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?

[cnn-photo-caption image= caption= "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. tjf67

    Thats fine while they are at it they should ban the quit smoking adds. They are just disgusting to look at.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:18 am |
  2. james

    all prescription drugs should be banned from advertising if they have to pay for it and then pass the cost on to us causing health care to spiral out of contral.lets cut the cost of all medication for everyones sake.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:18 am |
  3. Mark

    ED is a medical condition that is treated with medication. You dont hide medical facts or conditions from children. I have 3 yo twin girls and answer honestly any questions they have about anything. There is nothing wrong or "evil" in what a husband and wife share with each other.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:18 am |
  4. Paul

    If it is a commercial that makes me feel uncomfortable sitting in the room with my mother or 11 year old daughter then I don't think it is appropriate! Yes it is a real problem for some, but that doesn't mean you should show people sporting a hard-on on TV...let's use a bit of discretion please and keep it to late night TV.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:18 am |
  5. John

    Reposted for truth:

    "If you don’t know how to handle answering questions to a 3 or 4 year old on erectile dysfunction then you’ve got more problems than that.

    3-4 year old kids will believe anything…tell them whatever you want! You can tell them it’s a new kind of medicine to help grandpa feel better, you can tell them that erectile disfunction is when you have a problem erecting a building, whatever…make something up!

    ORRRR you could just say “it’s something that happens when you get old…much like Mr. Moron..oops…moran.

    This blatent censorship is stuipid…we’re not in the 50’s… 90% of TV shows have more questionable terms than some dude on the screen for the enzyte commercials.

    SOOO STUPID.. I can’t wait until these elderly people are out of office. There should be a limit on the age….40-60 for govt. positions, then you’re kicked out. We need a more progressive croud."

    May 7, 2009 at 10:18 am |
  6. Kristina

    This is rediculous. If you think that the ED commercials are not appropriate then what about the STD commercials? And the Feminine product commercials?

    Unfortuantely some people only get information on medical conditions and things of this nature from watching TV. People in their situation may feel alone and like they are the only ones with the problem, and unless it is put out there they will always think that and their relationships will suffer.

    also if your children are up until 10 or 11pm then there is an issue. School is early in the morning and children that aren't young enough to understand what sex is and what ED is shouldn't be up past 8 nevermind past 9!!

    Honestly, people that think their 13 year old kid doesn't know what sex is or what ED is then they are naive, and need to realize that sex ed is taught in the 8th grade when kids are 12!

    Basic developmental sex ed is taught in the 3rd grade when bodies start changing!!!

    TV is an area for free speech. And if you start limiting the time at which commercials can be shown then you are stepping on the first amendment.

    And i'm sorry but if your going to limit those then what about the telephone dating commercials and the e-harmony commercials.

    Honestly aren't there better things he could be putting his time towards?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  7. Y. Murphy

    It's about time that someone is speaking up about these terrible, poor taste commercials. And while we're at it, lets do away with all of the ‘feminine products’ commercials too!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  8. Keith

    If you don't like it then flip the channel like everyone else. How can lawmakers spend time/money on BS like this with plenty of REAL problems (i dunno maybe education, health care...i hear there might be some issues with the economy) to deal with. How about those clowns try an old fashioned corporate tool called the Cost/Benefit Analysis and get back to me with how much of their job is spent on useless garbage.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  9. JB Johnson

    Thank you!!!
    Mr. Moran for taking the initiative to do something about these ads!!!
    I agree... Contain them to late night.

    from someone in the Advertising Industry

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  10. NYgirl

    I am outraged that politicians spend their time on policing TV commercials while there are much more important problems around us. Plus if you believe that ED adds not apporpriate for your child then perhas your child should be watching Disney channel or other kid oriented network I know for a fact they do not have these type of ads.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  11. Tom

    Damn, I don't like the ads...Especially, during my dinner, but don't be such an almighty leader of Government and "BAN it ALL!" because it hurts someones feelings....they have only been airing on television for years now!!! I am not in the mindset of banning commercials to suit a certain group of people-maybe 25% want them banned because it offends...while 50% don't care and the rest of the percentage of the people don't waste their time by even watching t.v......

