REVIEW OF NCAA ADVERTISING POLICIES

ALCOHOL ADVERTISING: PROJECT TEAM’S MAJOR REASONS FOR SUPPORTING RESTRICTED EDUCATIONAL MESSAGES

OR A COMPLETE BAN

OPTION 1: Ban all alcohol advertising (across all mediums – TV, radio, Internet, game programs etc).

· Although banning all alcohol advertising will have little effect on abusive or underage drinking, a ban is the right thing to do – under age drinking and alcohol abuse are major social problems (e.g., negative health effects, traffic accidents, violent crimes).

· On principle, the NCAA should not want to associate alcohol with the top tier of college athletics events.

· The NCAA would not be taking an all-out ban position to lead member schools to do the same (most schools can’t or won’t ban it for their regular-season events), but instead would be doing so to send the strong message that alcohol and student-athletes (and championship events) don’t mix.

· “Drink responsibly” ads carry the connotation that drinking is still okay (for students).

· Without an all-out ban, the NCAA is seen (or at least our network partners are seen) as accepting money from alcohol companies.

· It is unclear how we can answer the question about why we allow alcohol advertising to be associated with collegiate championship events.

OPTION 2: (favored by the project team with a vote of 7-3-1): “Don’t drink and drive/Don’t drink under the age of 21” Messages

· Unlike cigarette smoking/tobacco use, alcohol has some medicinal benefits when used in moderation. No one can claim that tobacco use has a health benefit.

· An educational approach is consistent with the NCAA's brand (learning/education).

· The NCAA should not “stick its head in the sand” and pretend the problem of alcohol abuse doesn’t exist; instead the NCAA should take a leadership position and use its high-profile status to send appropriate messages about the dangers of alcohol.

· The NCAA’s position to date has been to work with the alcohol industry rather than to oppose it (e.g., the NCAA works with the Century Council [funded by distillers] and TEAM [funded by brewers group]).

· The NCAA has accepted an endowment from Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc. ($2 Million in ’91; has grown to $3-4 Million) to award over $300,000 annually to member schools through CHOICES alcohol-education grants. [$2.6 Million has been awarded to institutions since ’91.]

· Legally, it is likely more difficult for the NCAA to defend an all-out ban option when our member schools/conferences allow alcohol advertising during the regular season and many even allow alcohol to be served at their events.

· It may be problematic for the NCAA to prohibit and/or coverage all alcohol advertising signage at all championship venues (across all divisions and all rounds).

· According to Nielsen statistics, the television audiences for the NCAA’s Division I Men’s and Women’s Basketball Championships are almost exclusively over the age of 21 (88% and 90%, respectively; median ages are 42.6 and 53.5 years old respectively).

· The media may criticize the NCAA more for banning alcohol advertising completely since it may appear that the NCAA is “once again on its high horse”.

· To minimize the negative that might be associated with this approach, the NCAA (in association with its network partners or the alcohol advertisers) could earmark more funds for student-athlete specific education programs or other worthwhile endeavors.