm not the only one who finds these and other commercials the height of distasteful. No one needs to hear this stuff – and I'm just an old fogie I guess, but I live by a higher standard and will cease watching tv if this doesn't alter.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:25 am |
  33. jen

    Why are people so offended by the human body?? ED, menstruation, sex... it's all a part of life. If you don't know how to talk to your kids about these topics in an age appropriate way, maybe you shouldn't have had kids in the first place. The body and the things that happen to it as we mature and age are not things to be ashamed of or embarrassed by. This bill is stupid and a waste of time. I'm glad he's not my representative!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:25 am |
  34. onaniy

    Throw out the TV, it's the main problem. That's how they infiltrate your brain until there's nothing left of it. Until nothing left of us and US, physically.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:24 am |
  35. Jeff

    Oh, give me a break. If parents executed their parental duties properly to begin with, then we wouldn't need Big Brother Government telling us what to watch and not watch on TV. I've got news for Mr. Moran - Johnny and Susie are watching salacious tripe on MTV2 because Mommy and Daddy are too busy with their own lives to care. ED ads seem pretty tame in the grand scheme of things.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:24 am |
  36. Tom, Long Beach, California

    we need to do the same for female hygiene products then

    May 7, 2009 at 10:24 am |
  37. M.M. Finally!

    It's about time...the ads are out of control and taking all the enjoyment out of sitting down with the family to watch TV in the evenings. I'm sure they can come up with others ways of flooding their message...just stay off TV!! Please....enough is enough.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:24 am |
  38. cardmaker

    I think it is a wonderful idea. They should pull all of the ads that have anything to do with sexual activities. That is a very private matter and should be kept private between two people and in their own home.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:24 am |
  39. GT

    I don't like them because they raise my husband's expectations of our relationship to an unrealistic level. He thinks every couple except for us acts like that every day.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:24 am |
  40. anonymous female

    I turn the ads off. I am tired of hearing about men's private parts.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:24 am |
  41. Johannes

    Just another example of the oversensitivity of the US culture. Please, turn off the tv if you have a problem w/ it.

    Let's shelter our kids in a bubble their entire lives, and let rumors be the way they learn about life.

    Instead of the financial crisis, an endless war in the middle east, failing school systems, Representative Jim Moran is talking about this.
    God help us all.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:24 am |
  42. Laurie

    It seems every time one of these ads comes on, I am watching TV with my father in law....uncomfortable!!

    I vowed never to watch a Superbowl again after (it seemed) 90% of the ads were for these products. It is inappropriate and offensive. I

    May 7, 2009 at 10:24 am |
  43. Michael Beausoleil

    Seriously? Thank you for Jim Moran for wasting you time as a public official. Do you think any men want to see any feminine product ads? Or pregnancy test ads. Matter of fact, I don't want my child asking me why women shave their legs, so can you remove those ads too? When I read magazines I no longer want to see cigarette ads, I don't want my children drinking soft drinks, so remove those unhealthy ads too. If companies are paying to advertise, just be happy they are paying. In a struggling economy you want to do this?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:24 am |
  44. Muriel

    I'm sick to death of these commercials. Feminine hygiene products too. Damn! If you have a feminine problem or erectile dysfunction, see your physician! Duh? Why the silly ADS? Give us a break!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:24 am |
  45. John

    I don't see a problem with answering kids questions about ED. I don't find the Viagra, Cialis or Levitra ads as offensive, but do find those ads that encourage the use of products that are sold and hit youir credit card every month as a nuisance. If you ban ED ads, why not also ban ads on femine protection products. Who wants to discuss periods with their kids?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:23 am |
  46. Dave

    ED is an illness, or at the very least the symptom of a possible illness. Are we that repressed that the thought of a couple having sex puts us into a tizzy? If we want to eliminate advertising that is offensive, let's start with the penile enhancement ads, and then start working on the ambulance chasing laywers!!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:23 am |
  47. szmarie

    I go along with everyone here who says ban the ads, but include in the ban those ads that are embarrassing to women as well. Women have had to put up with those ads for years – the latest in the offensive string being the asinine :"have a happy period" ads. Of course it just goes to show that there is most definitely still a double standard in this country – nothing gets done until a problem touches on the men and their "boys."