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  12. boadicea

    I agree. I hate those ads, and I hate the feminine products ones too. Besides being annoying, the topic is inappropriate.
    I have two kids who are old enough to start asking what it means, but still too young to need to know.
    And its not like we are seeing these while watching some primetime show (that may be considered not for children anyway) – but we are seeing them while watching shows like mythbusters, or dirty jobs or whatever...
    Considering that every person in America has seen those ads at least 1,000 times, the drug companies should feel confident that they've gotten the word out. We get it, you have something for ED. Great. Now shut up about it.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  13. Bill

    Let's ban stupid legislation. Of all the things we have to worry about in the country at this time...

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  14. Joanna

    All the ads are NOT tastefully done. Has anyone seen the one where the guy is dressed as santa clause – who now has a "sack" full of confidence after his pill popping? All the women are waiting in line to sit on santa's's like a commercial for a porno! Not cool, not cool at all.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  15. Shan

    I am 28 years old and I agree that these "ED" commercials should be banned. They are lame, cheesy, uncomfortable and corny. I for one am tired of being bombarded with sex. No I am not "against sex", I just wish people had more common decency, discretion and respect for one another. And also this stupid "just change the channel" (it's nearly on every channel) or "babysit your kids"; well I don't have any kids, just nieces and why should I have to worry about running back into the room to change the channel??? Why should the entire nation be subjected to a man's impotency problem?????? He obviously knows what problems he has and he can go to a doctor or specialist without any prompting by advertisers. And also for the record, I am also sick of all the rest of the prescription drugs commercials as well.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  16. Eric Roberts

    Why don't we ban people who suggest bans. To those who find it embarrassing, get over yourselves. Act like an adult. I read where someone is sickof sex because of have some serious issues. Get some psychological help. Kids are not damaged because they hear about sex. It is a natural function. What needs to be banned is this lame and psychologically damaging puritannical attitude we have towards sex. Lets get over it folks and get our heads out of the Victorian era and into the 21st century. We have much more import things to worry than your discomfort and prudishness in explaining sex to your kids. Maybe you should try some out and get goes a long way to relieve that uptightedness 😉

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  17. Walter

    Ban them at all times of the day.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  18. Priggish

    Great. Can we ban the tampon commercials as well. Also, I think it is disgusting to have commercials regarding constipation. Drippy noses also irk me. Come to think of it, I am sick of seeing any commercial about any bodily function. Tell Grandpa Moron (sorry Moran) to "lighten up Francis!"

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  19. StiffySteve

    There's no greater libido-killer than a pompous politician moralizing about erectile dysfunction. It's just weird listening to these people like they know what's best for everyone else and society in general.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am |
  20. John

    This country has such a huge hang up about sex. Sex is a normal part of life and needs to be demystified. Move on to something more important, please.

    ...and what about those annoying (and much more prevalent) commercials regarding tampons and periods? Should those be pulled as well?

    John P.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  21. BARRY G

    Another blow to freedom of speech. I don't like the ads but that doesn't give me or anyone else a right to ban them. We are supposed to be living in the land of the free, but that ship has apparently sailed. These days when someone feels uncomfortable about something the first response is outlaw it !!!! (no matter what our constitution says) just ban it and make it go away.

    Here is a novel idea, if you don't like a commercial CHANGE THE CHANNEL. Censorship is spiraling out of control and needs to be stopped. If your worried about kids seeing these ads you might as well have them start living in a plastic bubble because there are a lot worse things in the world than these stupid commercials.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  22. Fred

    If the ad is inappropriately filmed is one thing. Information, on the other hand, concerning male issues is not only important, but vital to a healthy education. It's not the ads that should be banned. It's the attitude toward certain male-related issues that should change.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  23. Patrick

    How about pulling all ads for things requiring a prescription? We're all drugged up enough and doctors have to fight through the misinformation we all get from TV ads to actually treat us correctly.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  24. jim

    Ban them alltogether. My wife and I are so sick of them. They are embarrasing and should not be on .....speaking of which ban all the ads from the drug companies!
    We use the mute button or change channels, we dont wish to hear any of it anyore. !

