Rolling Stone Bans Zondervan Bible Ad

              Page 1 of 2 
Hall, Cline E. 
From: 
Sent: 
To: 
Dr.Jerry Falwell (webmaster-reply@falwell.coml 
Friday, January 21, 2005 6:03 PM 
fc@list.falwell.com 
Subject: ROLLING STONE BANS ZONDERVAN BIBLE AD 
Falwell Confidential 
Insider weekly newsletter to The Moral Maj or it y Coalition and The Liberty Alliance 
http : / /www.moralmaj or it y . us 
Date: January 21, 2005 
From: Jerry Falwell 
ROLLING STONE BANS ZONDERV�N BIBLE AD 
The editors at Rolling Stone magazine have determined that an ad promoting a new 
Bible for "spiritually intrigued 18-34 year olds" is too religious to appear in the 
historic rock and roll publication. 
Zondervan had attempted to place an ad in the publication for its new Today' s New 
International Version Bible . Ad space was initially sold to Zondervan before the 
ad was ultimately disapproved. 
The ad reads: "In a world of almost endless media noise and political spin, you 
wonder where you can find real truth. Well now there's a source that's accurate, 
It's the TN IV � Today' s New International Version of the 
clear, and reliable. 
It's written in today's language, for today's times 
� and it makes more 
Bible . 
sense than ever. " 
Kent Brownridge, general manager for Rolling Stone' s parent company Wenner Media, 
told USA Today that the Zondervan ad "doesn't quite feel right in the magazine . 
"The copy is a little more than an ad for the Bible," Mr. Brownridge added. 
"It's 
a religious message that I personally don't disagree with. " 
By the way, I'm not familiar with this Bible translation and have not endorsed it. 
But that's not the issue. The concern here is that in the alleged culture of 
"diversity, " we are actually seeing a burgeoning atmosphere of repression when it 
comes to issues of faith. 
This controversy comes down to one question: Where is the harm in running the 
Zondervan ad in a secular publication? 
I'm not asserting that the editors at Rolling Stone hate religion. Mr. Brownridge 
proclaimed that he didn't disagree with it. 
But I am increasingly concerned with 
this perspective of absolute secularism that prohibits the religious community from 
participating in the free flow of cultural ideas . 
I doubt if Rolling Stone would have seen a mass exodus among its subscriber base if 
it had approved the Zondervan ad. And I doubt if the publication's editors even 
It appears that they simply did not want a religious 
feared such a response . 
� and particularly one from an evangelical perspective 
� to be in their 
message 
publication. While the editors say they "are not in the business of publishing 
this still stinks of censorship. 
advertising for religious messages, " 
1/24/2005