    May 7, 2009 at 10:23 am |
  48. Chris

    It's not the ED ads that need to go, it's ALL prescription drug ads. If you look at all the other ones, they're for products or services that you can simply go out and buy. Real estate? You can buy it. Food? Sure. Tampons? They're gross, but if you want them, go for it. Advertising services? Provided you can afford it. Viagara? Cialis? ? Nope. That one's controlled. Why should they be advertising something most people not only don't need, but cannot just go get? It turns people into armchair doctors and undermines not only the practice of medicine, but also the (hopefully) good judgement of doctors. by having laymen coming up with their own diagnosis based on goofy ads they saw on TV.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:23 am |
  49. David

    I see all the christian right wingers are on here as usual. I guess they never want to any medical problems solved in their lifetime. I'm sure none of them have ever had an sexual problems, ooops I forgot they don't have sex on a regular basis. Don't parents tell children where babies come from? Maybe some day one of these children will find a way to fix a lot of the worlds medical problems. You never know. It's not like they are showing people having sex on TV. It's a good thing you don't live in Europe. They are much more open about things of this nature and think nothing about it. We in America try to shield our children so much that they get in trouble later in life because they have to find out what we don't tell them.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:23 am |
  50. LC

    Why is your tv on during dinner?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:23 am |
  51. judy statz

    its about time, but not only the e.d. ads, but the newer ads for sex enhancing creams and lotions. its bad enough that every other commercial is for feminine products but I really can't stand the "Smiling Bob" commercials, double bath tubs out in the middle of nowhere and the idea that a little pill will take care of all your problems and if the pill doesn't work, buy the ky jelly that heats up and you'll see fireworks,,,,,,,,,,,puleeze

    May 7, 2009 at 10:23 am |
  52. FINALLY!

    Jeremy, you're an idiot. That's a great way to raise a child. Lie to them. Oh, I'm sorry – that's probably the way you were raised. Hmm. Maybe that's what's wrong with you.

    These ads should absolutely be banned to late night. If grown men don't know that these drugs are out there by now.....

    You can't hit the mute button fast enough. And even if you could, you get, "Why did you do that? What are they saying? What are they talking about?" from the kids. Just makes them want to see the commercial even more.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:23 am |
  53. Donald S. Hardy

    I agree 100% that the ED ads should be removed. I think they degrade manhood and cause men to use the durgs when they really don't need them. The promoting of the problem is createing a problem. I find the ad's of very poor taste and not necessary except to sell the product. A man should talk to his doctor about ED and the Doctor should advise him. By the way I am 71 and have no problem

    May 7, 2009 at 10:23 am |
  54. mark

    if you actually look at these ads and listen to the warning signs, they actually educate the populace on health issues! think of the 40's/50's guys that can't afford decent health care and hear that the cause of their ED might be a sign of Diabetes and decide to go get checked out (because there's nothing more important to a man than his "buisness"). this would also drive guys to go to the doctor to get their "buisness" fixed and when the doctor checks them out he identifies Critical underlying problems. if you people can't talk to your children and explain (in whatever manner you choose) the commercials, THAT IS THE REAL PROBLEM with this country, not some commercial.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:23 am |
  55. Kraig

    Can we ban the "Free Credit Report dot Com" also? The songs are annoying and its NOT free.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:23 am |
  56. Markstripes

    While it can be argued that it would be more appropriate to air these adds when fewer children are going to be watching television, I believe that, if children are old enough to ask, they're old enough to know. This is a medical condition, and there is nothing indecent about it.

    Also, they're not banning alcohol, tobacco, or firearm adds, and these products present a much greater threat and are far more dangerous than ED treatments.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:22 am |
  57. Kevin

    While your at it, why dont you ban most of cable television which does not even try to hide its very open sexual innuendos, or blatently shows nudity or other risky scenes and violence constantly. You can not even watch ABC FAMILY with your child any more without commercials and or movie trailors that express sex, violence, and horror at some point. Erectile Disfunction to me is the least of our problems with what comes through our television. My 6 year old watches the disney channel and for the most part it is great, but even now adays it has more topics on skipping school, gossiping, lying, partying. We have allowed television to bend all the rules on what is appropriate and what is decent. I am not saying we should ban TV, I am man enough to explain things to my kids when asked (and do it appropriately) Or to change the chanel when something inappropriate comes on. So ED commercials seem like such a PETTY argument in my book. In my opinion human bodies and functions are more real and acceptable than someone planting car bombs or shooting someone up which is far more rampant on our televisions.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:22 am |
  58. Rich L

    If you do that then you better get rid of all those tampon and maxipad ads too. How do you explain that to a little one?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:22 am |
  59. Jordan

    I don't have a huge problem with the ED ads, although I don't have children and can certainly understand why parents would be upset.

