TurboTax announces Glenn Beck ad pull via Twitter

Glenn Beck is a performance artist of the highest order. Whenever I have happened upon a little clip of him online, I feel that he has studied just about every successful TV evangelist. He seems to mimic their hand gestures, their little eye rolls. And just like the finest TV evangelist, he also seems to succeed in making a lot of money.

But for how much longer can his act be lucrative? Tax-preparation software company TurboTax on Wednesday became the 120th company to take its ads away from Beck's variety show on Fox.

Companies such as Kraft, Mercedes, Geico, Verizon, and AT&T have already decided that Beck's invective can tend toward the objectionable and therefore should not enjoy their advertising. TurboTax decided to announce its decision in a tweet on Twitter.com/turbotax.

"Thanks everyone for your feedback, & for reminding us of what we value. We've pulled advertising from the Glenn Beck show," it read.

Watch CBS News Videos Online

Perhaps Beck's greatest claim to notoriety is his suggestion that President Obama is a racist. However, this claim seems to be supported by other Fox presenters. Sean Hannity, for example. Will advertising be withdrawn from his performances too?

Beck is also such a curiously mercurial character. You might find him weird. You might find him twisted and dangerous, But those of an opposite political persuasion would, I suspect, secretly love to have one or two Becks on their own side.

Those who criticize him wouldn't necessarily find everything he says to be objectionable, either. He suggested, for example, that both Hillary Clinton and Obama would both be preferable presidential choices to John McCain. (I have embedded the evidence, just in case you wondered.)

There is also a question as to whether leaping onto a morally righteous bandwagon, however tempting and correct it feels, has the right effect for brands, for their customers or even for critics.

Sometimes it seems that those who shout loudest that slightly sad chorus line "information wants to be free" are the first in line to stifle opinions they find repugnant. It is often the same people who rail that business is controlling government who scream at business to adopt these kinds of stances in order to silence programs that the objectors don't like.

It's totally understandable that an advertiser wouldn't want their advertising around Glenn Beck's show, though I often wonder if any viewer ever really associates advertising so closely with programming.

Beck has been around for quite a few years. Did none of these advertisers realize what he was like? Or, as long as there wasn't too much controversy, too much PR pressure, were they often happy to enjoy the ratings he delivered? Beck made his comments about the President being a racist in July 2009. What took TurboTax so long?

One aspect that is, perhaps, rarely mentioned is that when an advertiser withdraws its ads from a certain show, it is also, in some untoward way, telling its own customers that they shouldn't watch that show. But they do. That is the critics' real problem--the fact that Beck's bile-laden rants gets such exalted ratings.

Some might feel that in cases such as this, the company just doesn't want to be seen to be physically too close to a certain personality, show theme, opinion or even customer image. Sometimes companies know that their products are often used by and associated with questionable characters. Ask any cell phone provider who uses prepaid cell phones, for example. It's an understandable, but not necessarily value-laden, business decision not to feature or even talk about that aspect.

Removing ads from the Glenn Beck Show is an understandable business decision, a corporate image decision. Do values really come into it? Well, it depends which ones you mean.

[bj1126]

The reality is for every company that pulls its ads there are 3 in line to replace it. As long as Beck has a large audience he will have people standing in line to advertise on his show. Some may take this as a small moral victory but fact is even FNC's 3 AM Redeye show is pulling better ratings than MSNBC prime time. Until that changes the only thing being done by getting companies to pull ads is making work for the people producing the ads for the next new advertiser.

[Mystrunner]

Actually, no, he doesn't.

In the UK, the Glenn Beck show has been running ad-free for over a month now. These are all that's left in the US:

1-800-Pack-Rat
1-800-PetMeds
American Advisors Group
American Petroleum Institute
Biotab Nutraceuticals
Carbonite
Chattem Inc.
Consumer Debt Advocate
Dish Network
FreeScore
Goldline
Imperial Structured Settlements
IRSTaxAgreements.com
The Jewelry Exchange
Lifelock
Merit Financial
Rosland Capital
ServPro
Sokolove Law
Sun Setter Retractable Awnings
Tax Masters
Zero Technologies

You might notice a similar trend in the remaining advertisers... most are the sort that you find on late-night television, or "judge" shows.