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  25. BigDoggie

    Get rid of 'em! The main reason being is that it gets rather tiring seeing the same damn ads over and over and over for EVERY SINGLE COMMERCIAL BREAK in some telecasts. I can't understand how so much money can be spent on the advertising for these medications. One side benefit of this law is that maybe the price per pill will be cut by 80% with their advertising costs so diminished.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  26. Henning

    FINALLY someone who does something about the stupid ED ads during prime time. I am tired to explain to my young children what ED is and how you can have an erection that last longer than three hours. While the medication may have its place and people have the right to be informed about it, it should not be advertised during prime time.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  27. Alex

    I agree with Mr. Moran.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  28. david

    You people are a bunch of morans.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  29. Augusta Wind

    OH GROW UP!!!!!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  30. Mathilda

    Who let this guy into the party? 🙂

    Oh no! You're kid might ask you an 'embarassing' question!?! So you take it off tv, then the kids can't ask you, instead they ask their teachers, peers, etc? That's lazy parenting. Buck up and quit making other people parent your kids.

    The throwback to our old Puritan ways cracks me up sometimes. Sex is so taboo. No wonder teen pregnancy is so high.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  31. Kevin

    Seriously, it's just a commercial... If you're feeling awkward about topics involving the human body and sexuality, then really you need to grow up some. Having honest and accurate conversations with your teens about sexual behavior will benefit them in the long run.

    Most of America needs to lighten up and realize that banning everything isn't a public service or a moral good. Talking to your kids and discussing how media can influence them however is a public service.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  32. DMR

    I am sick of the ED ads. Yes, they are inappropriate for family viewing. Expanding on that issue, I am against any and all advertising for prescription drugs. It is the physician that decides what drugs are proper for the patient, no a drug company ad. Originally these ads were informational and that may have been good. Now they have gone off the radar into fantasy land.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  33. NANCY

    I'm tired of seeing these ads on television. If a man has a problem, go to the doctor. A doctor can tell him all about the benefits and side effects of these drugs. I feel that this is a personal issue and should be treated as such.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:16 am |
  34. Jeremy

    They should also ban Maxi pad and tampon commercials who wants to hear about a womans bleeding problems while they eat dinner

    May 7, 2009 at 10:15 am |
  35. KAB

    I think that we over shelter our kids to the point that they will never gain the knowledge needed to deal with Life as it really is. Sexuality is a problem only for those who can't accept that it is one of the few Natural, god given pleasures we have in this life. The ads are responsibly presented. You have the choice to change the channel if you don't like it, or if the kids are present. I don't see any ads on kids channels. There are rarely any ads on during the day.

    Stop using kids as an excuse to censor sexuality. Where did this Puritan attitude come from anyways? Take responsibility for your kids and give them some sexual education. Let them ask the questions that need to be asked from parents.

    Mr. Moran is running for Governor in Virginia. I think he needs to stick to the issues if he wants to get elected!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:15 am |
  36. Ian

    I no way should these ads be banned. They are geared toward adults, sure, but they are also only shown during shows that kids should not bewatching in the first place. Do you let your 4 year old watch CSI, or ER, or even daytime soaps? I hopoe not. I am so sick and tired of people blaming what is on tv. DON"T LET YOUR KIDS WATCH THE SHOWS. I mean, every channel on tv could show porns, does that mean that my child will watch them... heck no. Use parental locks, only allow stations that show rated G shows. That way, the problem is solved.
    It is not the ads faults that your kids see these ads, it is the parents fault for allowing them to watch. Take responsibility for you actions, stop blaming the world and look at yourselves!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:15 am |
  37. Larry Barnes

    Why is it wrong to talk about ED and perfectly OK to show, close up and personal, dead bodies, horribly mutilated or burned, or on the autopsy table with all their insides showing? Ref: any CSI. Maybe what we should teach our kids is: Sex – good, murder – bad.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:15 am |
  38. dayancara

    These ads would be better on late night TV. It's not the same in my opinion as tampax ads, since explaining to a young person what ED is lands to the question 'what's a four hour erection and why is that bad'? etc. I'm far from being a prude and use these products because of my age, however I don't think the grandkids need to here the facts of life from me, thats up to their parents. I feel the younger you teach the 'facts' to kids the better, but in a way thats age appropriate. But TV is not the way to do it. The biggest problems in American society is the mixed messages about sex. Morals say 'careful or bad' and everything around us(TV, mag ads, billboards, Las Vegas, movies, music) say 'go for it'! This is unhealthy and crazy making for young people. And if you don't think your two year old is affected by this, just look at the YouTube video of the 1year old acting out his Preacher. Were a very conflicted society, perhaps thats just an unfortunate outcome of being an open society, but my European friends think were nuts, I agree.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:15 am |
  39. Forrest Lowe

    It is not up to congress to decide what is "indecent".

