• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Brendon Marotta

  • Work
  • Blog
  • Show
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Why Would The American Academy Of Pediatrics Reject An Ad For A Film Featuring Their Leaders?

November 2, 2018 By Brendon Marotta

This article was originally published in The Good Men Project here.

Why would the American Academy Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) decline several thousand dollars for an ad for a film featuring several of members of their organization? Earlier this month, I contacted the American Academy of Pediatrics, one of the largest circumcising physician’s professional organization in the country, to place an advertisement at their upcoming convention for my documentary “American Circumcision“.

The ad would have been an info card for our film which read “Featuring Multiple Members Of The American Academy of Pediatrics” at the top. I was told getting an info card in each person’s bag costs $5,500 for one day of the conference, and $10,000 for both days—an amount which I would have happily paid. However, I received a message back from the person handling advertising which read “The AAP has declined your ad.” No reason was given, and I was not given the name of a person to contact. At the time I am writing this, I also have not received comment from the media contact listed on their website.

The info card we tried advertise.

Why would the AAP reject an ad for a film featuring their members? The documentary, which explores the modern circumcision debate, features top members of the AAP, including the chair of their 1989 task force on circumcision and a member of their most recent 2012 policy statement on circumcision.

Could it be because we also cover critics of circumcision and the AAP? Could it be because we discuss their retracted policy statement in which they advocated for female circumcision? Could it be because they don’t want to share a film where a member of their organization acknowledges the anti-circumcision Intactivist movement as the “more interesting controversy or topic for discussion?”

Whatever the reason, it must have been worth refusing several thousand dollars of advertising revenue for the AAP to make sure each of their members didn’t receive an insert with info about our film.

Our film is an objective look at the modern circumcision debate which features perspectives from all sides of the issue. We put the scientific studies we are discussing onscreen and even go through the research on HIV and circumcision with the authors of those studies. If the AAP is indeed an evidence-based organization, simply interested in what is in the best interest of children, then they would benefit from a film like ours. They should be promoting this film to their members as an educational tool. However, the American Academy of Pediatrics has yet to issue a statement on the film “American Circumcision”.

The only reason I can see that the AAP would not engage with a major documentary featuring multiple members of their organization is that they afraid of having a public debate on circumcision. By now the AAP should be aware of our film. When we screened at the Social Justice Film Festival in Seattle (where won a Silver Jury Prize award), I invited Douglas Diekema, bioethicist for the AAP’s task force on circumcision to come see the film. (To my knowledge, he didn’t come.) Every pro-circumcision expert I interviewed was well-aware of the Intactivist movement, including those from the AAP.

The AAP has a history of avoiding this issue. Intactivist groups used to be able to have a booth inside the AAP convention. Now, they have to protest in the streets. Every year, those protests grow bigger, with this year set to be one of the biggest yet.

This issue is not going away, nor is our film. Circumcision rates are falling in American. Multiple European countries, including Iceland, Sweden, and Denmark are currently discussing circumcision bans. Our film just got on international platforms, meaning that the world can now see what America does to its children. As circumcision rates declines and the public has greater access to information, the AAP will eventually have to engage our film and the others speaking on this issue. If the evidence is on their side, then they should embrace this opportunity for dialogue with the public. If the evidence is not on their side, then they might want to hide and avoid public debate as long as possible. It seems the second is the strategy they’ve chosen.

Watch the film here.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Filed Under: Blog

Primary Sidebar

Follow

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • GitHub
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Medium
  • Pinterest
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Vimeo
  • YouTube

Subscribe for more here:


Share

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Archives

  • November 2022
  • June 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • October 2014

Copyright © 2023 · Brendon Marotta