[TJwithAsadIQ]

"In the UK, the Glenn Beck show has been running ad-free for over a month now"

Wait...they're running a show ad free? Heck, even I might watch if it were ad free.

[nicmart]

Like Limbaugh, Beck is an entertainer, a political jester. Only boobs take him seriously, for or against.

[MrBoomshadow]

Unfortunately, we in the U.S. pride ourselves on our boobs.

Wait, that came out wrong.

[lkrupp]

Meanwhile Air America, that bastion of lefty-liberal talk radio, apparently had NO advertisers and went belly up a few weeks ago. And then there's Bill Maher of course. He got canned by ABC after basically calling the 9/11 terrorists brave and the U.S. military cowards.

[nouser]

I can understand why Intuit would want to pull back on their advertising, after all no one would really want to admit that they paid too much for tax prep software except maybe for Tim Geithner. There are less expensive products and I suspect their sales are lagging.

Intuit, the company that just released a Quicken replacement Quicken Essentials, for their abandoned Macintosh Quicken 2007 but forgot to add the ability to transfer that data to their TurboTax software. Really, I couldn't make this stuff up. To export at all. No Bill Pay either. I see a company in trouble and Glen Beck is the least of their problems, IMO.

[William Crow]

Bigots.

[MyRightEye]

OMG... This is insane. Beck is a moron, but to pull your add because of some twitter chatter shows a total lack of backbone and leadership. Whoever made this decision probably called home to cry to his mommy that the poor twitter users were upsetting him. Twitter or twit?

[VivalaMicrosoft]

Truth be told, the write of this article is most likely a liberal, so naturally he's going to bash Beck at every turn. Most liberals can't contain themselves, especially if they have a bully pulpit like the do here at CNET. What a joke. Frenzied, hysterical liberals mouthing off and going berserk because they see their fearless B.O Administration. going down the toilet like so many useless terds.

Beck speaks the truth. That's what liberals can't stand. They don't want the public to know what they are up to. All I can say is thank god for Fox News, Hannity and Beck. Give them hell, guys!

[alstatr]

Beck speaks the truth? Not sure I'd totally agree with that. He does however have the guts to voice his opinion and I can respect him for that. Many would just pander to the majority because it is easy. He is in the business to sell advertising and he will say what he needs to to do that. It is the same situation with more liberal news outlets.

Just remember to question news outlets', politicians', etc motives in mind when listening to them. That and do your research. If we all did this, our country would be well on its way to recovery.

[YankeePoodle]

Glenn Beck, a high school intellectual with conspiracy theories. He appeals to the people, who were brown-nosing Bush until the economic collapse and just look at the black president and feel that he is after them. According to Glenn Beck a lump of coal is communist because it provided electricity to Soviet Russia. This guys obscene conspiracy theories are not just beyond ridiculous, is just reflection of how much market is there for a garbage Joe McCarthy wannabe. At least McCarthy won an election become his lynching of suspected commies, this guy just lynches every thing, he did not spare Art Deco style claiming it to be communist.

[kojacked]

I agree! Most conservatives/haters can't contain themselves, especially if they have a bully pulpit like the do here at Fox News. What a joke. Frenzied, hysterical conservatives mouthing off and going berserk because they see their fearless conservative right going down the toilet like so many useless terds.

It's too bad the Joe six-packs of America are too stupid to realize that they are being duped by their conservative puppet masters who want them to be their loyal serfs. Nothing like making money off the backs of cheap labor! They don't need money; they can live off the hate.

[ChurlishCanadian]

To kojacked: Way to trot out the left-wing talking points.

E.g., "conservatives/haters" ... There's no room for hatred toward PEOPLE in true conservatism. Racist, sexist, or homophobic people might misidentify themselves as "conservatives," but TRUE conservatives respect all (regardless of personal traits) who lawfully attempt to be productive, better themselves, and provide for themselves and their families.

What real conservatives DO hate -- and rightfully so -- are attitudes and policies, most notably the following:

1. The politics of victimhood: the dogma stating that nothing is ever your fault, that someone else is always to blame, and should pay for your misfortune.

2. Institutionalized dependence: perpetuating a system that rewards complacency, irresponsibility, and bad choices.

3. Statism: the belief that government intervention, regulation, and seizure of private property is preferable to free-market forces (ignoring the fact that statism has never led to a better standard of living when compared with free-market capitalism ... anywhere, ever.)

