Regulatory Madness

The Super Bowl is known for its prominent and high-budget beer advertisements, which this year took up four minutes of commercial time. While the beer ads that show up during the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) yearly basketball tournament are not nearly as infamous, a substantial portion of its advertising is for beer. According to the organization’s own bylaws, it cannot advertise for hard liquor, but it only puts a cap on the amount of beer advertising that can be shown during a game—a cap that was exceeded in at least one of this past year’s games.

In response to this, University President Drew G. Faust, along with over 100 other university presidents and athletic directors wrote a letter condemning the NCAA for allegedly promoting irresponsible or underage drinking through its advertisements, and recommending that the tournament eliminate all alcohol advertising. While we understand the sentiment, getting rid of beer ads is the wrong move.

By airing the ads, the NCAA is not encouraging underage or binge drinking—or even endorsing drinking at all. The suggestion that the NCAA is expressing an opinion in favor of the products it allows to be advertised is absurd. Although the NCAA is certainly willing and within its rights to ban advertising that conflicts with its core principles, as it has done in the case of hard liquor ads, it does not find such an egregious conflict with beer, which can be drunk responsibly by those of age. We agree with this decision, and hope that Faust and the others protesting it come to see that the NCAA is not supporting illegal and unsafe drinking.

Furthermore, the suggestion that because the NCAA is a college tournament such advertising could lead to an increase in binge drinking is founded on a misconception: The NCAA basketball tournament is not primarily watched by those under 21. According to Nielsen ratings, 88 percent of those watching the tournament were 21 or older, and the median age of viewers was 47. Furthermore, studies have shown little correlation between beer advertising and overall alcohol consumption—instead, such advertising typically changes the brand or type of alcohol people consume. It would be an overreaction to censor beer advertising because of its purported effect on such a small fraction of the audience.

Though it is probable that reducing the amount of beer advertising could have some, albeit minimal, effect on underage drinking, as a professional sports organization, the NCAA does and should have other considerations, such as making ad revenue, when making programming decisions. It is unreasonable to demand that the NCAA substantially alter its advertising for a very modest reduction in underage drinking and a small increase in safety.

While we do not support putting formal restrictions on the NCAA, we believe that it has a responsibility to its viewers and the public to adhere to a standards befitting a collegiate organization. The beer ads that it runs should promote safe drinking, and it should not target people under the legal drinking age.

That said, Faust and the other signatories of this letter have unnecessarily overreacted in their request to formally restrict the NCAA’s advertising. Advertisement is not endorsement, and the NCAA should remain free to air tasteful beer commercials.