    What I don't understand is why sexually suggestive commercials for products that have nothing to do with sex are so easily allowed on the air. Have any of you seen the latest Quizno's ad, where the sandwich oven is asking the employee to "put it in me"? "Say it sexier David....no, sexier." The innuendo is disgusting.

    I also remember a few years back a minivan ad where two male neighbors are outside and one asks the other if he and his wife are interested in "swapping". The confused neighbor thinks he's referring to being swingers with each other's wives, but of course, he's talking about trading the minivans for a day.

    It is completely irresponsible and shameful that these types of ads are permitted to air during daytime and primetime hours, especially when the product or service is totally unrelated to sex.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:22 am |
  60. Dave V

    It's sad that in the 21st century when sex or bodily functions are ever brought up, anywhere, that people throw a hissy fit. Figured we have progressed beyond the Puritan days. Why this is still so taboo is beyond me. Wish we got the criminals instead of the Puritans like Australia.

    If you don't want your children to see these adds, turn the channel to Nickelodean (spelling?) or Disney, or turn the TV off and make your kids to some outside activities. The TV is not a parent, you're suppose to be, so start acting like one and quit blaming everyone else but yourself.

    Oh, and teen pregnancies are high because our government only invest millions in abstinance programs where a high percent of those kids will not use a condom when they have sex, and yes they will do it, shocker I know. At least Planned Parenthood teaches about condoms and abstinance.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:22 am |
  61. Scot

    If you truly feel that ads like these should be banned, then They all need to be banned. I'm a guy and don't need to or want to see all the feminine Hygene commercials. I don't need them, so why should I ahve to watch them. Women know how and where to find these products if and when the need them.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:22 am |
  62. pete

    why is everyone so afraid of sex?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:22 am |
  63. J Morgan

    Just this week I was watching TV with my husband as the ad with the Jimmy Stewart-esque man and his wife were talking about how "fun" it could be if his penis was a larger. They were hyping "Extenz." "I can't imagine watching these ads with my parents," I said.
    This plethora a penile enhancement drags has reached over saturation. It is part of an even bigger problem of drug pushing that is going on in television ads. What a nation of hypocrites we are if some drugs are illegal and give law enforcers the opportunity to shuttle the young of to prison, but manufacturers of drugs have free reign to push their product hourly while we sit watching "Law and Order" and the Sunday news shows.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:22 am |
  64. lisasuel

    THANK YOU JIM MORAN!!!!!!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:21 am |
  65. teresa english

    Can we include the new Burger King Sponge Bob square pants ad in this bill? All of these commercials are so pushy with their inuendos and I ma glad someone is fighting back. Although...I thought that was what the FCC was paid for....

    May 7, 2009 at 10:21 am |
  66. Oldtimer

    Don't just stop with ED advertisements. ALL pharma ads should cease at any time of time or night as should ALL ads for lawyers! Also, throw in feminine hygiene products, underwear and any other excuse of an ad to overemphasize sex. Loose dentures and bowel issues while unpleasant ads are certainly not provacative. Heck, now even hamburgers are trying to be sexy with BK's square butt commercials. Any company that hard up deserves to have reduced sales! Bottom line is to clean up TV and billboards and while I am certainly not a prude, advertising has gone too far in using sex in trying to raise social issues through public awareness.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:21 am |
  67. Donna

    Oh, Big Brother! This country has far, FAR more important things to worry about. If you don't like what's on the TV, don't want your kids to see, change the stupid channel – that's what the remote is for. Or better yet, turn the idiot box off and read to them. Wow, what a concept, taking personal responsibility (I just explained to mine what it was about – her response back then? "Eeeeewwww." Now, she just giggles.) I'm more offended at feminine hygiene commercials that make natural female body functions seem like the end of the earth (although, keep the birth control ads! Ladies, if he needs help to get it on, you may need help to keep from paying for the consequences.)