4. Tolerance of the intolerable: rewarding laziness, ineptitude, and outright criminal behavior while punishing initiative, genius, and achievement.

5. Socialism/communism: the belief that the needs of "society" overshadow the individuals' rights to opportunity (note: that doesn't mean GUARANTEED success), freedom, private property, and the fruits of one's own labor.

I'll quite proudly admit to hating those things. But I certainly don't "hate" in the way you mean it.

[Vurk]

@ churlishCanadian:
> "conservatives/haters" ... There's no room for hatred toward PEOPLE in true conservatism.

"True" conservatism doesnt exit, much like true Libertarianism. All conservatives do, in fact, hate People; any People who are different from them.

>Racist, sexist, or homophobic people might misidentify themselves as "conservatives," but TRUE conservatives respect all (regardless of personal traits) who lawfully attempt to be productive, better themselves, and provide for themselves and their families.

if this statement is true, there are no "true" conservatives of this type in America.

>What real conservatives DO hate -- and rightfully so -- are attitudes and policies, most notably the following:

>1. The politics of victimhood: the dogma stating that nothing is ever your fault, that someone else is always to blame, and should pay for your misfortune.

If people still had jobs, this philosophy would never have taken root.

>2. Institutionalized dependence: perpetuating a system that rewards complacency, irresponsibility, and bad choices.

You mean like planned obsolescence? Or do you mean Wall Street Capitalism? Lets see, complacency: "i've got mine, that all that matters"; irresponsibility: Enron employees saying "We're raping Grandma Millie"; bad choices: making up a physics formula so you can prove that risk does not now and never has existed.

>3. Statism: the belief that government intervention, regulation, and seizure of private property is preferable to free-market forces (ignoring the fact that statism has never led to a better standard of living when compared with free-market capitalism ... anywhere, ever.)

I bet the residents of Love Canal, NY loved the unregulated free market. Until the unregulated dumping of toxic waste killed them.

>4. Tolerance of the intolerable: rewarding laziness, ineptitude, and outright criminal behavior while punishing initiative, genius, and achievement.

You're right here; Wall Street only gives out $100,000 bonuses to its lazy and inept workers instead of the million dollar ones. You know, conservatives like those at the C Street House are rewarded every day for such criminal behavior as "accomplice to murder", soliciting prostitution", and "aiding and abetting known criminals".

>5. Socialism/communism: the belief that the needs of "society" overshadow the individuals' rights to opportunity (note: that doesn't mean GUARANTEED success), freedom, private property, and the fruits of one's own labor.

This sentence right here shows that you are *not* a conservative. A conservative believes in the maintaining of a *society's* traditions and values. While conservatives believe in the individuals free exercise of liberty, the true conservative understands that a nation is not a group of disconnected individuals but rather a collection of people who share the same ideas, values, and traditions.
Socialism is an economic theory, just as capitalism is. Communism was a social theory of equality, but because a society needs leaders and organizers, it turns out that some people are more equal than others. This is why communism failed.
You see, sometimes the needs of society *do* outweigh the needs of the individual. Like law enforcement, or contract law. Just try having a free enterprise system when there are no laws.

[ChurlishCanadian]

To Vurk:

I should know better than to try to "define" something as nebulous as conservatism ... gather a hundred people, and you'll get a hundred different definitions of the word. You'd probably get as many definitions of "liberalism" as well.

In any case, I agree than my definition doesn't necessarily represent that of others who call themselves conservatives. But simply because they identify with the word as I do does NOT mean that I share or respect all of their opinions.

For example, there are certainly self-proclaimed "conservatives" who hate minorities and homosexuals, and those who have murdered people at abortion clinics. But to use this ignorant and maladjusted fringe to smear an entire social, political, and fiscal philosophy is as disingenuous as equating all liberals with left-wing terrorists like Bill Ayers and the Weathermen. I don't do that, and in the interest of intellectual honesty, you shouldn't either.

I can assure you that the vast majority of mainstream conservatives are sane, informed, and free of hate toward groups or classes of people. (It's the left, after all, that celebrates in groupism, not the right ... and for the record, disagreement does not equal hate.) If you're still convinced that "no 'true' conservatives of this type exist in America," then you should periodically get out of the lecture hall, leave campus, and talk to some regular working people. You might be surprised by their open-mindedness.

