To Whom It May Concern:
While I appreciate the fact that a response was composed and a reply was sent, I cannot find a scintilla of redemptive value in the choice of General Mills to support the kind of partisan pabulum Sinclair Broadcasting represents.
The simplistic statement used in your response, "We choose to stand with the freedom of the press," is a transparent excuse for the choice to continue to spend large sums of money supporting a partisan advertising campaign disguised as news. While I hold dear the rights and privileges afforded Americans by the First Amendment, I also value Section 315 of the Federal Communications Act, which states that broadcasters selling or giving time to a federal candidate must provide equal time to the candidate's campaign opponents. Complaints have already been filed with the F.C.C. asking for equal time for other candidates and, not coincidentally, Sinclair's stock price has fallen by almost 17 percent and its market capitalization drop by $140 million in the last week and a half. What this means for companies allied with Sinclair, I can only guess.
Please note that, while I am not registered with a political party and, in fact, serve as a volunteer for a number of non-partisan organizations, I am appalled at what amounts to General Mills' support of a last ditch effort to give the Republican Party a let-up just days before the Presidential Election.
Until such time as General Mills makes some effort to correct this egregious decision, myself and hundreds of thousands of other consumers will take note. From Cheerios to Old El Paso products, from Pop Secret to 8th Continent, consumers will voice their concerns at check stands nationwide.