College sports may no longer be a part of "Miller Time" in the next few years. Over the last year, the "Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV" has been striving to ban all alcohol advertising from college sports in an attempt to curb underage drinking.
College sports may no longer be a part of “Miller Time” in the next few years.
Over the last year, the “Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV” has been striving to ban all alcohol advertising from college sports. Rep. Tom Osborne, R-Neb., former North Carolina basketball coach Dean Smith and the Center for Science in the Public Interest are leading the campaign, which has been endorsed by more than 150 organizations.
Osborne, a former Nebraska Cornhuskers football coach who won three national championships during his 25 years steering the program, has proposed a resolution in the House of Representatives that would urge the NCAA and its member schools to ban alcohol advertising from radio and television broadcasts of collegiate athletic events. The resolution was recently attached to a larger bill that proposes funding for the prevention of underage drinking.
“You’re sending a mixed message to students by taking this money,” Osborne said. “You’re saying that alcohol is all right while trying to fight it as a problem on campuses.”
A study conducted by the Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth showed that in 2002, alcohol companies spent $58 million on advertising during college sports. Fifty-eight percent of this came from four major beer brands: Bud Light, Miller Lite, Coors Light and Budweiser. Of the $58 million, $27 million was spent on advertising during the 2002 NCAA Men’s Basketball tournament, which featured 939 alcohol ads, more than the Super Bowl, World Series, Monday Night Football and college bowl games combined.
The CSPI has used this study in conjunction with a poll taken by the center that indicates the majority of adults support a ban on alcohol ads during televised college games. The survey showed that 75 percent of respondents believe that allowing beer commercials on college sports programs is inconsistent with the efforts colleges make to discourage underage and excessive drinking, and 71 percent supported a full ban.
The Beer Institute and the National Beer Wholesalers Association have disputed the campaign’s claims. The two organizations, which represent the beer industry, state that the issue is not the number of ads on college sports television but rather the makeup of the audience. In accordance with this belief, the Beer Institute has created the Advertising and Marketing Code. The code requires that beer advertisements only be run on programs that feature an audience in which at least 70 percent of viewers are over the age of 21. According to 2003 Nielsen Media data, the percentage of the television audience over 21 for college football and basketball games were 88 and 87 percent, respectively.
The beer industry also has referred to studies that show that underage drinking is down. According to the American Freshman Survey conducted by the University of California at Los Angeles and the American Council on Education, the percentage of college freshman who drink beer “frequently” or “occasionally” is at its lowest level since the survey began in 1966.
“Numerous independent studies have found no significant link between advertising and underage drinking,” Jeff Becker, president of the Beer Institute, said in a statement. “We need to work together to raise awareness of the problem of illegal, underage drinking and to encourage greater engagement of parents, who are the most influential group affecting their children’s decisions.”
Despite the beer industry’s opposition, the campaign is gaining increased support. In January 2004, the campaign released a “College Commitment Statement” and invited all NCAA schools to sign. As of Oct. 8, 224 schools had signed the statement, which pledges that the colleges will end all alcohol advertising on their local broadcasts and will push for their respective conferences and the NCAA to do likewise, beginning with all future broadcast contracts. Of these 224, 58 were Division I schools, but only four are from BCS conferences: Baylor, Minnesota, Northwestern and Ohio State. Duke has not yet signed the pledge.
“We are delighted with the progress we have made so far,” Jay Hedlund, director of the campaign, said. “ Larger, Division I schools are going to make the difference, but that is also going to be the real struggle—getting their support. We have not gotten any principled opposition to this, though. Either schools are avoiding it, or they are making economic arguments in terms of funding.”
Opponents of the prohibition argue that the revenue generated by the advertising helps to fund the athletic programs themselves. Losing advertising money by dropping alcohol advertising would hurt the programs, especially funding for non-revenue sports. Hedlund believes, however, that the alcohol advertising money can be replaced.
“Although this is big money, it represents, even at the big schools, only 5 to 7 percent of the advertising revenue, and we believe that is replaceable,” Hedlund said. “There are plenty of products out there that would like to have a visible relationship with the major athletic programs.”
Osborne believes that any economic loss would be countered by the more important ethical gain.
“It is about time that we stand on principle. Athletics should represent something more than just mercenary values,” Osborne said. “Right now the emphasis is on making money and marketing and not necessarily on doing the right thing.”
Duke has not yet signed on to the commitment statement. Catherine Bath, whose son Raheem died of alcohol related medical issues while a student at Duke in 1999, says she contacted head basketball coach Mike Krzyzewski and former president Nan Keohane each two times last year, encouraging them to prompt Duke to sign the commitment.
“I will be very disappointed if Duke does not support this positive initiative, especially since they are such a high profile school,” Bath said. “Their say is very powerful, and I would love for them to exert that power.”
Osborne said that the progress of the campaign has been slowed because of lobbying by the alcohol industry, but supporters remain hopeful that it will eventually succeed.
“We think it is going to happen, but it is going to take a while,” Hedlund said. “We’re very encouraged by what we’ve seen so far.”
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.