Regarding Wall Street, corporate welfare, and law: you won't find many real conservatives sticking up for corporate criminals, either. The rise of the Tea Party movement illustrates average conservative Americans' distaste for "establishment" Republicans' complicity in the bailout travesty and the tacitly-accepted culture of corruption that caused it. We're just as frustrated as you are that taxpayers being forced to foot the bill for greedy scammers. The difference is that we don't perceive "working to earn a profit" as inherently evil, nor do we believe that anyone with money must have accumulated it illegally or unethically.

As such, you're correct on another point: conservatives DO respect laws, and recognize their necessity to maintain a society in which individual rights are protected. (I.e., despite liberal myths, very few real conservatives are backwoods-compound dwellers, stockpiling weapons and paranoid about the government.) Most simply believe that the government's mandate ends at the boundaries proscribed in the U. S. Constitution: that its job is to protect our rights, and to ensure LEGAL commerce. Punishing corporate lawbreakers and Love Canal polluters certainly falls within this mandate; abdicating American sovereignty to U.N. treaties and micromanaging household energy use (just two examples of liberal goals) are decidedly not.

To conclude, please don't deliberately misinterpret conservative support for free markets and individual rights/responsibilities as a call for "might-makes-right" anarchy. That's a sly attempt at distraction, but it's irrelevant to and opposite of what conservatives actually advocate.

I know that I'll never change your mind, just as you won't convince me to get out there marching for "social change" (read: redistribution of private property). What's more, I don't know whether or not you -- or anyone else -- is still tuning into this conversation. Still, despite the futility of arguing politics on the internet, I felt that I need to respond to some of your more egregious (and deliberate) misrepresentations, generalizations, and outright falsehoods.

[Mr_fleabite]

Help Help I'm sinking!!
First there was this troll and he was so huge and obvious but so many engaged him. Then the bull S* started coming from the right and then the bull S* came from the left. I was just stuck in the middle clinging to objective reason, but there was so much bull S*. Then came the backpedaling and more bull S*...it's everywhere. Now I'm stuck in this mire of idiotic political propaganda bull S* with the rest of the sane people and every time I hear something close to objective logic I head towards it but someone spews more bull S* and the logic is gone.
Help anybody!... well maybe not anybody.

[Kirkaiya]

I would say that consumer boycotts and other consumer pressure on companies has led to changes in the targeted companies' behavior many times over the years. Probably the most famous example is the experience of South Africa and apartheid, which really only came under serious pressure when many large, western companies began ending business relationships with South Africa, ending all advertising within the country, and in some cases, ending operations within the country, at the behest of consumers who were passionate about the "cause" of ending apartheid.

And so it is with Glenn Beck - if enough customers threaten to abandon your brand due to your financing the partisan polemic (or whatever it is that Mr. Beck does - he's something of a comedy act, in my view), then you, as a profit-making enterprise, are going to stop financing it.

Does that in any way affect Mr. Beck's freedom of speech? No, he's free to rant about Obama, and foreigners, etc., just as the rest of us are. You wrote, "It is often the same people who rail that business is controlling government who scream at business to adopt these kinds of stances in order to silence programs that the objectors don't like" - but that's a rather shaky analogy. Comparing private citizens use of their purchasing power to affect the behavior of a company to companies use of corporate money to influence politicians and legislation seems absurd; apples and oranges. Companies are (on the whole) for-profit organizations, while private citizens are human beings whose rights are protected by the constitution, and for whom our entire system of government was created to protect (and to allow them pursuit of life, liberty, etc).

Bottom line - Glenn Beck's show, and the actions of any other company, will always be legitimate targets for consumer boycotts, or consumer letter-writing campaigns. It's a bit disappointing to see you attempting to equate actual citizens (eg, human beings) with large multi-national corporations like News Corp, when they are clearly not the same.

[bobnla14]

Glenn Beck is an extremist that gets FAR too much coverage for the size of his audience. But the screaming edges are getting the news stories. His numbers are about 1.5 million a night. 7 shows on the Univision network beat him in the ratings (more viewers), and yest people think he is an opinion maker. 1.5 million out of 300 million in the US meaning that 99.5% of the poeple in the United States Do NOT WATCH HIM. 99.5% Yet he still gets press.
Now I know how to get a national show. Scream and say controversial things and get journalists to watch you for story ideas.