    Why is this bill aimed at banning erectile dysfunction ads during certain hours, and not KY ads, or tampon ads?

    "Indecent" is in the eye of the beholder, and an individual, or group of individuals should not have the right to impose their interpretation of indecent on the rest of American citizens.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:15 am |
  40. cabinessence

    If you pull ED ads, then these should be pulled as well:
    1. birth control
    2. monistat
    3. Summer's Eve
    4. Vagisil
    5. tampons
    6. sanitary pads
    7. pamprin
    8. bikini wax products
    9. ky "sensitizing" gel for women
    10. FDS
    For years, anything and everything about women has been shown on TV and not only is it embarassing (and sometimes untrue), imagine explaining all these items to kids who are watching TV and are curious.
    BAN ALL WOMEN PRODUCTS ADS....geez, half of these products women don't even USE or NEED (it's all marketing ploys).

    May 7, 2009 at 10:15 am |
  41. C Colon

    Grow up people! These ads are extremely subtle and non-suggestive and very few people even notice them. There have been ads for feminine products bombarding us at all hours of the day and night for years and frankly I find some of them more offensive than the commercials for ED. We should air some of the commercials that play on European TV and you would all realize just how tame and subtle American TV is. What are you afraid of that you will have to talk with your children about basic human behavior? Perhaps if we were more open and honest with our children they would understand more about their bodies and sexuality. We avoid discussing human sexuality with our children, but allow them to be exposed to violent video games and movies and TV shows without one thought as to how these will affect them. I think we have more important we should focus on in this country without more useless legislation from fearful prudes about brief commercials on our TVs. Our children are exposed to much more harmful visions and lessons in their everyday lives than they are from a few commercials about ED. I would hope Congressman Moran has a few more pressing issues on his legislative plate than ED commercials.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:15 am |
  42. Kevin

    Here it goes again, lawmakers pushing their moral values on the population. Tell me America, why is it that we are so concerned about "protecting" children from something that is a natural process in human life? Sex that is? These children will have to learn about sex education when they are 7 and 8 years old in school yet we would rather have them watch movies and tv shows with violence and blood and gore? Wake up America! You are letting your country turn into some place where we need to have every corner cushioned and blindfold our children with everything they see! This is ridiculous.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:14 am |
  43. Dave Stierman

    I dont know how many times I have stated this to my wife as i try to introduce my children (3,11) to football on tv. There is no place during the day a child should be seeing 3 gals sitting on a guy's lap and rubbing his chest while they talk about a pill for him to get it up and suggest what is being suggested. Quality of life suffers, and has suffered because of this. I am all for the constitution, but lets face it, we have a responsibility to stop our children from seeing these, especially during sports events. I mean you wouldnt want to have your child submitted to porno graphic ads would you? so there goes your constituitional right arguement, eh?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:14 am |
  44. Peter

    quit forcing your hangups on us more mature people. So what's next no tampon ads no irritable bowel syndrome ads Just to inform all of you
    On all TV sets there is an on/off switch or there are many other options called OTHER channels. Please use these until YOU grow up.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:14 am |
  45. Steve in Las Vegas,NV

    Judith May 7th, 2009 9:54 am ET

    I’m a Pfizer employee and feel that the ads are done as responsibly as possible. Just like the ads with teenagers and their moms promoting the cervical cancer vaccine. Let’s face it the only way you get papilloma virus is through sexual intercourse. Are they saying it’s ok for teens to have sex?? Seems that way to me. Or how about the new KY jelly ads where the couple are laying in bed talking about enhancing their pleasure and the wife is beaming. Come on just leave it alone. I think Pfizer is very reponsible in their advertising, more so then the other examples I’ve mentioned

    Your point is well taken, but it in the time these products are shown.
    Most are not what anyone wants to hear and see at dinner time, when so many are shown. This is not a first amendment issue, they aren't banned...Just shown at a better time. And most people have seen them, but showing them at dinner time is just wrong.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:14 am |
  46. ladyintn

    Yes, finally!!! I hate those ads!!! Who cares??? Keep your privates private please.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:14 am |
  47. John in Providence