    May 7, 2009 at 10:21 am |
  68. JWalk

    Has anyone noticed that with the state of our economy the vast majority of major companies have really scaled down their advertising except for a few companies and the pharmaceutical selling ED meds? It seems that ED drugs are recession-proof and obvioulsy making the pharmaceutical companies lots of money in order for them to be the big advertisers for the major sporting events. They will spend millions to fight this bill. Our children are our future and the last thing our teens need to think is that their sex life has a limited time frame. I can just hear the come-on line, "Pretty soon we'll be like those people sitting on the beach in bath tubs"...

    May 7, 2009 at 10:21 am |
  69. Matt Shine

    Personally, I think all drug company ad's for new medications should not be aired. People should learn if a medication 'is best for them' by their doctor. People who needs specific meds also tend to do enough research to know what is out there and what is coming down the FDA pipeline.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:21 am |
  70. Sheila Murdock

    I think ALL prescription ads should be banned. I thought it was the MDs who should be prescribing medications. With all the expenditure for advertising, no wonder the drug costs are sky high with consumers picking up the tab!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:21 am |
  71. Michael Sawyer

    Sure, why not. We should bring in experts from China to help implement this bill. Afterall, who else knows better the wonders of state controlled media content than the Chinese.

    Of course, the consumers could organize petitions and threaten boycott to the networks and try to remove the ads on thier own, but then again, that would require them to get thier lazy (butts) of the couch and do something other than watching TV for a change.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:21 am |
  72. Pat

    Banning these commercials is unconstitutional! Do they run during children's programs? If so, the problem is with the paring of shows with commercials. If you ban or restrict the times of one type of commercial then you have to ban or restrict the times of others for example, tampon, the pill and condom ads, etc. Too bad Rep. Jim Moran has to deal with reality! He is not the only person in this world and if he likes or not the worlds a changing.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:21 am |
  73. kaylon taylor

    I hope this passes. I told my husband not to long ago that i was so tired of watching these ads. Every movie, TV show has these ads. I think it is a disgrace to have these and other ads like them on TV. This country has turned into something that our forefathers would not approve of.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  74. Lisa

    Hallelujah! Someone with some common sense is trying to get some guidelines in place for when these types of adds should be aired. My daughter is 16 and we have a great relationship; we talk about all topics, including sex. However, even we get uncomfortable when those adds appear as we're sitting on the couch trying to enjoy some family time. ENOUGH!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  75. Bunny

    Enough is enough. While not a prude, I am very tired of seeing these ads played over and over again. While your at it, maybe someone can pull the Burger King Square Butt commerical too?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  76. Chris

    Yeah, these ads are far more dangerous to America than the numerous shows the center on violence.

    I don't know, but maybe these old geezers could use some of the drugs advertised in these commercials. Maybe it would loosen their sphincters just a tad... /shrug

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  77. Peter S. Flynn

    About time! Good for Jim Moran. These ED ads are just another example of how the liberal progressives of this country are trying to erode the moral and ethical codes (written and unwritten) that helped make this country the icon that others used to look up to for moral guidance and leadership. I truly believe that the decline of the USA's image in the world is in direct proportion to the licentiousness that has been allowed by the media and the courts to take place over the past 25 years.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  78. ap2000

    After hearing my 11 year old singing "Viva Viagara", I too felt that these commercials are inappropriate for family time viewing. Yes, we can explain to our children about ED- something that has absolutely NOTHING to do with them- but we shouldn't have to.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  79. supernova02

    Seriously? THIS is what we're worrying about? We should be able to talk to our kids about anything, ED is no different..its a medical condition not an advertisement for porn. If you can't handle a conversation about ED, how are you ever going to explain sex to your 3rd grader who was just exposed to it at school or elsewhere?

    I would be more in agreement with banning the ads for reasons relating to safety of the drug or the tiresome list of side effects every drug we're presented with comes attached with....or better yet the amount of money these drug corporations are making because they jack the prices up to insane amounts that most can't afford anyway.

