Chuck Konzelman, writer and director of "Unplanned". (Screen capture)
(CNSNews.com) – The director of the movie "Unplanned," which tells the story of former Planned Parenthood director, Abby Johnson, turned pro-life, said Wednesday at Capitol Hill about the censorship suffered during the promotion of the film. on social media.
The writer and director of the film, Chuck Konzelman, told the Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution "how he chose to advertise on social media after the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) awarded him the note "R" strongly discourages much of the Christian public and all members of The Church of Latter-day Saints from seeing the film because "they generally forbid viewing" R "rated movies. "
"We also sought to advertise on cable TV, but with the exception of Fox News and CBN, access was systematically denied at the outlets where we sought to make of advertising – including Lifetime, UP TV, Hallmark, HGTV, USA Network, The Food Network, The Travel Channel, DIY and Cooking Channel, "Konzelman said in his opening remarks.
"Lifetime, which belongs to A & E Networks, a joint venture of Walt Disney and Hearst Communications, told its buyers that they were refusing because of the" sensitive nature of the film, "but it had previously promoted a Scarlett Johansson interview in which touted Planned Parenthood. We view these widespread refusals as very unusual and highly discriminatory, and formally request the FCC to deepen its research, "he said.
Konzelman said Google Ads was blocking the preliminary banner ads for the movie, which "consisted of a woman – half of her face with a tear drop and the words saying," What she saw changed everything " , he said, were not offensive.
After blocking movie ads, Google cited "a policy on abortion-related ads," Konzelman said. "Just a problem: we did not advertise about abortion. We sold a movie. "
Konzelman also testified about how Twitter has suspended his Twitter account.
"We were not done with the problems of social media. Only hours after our debut in theaters – early in the morning of Saturday, March 30, the movie's Twitter account – technically the account belonging to the marketing entity of the film's purpose – was suspended. To my knowledge, the reasons for this suspension have not been explained beyond the "accidental" nature or error, "he said.
"However, when such" accidents "occur within 12 hours after the movie starts – and after nine months from the film's possession, there was no suspension – the" glitch " becomes suspicious, "said Konzelman.
He said media personalities such as Shannon Bream of Fox News Channel, conservative commentator Dana Loesch and actress Patricia Heaton had spoken of the "glitch" of their own social networks.
"If progressive or far-left experts or influencers came to our support, as a matter of principle, I did not know it. However, about three hours after the suspension, the service was reinstated, although I also know that our Twitter ad has been cleared from the account, without explanation, "Konzelman said.
"Later the same day, Twitter apparently removed the vast majority of those listed as" subscribers "on our behalf … reducing the number from about 200,000 to less than 200. A thousand to one reduction in our listed subscribers. . And many people – including the subject of our film – Abby Johnson – and the star of our film – Ashley Bratcher – found themselves unable to follow their own film on Twitter, "he said.
Konzelman asked, "Why does this seem to happen only to the conservatives?"
"Interestingly, on one of the social networks from the first panel today where we had no major problems – on Facebook – our visibility has exploded, and I believe the The movie's Facebook site had something in the order of about 12 million trailers at the time. of our debut in theaters and nearly 18 million so far, "he said.
"And we attribute to this unlimited access much of the film's success – highlighting the importance of social media access. For the record, we do not claim any collusion between social media or cable media entities. At least not in the formal sense. They do not require any coordinated communication or agreement between them because they are universally progressive in their focus, political beliefs and worldview … and are also highly predisposed to stifle conservative thinking, "Konzelman added.