    Good, while your at it let's ban tampon, douche, vaginal hygenie, Victoria's Secrets, Playtex Bras, etc. Come on folks, let's grow up. If you really want to ban offensive ads, how about the ones that advertise hyper-violent video games? Here's an idea parents – DON"T LET YOUR KIDS WATCH TV!!!!!! Then you won't have to answer any of those hard questions. Of course if you aren't able to handle those questions then maybe you should reconsider having children.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:14 am |
  48. Bill Amado,Arizona

    The other one that needs to go is the womens Trojan masturbatory device. I had my granddaughter sitting in the living room watching I Love Lucy on TVLand, an oldies TV station, when the ad for the finger tip device popped up. Can you imagine a fifty-two year old man trying to explain to his 5 year old granddaughter exactly what this little thing is used for. Sometimes, in order to protect our children we must have a little government in our lives, cuz, Lord knows, our industry and corporations, have no self regulatory sense and only one goal: PROFITS.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:14 am |
  49. Gloria

    Thank goodness someone has come along to stand up and have this kind of shameful display removed from prime time and day TV. While he is at it, maybe he can do the same for femine hygiene products that are being shown at the same time. Lets get back to common sense and decency. These ads are obnoxious and embarassing for the teenagers in my neighborhood who see them and have to turn the channel each time they come on. They are also inappropriate at dinnertime. Good for you Mr. Moran.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:14 am |
  50. jay

    uhh how is tampons not related to sex?.. women do you even hear yourselves? if you kid asks what tampons are for you have to explain the words "VAGINA, UTERUS," and what are those for? bleeding 1 time per month only? no they are reproductive organs and you have to explain sex, its not "a beautiful flow of red stuff" its the body getting ready for reproduction, ie you have to have sex for that... so don't say that tampons don't talk about sex, they do, you just have to take off your self righteous hats to see that.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:14 am |
  51. Connie

    I am so happy someone is doing something about these annoying ads. It may not seem like an important issue compared to the other things a Congressman has to worry about, but it is something that you would think could be easily rectified. To those who say just turn off the TV or change the channel, what about the minute you leave the room while watching a basketball game, and when you return your 11 year old son is walking around the house singing "Viva Viagra" and you have to explain to him why he can't sing that song? I don't have a problem talking about sex with my children, but this is totally unneccesary!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:14 am |
  52. John

    I believe the adds should be pulled, but so should "female" products. I didn't want my kids to ask what a tampon was when they wee three and four years old. I find both types of adds inappropirate for tv.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:14 am |
  53. Jeff

    Citizens of are now on notice. If Jim Moran can find his way back into another term, you should be ashamed.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:14 am |
  54. GTed

    Wow..Big deal. It's not like this is something shocking. No wonder this country is the laughing stock of the world. We swear we are a "progressive" nation, but censorship is the rule of the day.

    Jeremey.You summed it up.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:13 am |
  55. PS

    What about all those ads for "female products" – Let's ban them too as they can be quite embarrassing also.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:13 am |
  56. KM

    I agree, those ads are repulsive and way too suggestive for television. I have a couple to add to this list of "should be banned" ads...the herpes and birth control medication ads.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:13 am |
  57. DONNA

    actually , If I am correct don't the " advertisers " use a target audience when choosing where they want to run their commercials ? For example : action / intense drama shows or soap operas ? ( ie intended for age 13 + viewing )
    What is a small child doing watching these programs anyway , are they not innappropriate ? Daytime dramas are basically soft porn .
    I do not want my small grandaughter who lives with me to see these commercials either but I also do have her in the room when watching Lord of the Rings , Star Wars , etc. ( my personal fav type shows ) either . I sit and watch Elmo & Pooh with her

    May 7, 2009 at 10:13 am |
  58. Sick

    If anyone thinks those ads are indecent, they need to get a life. If you don't like them, don't watch them. I am sick of puritanical people trying to determine what we can and can't see. Ban them.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:13 am |
  59. jmoreno

    i agree these ads need to be removed they are completely disgusting! These drugs need to be taken off the market as well, grow old like you are suppose to. I hope this bill passes soon.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:13 am |
  60. Art

    I completely agree with pulling ED ads off the air at least for portions of the day. I'm a father of two young girls and have found myself appalled at the commercials which exist during sporting events and supposedly safe television shows, though, to be fair, we Tivo most shows, so we miss most ads.

    In any case, advertisements for such products, as well as ads for horror movies or other movies with provocative images are inappropriate for television which is appropriate for children. I shouldn't have to worry about a My Bloody Valentine horror commercial during the Super Bowl. During March Madness having to avoid the distressing crab-like image of a human during one horror ad so my children wouldn't see it shouldn't be required.

