USA TODAY Refuses to Run Any More Ads from We The People.

Foundation Considers Legal Action

We The People Foundation was contacted by USA TODAY advertising representative Katie Emory late Wednesday afternoon, April 11, 2001, to inform Bob Schulz that USA TODAY will not accept more advertising from the Foundation.

When asked why, Ms. Emery said their legal department had decided they should not run ads that promote illegal activities and that the ads have been classified as "offensive." As an example, Ms. Emery relayed an example of another offending USA TODAY advertiser, an unnamed "dot-com" that ran an ad featuring a photograph of a three-headed baby. USA TODAY was asked to formally advise the Foundation in writing concerning their decision.

On Thursday morning, Bob Schulz telephoned Ms. Emery. The call was transferred to the office of Joanna Cebonte, VP of USA TODAY advertising, who put the call on her speakerphone. Ms. Emery was in her office. When questioned about the basis for the decision, Cebonte and Emery resisted detailing what specific aspects of the ads were found "offensive" by the USA TODAY legal staff. When pushed further, Cebonte backed off Wednesday's ban on the Foundation, saying USA TODAY was not rejecting "all" advertising from We The People, just ads like those already run for We The People. Schulz pressed futher. He told Cebonte that no one in government, in academia, or in the research community has refuted anything We The People has said in the four USA TODAY ads, that USA TODAY's legal staff is the only voice that has questioned the accuracy of the content of the We The People ads. Cebonte said that the publisher, as the owner of USA TODAY, a private newspaper, was free to accept or reject any ad. Schulz said that nonetheless he needed to know the specifics because the reputation, integrity and credibility of We The People were at stake. Schulz respectfully requested of Cebonte that she provide him with the specifics -- just what did the ads say that is incorrect and offensive. Cebonte finally admitted that she did not know the specifics. She said she would have the legal department get in touch with Schulz next week.

Katie Emery explained to us that it is their policy to notify any advertiser of complaints by readers. Prior to this, USA TODAY has only notified the Foundation of only a single (and unidentified) complaint from the general public that took USA TODAY to task for running the tax education ads.

Although We The People understands that USA TODAY is a commercial business, providing access to fully paid advertising space for discussion of critical legal issues of national concern is essential in the practical exercise of our First Amendment rights. We The People believe that although our ads may be highly controversial, they are not "offensive," libelous, defamatory or in any other way illegal. They do not advocate breaking any law. On the contrary, they advocate obedience to our tax laws and our Constitution -- by the IRS as well as by citizens.

Our four full-page ads in USA TODAY have discussed specific tax laws, regulations and court cases, but in no way advocate, endorse, instruct or abet any illegal activity. Indeed, this Foundation wants a full public examination of our tax laws to compel the government to disclose their purported legal authority as evidenced by the very laws we are being censored from discussing.

It is incongruous at best, and discriminatory and capricious at worst, that USA TODAY (or the New York Times) publishes, as news, stories covering IRS tax messages (typically in the form of threats) or tax legislation, but labels as "cheats" those people who have studied the tax laws and question their validity. And if this Foundation purchases ad space to examine specific legal questions concerning those same laws and regulations, it is CENSORED.

It is important to note that this Foundation contracted with USA TODAY to run ads at full market rates as openly offered by USA TODAY in the commercial marketplace to all customers. Short of those ads being blatantly offensive and illegal, We The People believes the newspaper is censoring our educational message.

The Foundation has begun to explore its legal options. The decision by USA TODAY to reject our ads because they "advocate breaking the (tax) laws" could be an opportunity for a court to determine just what law the ads advocate breaking. Would USA TODAY convince the court that the 16th Amendment was properly ratified, and that there is a law that requires most American citizens to file a tax return and pay the individual income tax, that citizens do not waive their 5th Amendment right not to be a witness against themselves when they sign and submit their Form 1040s, and that part or all of what The Foundation said in its USA TODAY ads was false and advocated the breaking of valid tax laws, we might be able to accomplish in court what we have been unable to get the Executive and Legislative branches to do, i.e., determine the legal authority of the IRS to force citizens to file and pay the income tax.

It might be helpful if people contact USA TODAY, and/or its advertisers to protest its decision to cease publishing our ads. If USA TODAY is going to "control" the news, not only by selecting stories, but also by refusing paid ads that attempt to educate Americans about their laws and Constitution, maybe people ought to let all Gannet papers know what they think of the publisher.