    Let's focus on things that matter like our crappy healthcare system...if you don't like the commercials, change the channel.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  80. Frank

    Add a rating to comercials and allow your content blocker to filter them out.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  81. russ

    It can't be that in the 21st century we're still a race of puritans sewing scarlet letters on every reference to sexual content. Knowledge is power. An ad for ED can be an opportunity to explain in an age appropriate way the medical factors involved. Who knows, if the interest of the child is piqued, your four year old could end up a future doctor.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  82. charles edge

    While you are at it, lets remove all the tampon commercials, condom commercials and the victoria secret ads run during the family hours. Let's bring back clean tv for our kids. There is not enough censorship in this country and that is why our children our getting involved in sexual activity earlier and earlier.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  83. Eric Jensen

    Do these geniuses have a problem explaining high cholesterol to a five year old? I'd love to hear how they do that. Then, doesn't the kid get scared his heart will explode if he eats more string cheese?

    So, why is it that you can't explain biology IN ALL FACETS to your kid? Oh yeah, I forgot about America's idiotic Puritanical reaction to anything that involves sex.

    The reason *TO* get rid of these ads is the same as *ALL OTHER* medication ads – doctors should be telling you what you need to take ... and then you should be smart enough to question their every word ...

    ... because there is a decent chance they haven't read the research because they are looking at their finances like the rest of us ... trying to figure out why Congress botched that job just like they stupidly let every drug ad be on the TV. We can't advertise "hard liquor" or (admittedly moronic) cigarettes so that people can execute their rights of free choice, but we can throw hundreds of different pills at them so they can choose what chemical junk to stick in their pie hole? Only in America!

    Nice job (again) Congress!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  84. gerald

    Conservatives hate government and yet they constantly try to use government to advance their idiology
    The old time conservatives were right; get government off of our backs and leave us alone.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  85. Bob W

    I can't believe this goon. Perhaps his name is mispelled and should be MORON.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  86. peter

    PERFECT! Move this country back in the right direction. I am liberal but want morality to make sense. Drug companies are as bad as banks and oil companies. Why have anyone shove products down our throat because they have the money and yes what about the kids? and what about all of us who keep our privates private! We have a voice too, shut it up! Thank you Mr. Moran for taking on a subject that may mean something even if it is to the normal little person! ~~~~~~~~Onward!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  87. Darren

    This sounds more like a Republican ilk kind of initiaitive...Support business gung ho all the way to environmental destruction but any mention of natural human sexuality ban the ad or drop support for the business. I don't like the ads but that is freedom of advertising.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:20 am |
  88. Dustin

    I thought ED was a medical condition. So if we cut these advertisements go ahead and stop commercials that pertain to breast cancer awareness. Americans need to grow up and focus on other things like obesity in children, exercise for adults and proper nutrition. If you don't like the advertisements turn the tv off and read to your grandchild!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:19 am |
  89. EarGrayHot

    I agree the adds are annoying and, frankly, stupid. Since when did a couple sitting side by side in two bathtubs watching the sunset become synonymous with sexual activity, anyway? But these adds are hardly as sexually suggestive as numerous other things we all see daily on TV and really, this IS a medical condition for which these drugs do apparently work-that is a documented fact.

    Does it get guys over the embarrassment they might feel about the condition? Maybe, but again, people need to be more open in discussing such matters with their actual doctors. That is really the message the drug companies should push rather than individual drugs. Really, parents should be prepared for questions about sexual matters anyway and not give the impression there is something wrong with asking.

    All in all, the adds for ED are not nearly as appalling as the adds for Enzite and the creepy characters in them. Enzite has no medical value or effect and its producers are in trouble for their claims. Adds for crackpot cures like Enzite should be banned from advertizing across the board.

    People with any kind of medical problem should discuss it with their doctor, not wait to receive instructions from a TV add..