    Indeed, though, we should remove content beyond the maturity level of the programming. If we're watching Criminal Minds, horror ads should be fine. If we're watching Desperate Housewives, ED ads are fine. Presumably parents are not watching such shows with young children. If they are, there's no saving them anyway.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:13 am |
  61. Robert

    We may as well ban all products remotely having to do with sexual body parts. Tampons, Incontinence Pads, Yeast Infections and the list goes on and on.

    As one of the other comments stated. If you have problems with the ability to discuss normal human biological functions and body parts with a child in a healthry manner. You have a serious problem bigger than an ad on TV.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:13 am |
  62. Bud L

    So if they ban these commercials, do they also need to ban all the commercials for womens' sanitary products? Those are disgusting to some of out here in 'TV Land' too.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:13 am |
  63. Chris

    I wouldn't say they are "too hot," but I think they should be banned, along with all other ads for all other prescription drugs. These companies are using the power of suggestion to get people to ask their doctors for their drugs, whether they need them or not.

    Our entire health care industry is mess because of these types of behaviors. When a company resorts to advertising for their drugs/medical care, it indicates to me that their shareholders are far more important than their customers.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  64. Deb Flanagan

    My reasons for banning these commercials is slightly different. If you think that the oil company profits were huge, wait until the government begins to reveal drug company profits. All TV drug advertising is a scam-preying on our fears and desire to defy nature or make us believe that instant relief is possible. How about all of the potential side effects! Good for you for this bill-keep up the good work!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  65. pjevans3

    We need to bring in the reins on all the drug ads. When I travel to Europe, I don't see ads for drugs on TV. Here, all we see are ads for drugs. Have a problem? Take a pill. It is really un-American to think all our answers are in pills. I believe it goes against our pioneer spirit. We have a health care problem in this country and the only solution the drug companies have is to push more pills that solve the same problems. There is no incentive for them to be innovative to find new drugs or treatments. How many ED, antidepressant or statin meds do we need? Maybe if they stopped spending money on all the ads they would put the money back into research and development where it belongs.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  66. Jenn

    These ads have gone too far and will continue to push the envelope. What started as cutesy, somewhat ubiquitous "smilin' Bob" commercials has now turned into "it can make a man bigger". Give me a break. Parents DO supervise what their children watch as far as programming goes, but we have no control over what commercials show up. It is mortifying for my teenagers as well and we are not prudes. There is also no need for us to ever have to see another gross Valtrex commercial. "I have herpes" and "I still don't". Gross. Seriously, have a brain and go to a doctor if you have any medical problem, don't rely on television ads.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |

    You have to be kidding....with everything else this clown could be focused on he jumps on ED ads......time to vote this backwater jerk out so he can sit on his porch at home and worry about these ads.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  68. geddy2112

    Funny, these politicians are bought and paid for by pharmaceutical companies. Someone should let this guy know that there are much bigger issues to deal with in this country. I suggest taking a good look at "Outsourcing", sending good american jobs oversees. How about that?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  69. Leslie

    I don't find the ads too racy as described, but distasteful. Espescially the ones where the guy seems to be making every woman in 5 mile radius smile that idiotic smile that makes everyone seem to have lost their brains and are now being controlled by this man's alien body part. It is just a bad commercial, and if all of that isn't bad they throw in the fine print that talks about the 4 hour erection problem. Bottom line, I am not offended, but it will be a better TV watching experience without them.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  70. Nichole

    This should have been done sooner. My boys have asked what erectile dysfunction is multiple times. As a parent, I must use discretion. I also must be honest. It is hard to sugar coat my responses to these type of ads.