[artfromtex]

FIrst off; TurboTax, along with over 100 of the other advertisers that colorofchange.org list, NEVER ADVERTISED ON BECK TO BEGIN WITH!!! So they are not "pulling" anything other than your strings.

Secondly, Glenn gets between 2.7 and 3.9 million viewers a day in the 5PM eastern time slot. He nearly triples the COMBINED total of his competition. He had alot to do with getting the Tea Party movement off the ground. So he is a major player in the politcal landscape. To deny this is absurd whether you like the man or not.

The last thing I'd like to mention is this; don't judge Mr. Beck by edited online clips. Take the time to watch his full show for a week or two. You'll then understand that the guy is genuine. You may still disagree with him, but you won't think he's just an "entertainer" who pander to any audience for ratings. Glenn Beck means what he says.

Thanks and God Bless!
Arthur
Fort Worth, TX

[cnetguard]

artfromtex: All the advertisers from the list did air commercials in Beck's show, although some of them (like TurboTax) only did so for a couple of days before the backlash forced them to stop. In fact, there was one TurboTax ad in yesterday's show even though TurboTax had already said that they would pull them (that's probably because they had already committed to paying for that ad).

The only inconsistency in (some versions of) the list is Roche, who restarted airing ads sometime after they committed to pulling them.

[ChurlishCanadian]

What's ridiculous is that a new advertiser would be scared off by a "backlash" organized by a few vocal protest groups, likely consisting of a handful of people with an internet connection and too much free time.

Moreover, did the people responsible for buying Turbo Tax ad time never even WATCH Beck's show before signing the contract? Beck is not exactly an unknown figure, and he wears his opinions -- love 'em or hate 'em -- on his sleeve.

For Turbo Tax to cave in to pressure from the tin-foil hat brigade, and to suddenly act shocked and appalled by the content of Beck's show, is more than a little laughable.

[isomerize]

The state of california should hire him to cry them a river and then gin up some money for the bankrupt economy ... just sayin'

[MickBurke]

How is this a tech article? Or even accurate? obama is an absolute racist.

[dwterry]

That's very strange. I watch Glenn Beck every evening and I've never seen a TurboTax commercial on his program!

[cnetguard]

Actually, TurboTax had been advertising on Beck's show only for two days before they pulled the ads. Furthermore, an ad did run on yesterday's edition (March 10), probably because it was already paid for.

[CommonSense_123]

I've never seen Turbo Tax on his show either. The fact that the left wing nuts are freaking out by constantly talking about him is only helping his cause. Keep it up guys, more people need to pay attention to what's going on in Washington!

[outcheck]

Beck does not sell hate or disrespect. It is so opposite the liberal/progressive playbook that he must be a moron. Actually he appears to be a slightly above average intellect that is working hard to learn about what America is, what made it work and what is getting in the way of what worked.

Unfortunately the answer is that the likes of FDR and Obama are the negative ideologies that only hang together if you think your smarter than everyone else and get funded by odd bedfellows in banks, unions and elites.

Trying to sell big government when it has never ever worked takes a very high intellect combined with even higher self interest. .

[jeff_o]

I thought Beck was kind of out there--from seeing sound bites about him--until I watched his program. Love him or hate him, his program teaches history. It gives you an hour on the past nd how it is tied to the present. You may not like his views and they may have a conservative bend, but I believe he is telling and showinh what has actually happened in the past.

It is reporting that you never see on any other network. It is reporting that I never saw in ANY history class I had. You may not like him but it is not just HIS opinion. He shows you actual footage of the items he is discussing. He names books so you can go out and actually read them for yourself.

In addition, I guess I will not be buying turbo tax today. I will be going with another vendor.

[pixelpshr_va]

If you think Beck is providing anything like an accurate interpretation of history, you should spend some time poking around on news sites that actually research the facts behind the stuff he says. Try http://mediamatters.org/search/tag/glenn_beck for a starter.

[cougar300]

you clowns that are bashing beck only show your ignorance of what his program is all about. fine, you've seen cut out clips here & there; try watching for a while and see what your opinion is. oh wait, you've already made up your "tolerant" mind.