    May 7, 2009 at 10:19 am |
  90. mina

    LOL, i think the people who want this change took it very personal....maybe they have ER-dysfunction. Personally, i would not mind at all expalining to my child the realities of our biological body...it's educational. maybe i would have been more convinced these folks were trying hard to ban all "innapropriate" ads if they had reacted the same way towards the highly innapropriate car commercial, or Subway commercials (oh..12 foot long sandwich", or the "Seafood commercial" with the "take your top off" or the "Arby's commercial made in bed" or the AX deodorant commercial, the list goes on.......so stop pretending, either fight all or don't fight.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:19 am |
  91. Al Iglesias

    I was under the impression that I was the only one that felt that way.. thank god someone has common sense in government. I have been talking to my family and friends about how annoying these commercials for months and they they need to placed after 10 or 11. They appear to be on every 10 minutes or so. My wife kept saying I can't change the world...well I guess if enough people speak to the right people we can be heard. I have nieces that are 10 and 4 who are glued to the TV set when they visit me... I don't need to hear "Uncle Al ...what does that erectile dysfunction mean?". Pharmacuetical companies have enough money to air these constantly now they need to have respect for their fellow man and families and limit these to appropriate times. I am not a prude but I don't need to hear the word erectile dysfunction or erection lasting more than 4 hours 10-15 times a day ..365 days a year.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:19 am |
  92. Augusta Wind

    OH GROW UP!!!!! Send the lil ankle biters to bed or make them do their homework....what are they doing parked in front of the tv anyway

    May 7, 2009 at 10:19 am |
  93. T Bower

    Yes! Let's turn the country and TV back to the black and white days of "Father Knows Best" and "Leave it to Beaver" and make sure Mom and Dad are only shown in separate beds!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:19 am |
  94. Mary

    THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU Someone is finally taking this on. But let's not stop at TV ads...what about the radio ads???? Talking about "improving width and thickness"??? You've got to be kidding me!! This is being aired here in Cinn. in the middle of the day!! Enough already. P.S. I don't have little kids to worry about hearing this or seeing this. Let's just have a little decency ok?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:19 am |
  95. JC

    Why doe drug companies tell us to ask your doctor about drug "X"? Is it becasue it is a good product or they just want the sales?

    Doctors are educated daily by sales reps on the benefits of each new drug. Let them decide which is the right product for us.

    Seems to me a person with 8 plus years of trainig and experience is in a much better position to tell me what is the best medication than a 30 sec ad on TV that discloses all the risks in very small print for a few seconds.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:19 am |
  96. Myth Buster

    Being offended is being offended, there are no gradients. If I find something offensive that you think is silly is it any less offensive to me. So if you find something offensive and I think it is silly is it any less offensive to you. The point is, if we start removing things that people find offensive there will be nothing on the tv, because everything has to potential to be offensive to someone. 14th ammendment provide equal protection, make a law to remove offensive material you find offensive, then you have to remove material I find offensive. Well I find church and religious material offensive, BAN IT TOO!!!! If you think I am the only one that finds it offensive, you are fooling yourself.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:19 am |
  97. Kathy Cleary

    GREAT! Thank you, thank you, thank you Representative Moran! I hope this bill passes!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:18 am |
  98. Brad S.

    I say ban all pharmaceutical ads!

    I'm tired of big pharmaceutical companies trying to influence consumers to convince their doctors that they need the latest drug for their problems. The decisions should be made by the doctors who can research how these drugs affect us, not half-informed consumers saying "No! I need the Red Pill now! I saw this ad!"

    Try this next time: CLOSE YOUR EYES when a drug ad starts. LISTEN to everything, ESPECIALLY THE SIDE EFFECTS. The pretty bee flying around, the smiling happy people, the flowers, the guys playing instruments... they are all designed to distract your mind from the nasty side effects these drugs could cause. You might be surprised what you missed in that list.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:18 am |
  99. that1guy

    Actually, any idiot parents who can't speak frankly with their children about basic sexual matters in order to prevent them from developing into repressed fetishistic pretzels (like most of the Con crowd) deserve to just explain erectile dysfunction as 'Daddy's disease'.

    However, as many other posters have noted, it makes enormous sense to just ban ALL prescription drug advertising. The general public has no need to ask their physicians to give them certain drugs based on snake-oil pitches. It's irresponsible, insulting, and wasteful; let them use their profits to lower drug costs & increase R&D for new drugs more socially beneficial than impotence cures instead (malaria & AIDS cures, anyone?)

    May 7, 2009 at 10:18 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6