    I would also like to see the Quizno and Burger King ads removed. The sexual innuendos are ridiculous. Levi's and Twix should also be ashamed of their ads. It is awful the way women are used to promote promiscuity and brand names.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  71. kay

    The adds are annoying, but probably constitutionally protected. When my kids are in the room, we try and turn the channel fast so that they don't get wind of the commercials. But truthfully, the normal 5:00 p.m. news is usually a lot worse – if you want your kids to be exposed to sexual content, flip on the nighltly news.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  72. Danny Lindsey

    Good for you, Jim. I don't want some idiot like Janet Jackson baring herself on screen, and I don't want ads for ED to intrude on the few short hours my family watches TV.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  73. Muffed

    Women have been dealing with douche, yeast, and 'not so fresh' commercials since the dawn of time. One commercial criticizing men impotence and now lawmakers want to crack down.... If you're gonna fight the ED commercials, can we at least take down the commercial where the woman is wearing a hooded sweatshirt, skulking around town with an "odor and itch" problem – making the human race believe that women have nothing but problems with their nether-regions? ED commercials are HARDLY offensive by comparison.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  74. anon

    No. Censorship is inappropriate. Why does the Government again compelled to regulate something that was created within the framework of the law? Unfortunately I think the answer is that rather than parents parenting (my 4yo often enjoys watching '24' with me <- sarcasm) or exercising their freedom of choice (by changing the channel) they feel as though they should not be 'subjected' to something that is deemed (very subjectively I might add) 'indecent'. Rep. Moran represents well. He's representative of what's been wrong with Washington for decades.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  75. jk

    Yes, these ads might be "uncomfortable" for some, but they are not indecent or inappropriate. There is nothing wrong with explaining to a child (in age-appropriate language) what ED is, or what feminine hygiene products are, or condoms, or bladder control, for that matter. The fact of the matter is, all of these items exist, and they are not dirty or shameful. These are either medical conditions or simply items needed to get through the basics of human life/functioning (as in the case of pads/tampons, etc.), and I'm sorry if you have to be a parent and think for a minute to answer your child's questions. I think it is most appropriate for an answer to be given when a child asks from a reliable source (their parent!), rather than being told "don't ask" or "it's not something we talk about", which will only spark their curiosity more and have them inquire from peers or other ill-informed sources. I'm not suggesting that someone give their 4-year-old the birds and the bees talk because of an ED commercial, but a short, simple, and age-appropriate answer would be fitting. ("Some men have problems with their private part, and this is a medicine that helps fix that. It's not something that people like to talk about, so please don't ask anyone if they have it.") Same with urinary incontinence medications, etc. What is the problem here???

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  76. Ron M.

    While I'm sick of these commercials, I'd rather see them ban the ads for Extenze and all those "natural" products that claim they will make a man bigger. What a con job. They will probably end up damaging your liver and kidneys like hydroxycut. They need to get control over these "natural remedies" that have no scientific studies done, are not reviewed by the FDA, are not tested for health effects, and make outrageous claims etc.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am |
  77. Mindy

    The commercials infuriate me every time I see them, and it has nothing to do with my kids. It offends ME. Restricting these ads to late night has nothing whatsoever to do with censorship – or do some of you fools think it would be okay to air pornography on television in favor of the freedom of speech.

    The commercials are just gross. I don't want to think about genitals when I'm watching t.v. PERIOD.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:11 am |
  78. Robert

    Please ban all prescription drugs from all advertisement except in medical journals where doctors, who are the only people who need to, can see them. We take too many drugs and advertising encourages the use of them.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:11 am |
  79. Brian

    Good on you Jim, about time!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:11 am |
  80. JWalk

    Hooray! These commercials, albeit 'tasteful" have my 12-year old asking many questions. I explained what ED was and he was even more confused because the adults are sitting in bathtubs on a beach. Is this what people that have ED have to do? As for the respondant whose grandchildren know about sex and are well adjusted...This isn't just about your grandchildren, it is about our society and children as a whole. Teenage birthrate is up. My son said that getting old is looking worse and old is he going to be when this ED happens? He said he thought the man and woman in the ads look to be MY age, (early 40's) and he is right.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:11 am |
  81. Mike

    I'm SO sick and tired of all the ED adds. They make it sound like EVERY male over age 40 suffers from ED and that the their partners are unhappy because of it.

    I fully support HR 2175.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:11 am |
  82. ron

    Why doesn't our lawmaker focus instead on the flashy ads on alcohol we see on televised sporting events, which are a terrible message for our young people.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:11 am |
  83. t

    I don't particularly care for the ED adds myself, but you have to ask, what is the difference of addvertising the ED vs the adds for all the womens sanitary products?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:11 am |
  84. Suzanne

    I have no problem with it for myself, but I too have small children who ask what it means. I mute them every chance I get. I have no intention of explaining to my children what it means.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:11 am |
  85. Woody

    I also want to see all the damn tampon, pad, and feminine deoderant commercials banned as well. They're just as nasty. Do we really need to be bombarded with commercials telling a woman to keep her "stuff" from stinking? Gimme a break!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:11 am |
  86. mark

    hmmm...let's see where this can lead us.
    Ban Viagra and Levetra ads because some folks have trouble talking about sex to the kids.
    Ban Valtrex ads because it discusses a sexually transmitted disease (shame...shame...shame!)
    Ban McDonalds, KFC, Taco Bell, and Wendy's ads because a this diet of convenience leads to obesity, which in turn leads to diabetes, hypertension, heart disease and strokes.
    Ban Bob and his male enhancement pill ads...just because the ads are just stupid
    Ban cereal and soda ads....see McDonalds, KFC, etc above
    Ban car ads because I will never be a professional driver on a closed course
    Oh heck...I'm just going to turn off my TV

    May 7, 2009 at 10:11 am |
  87. brian

    oh come on jim, you are supposed to take the pill not your wife!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    probably why you are so uptight, lol.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:10 am |
  88. Chris McNally

    I am truly embarrassed to be apart of this country when people sound off or jump on a bandwagon about something that is so trivial and irrelevent. It is just a commercial. It is spreading knowledge to people out there that may not be living full lives. Do any of you know what ED is or even looked into it? This guy needed some to get behind. Maybe he should spend more time with his grandkids instead of them just sitting there watching commercials... Sad.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:10 am |
  89. Mo gumbo


    May 7, 2009 at 10:10 am |
  90. Jager

    I find MOST commercials nowadays terribly annoying – ban them all, my MUTE button is getting warn out...

    Joe Isuzu, Got Milk?

    May 7, 2009 at 10:10 am |
  91. EdK

    All prescription drugs ads should be banned. Also, all hospitals adds should be banned. Enough with making everone feel that they need to get this or that drug to feel well or to go to this hospital or that.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:10 am |
  92. jeannettelj


    May 7, 2009 at 10:10 am |
  93. Paul

    How sexist - if you pull the ED ads, then also pull the tampon ads, and douche ads, along with all the ads about PMS and cramping and bloating. Why is it that it's OK for women to be informed, but not men? While your so worried about cleaning up television, take a look at the sex and nudity on soap operas. Why is that allowed? Because it's geared towards women?.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:10 am |
  94. JimBWise

    ED is a legitimate health concern that affects millions of American men. Not only can it be a telltale sign of other problems like heart disease and high cholesterol but a healthy sex life is good for both partners physically and mentally. The ads are not indecent and they are not aired during programs targeted towards children. If your 5 year old is watching a program whose target audience is teenagers and up, then maybe you should consider restricting their television viewing to more suitable, age appropriate material. They (drug companies) have every right to advertise their product. To be honest, if you really cared about the well being of children then you would be outraged about fast food commercials, soda adds, and other material that give kids lifelong bad habbits that can (ironically) lead to ED in their distant future.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:10 am |
  95. Sara

    Men (and women) should just know to ask if they have a problem and the companies should seek other venues to compete for consumer attention. Plus, most of the ads are just annoying! How many of you who have read this article now have one of those ad jingles in your head– I do! Same goes for women's products, too. I think going to the grocery store and seeing an array of options is information enough for us all!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:10 am |
  96. Jay

    Hey Rep. Jim Moran – why don't you and the rest of the Government regulators pay closer attention to REAL issues at hand with our economy and lack of acknowledgement of real issues in our country.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:10 am |
  97. Texas

    I have three words for this old man –

    "Deal With It"

    From what I've seen, these erectile disfunction ads are very discrete and with Freedom of Press, everybody has the right to advertise any product.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:10 am |
  98. Chris

    They should ban all such advertising, including feminine hygene products and all prescription drug ads, to late night television. If you need these products, you already know about them; and if you dont then your doctor does. These not only affect children, but appeal to neurotics who will then be convinced they need to go to their doctor and insist they need the latest drug they see.

    May 7, 2009 at 10:10 am |
  99. carol

    Hmm, and are we going to pull ads for tampons and valtrex and monistat? Because goodness knows we want to pretend that menstruation, genital herpes and yeast infections don't happen either.

    My only complaint stems from when I was married to a man who refused to address his ED. Every time one of those ads came on I just wanted to slap him!

    May 7, 2009 at 10:09 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6