First off, I wish to acknowledge that some of the finest journalists I know work for Fox News. I’m serious. People that I have had the privilege to work with over the years including, but not limited to Adam Housley, Claudia Cowan, Tom Whitaker, are honest, fair and aggressive journalists who work their butts off in the field to deliver compelling and well balanced stories (in fact, as I write this, Tom is on his way now to Libya, and Adam has spent a good deal of time recently in Japan). I greatly admire them and want to make it clear, these are not the people this blog is about.
No, instead it is about Fox News in general. The so called “news” network that continues to amaze me and continues to bamboozle Americans into thinking the U.S. is speeding along the road to ruin and it is all because we elected Barack Obama President. The latest shining example of Fox’s penchant to unduly influence the American psyche comes directly from the managing editor of Fox News’ Washington, DC Bureau. Today, it was revealed that Bill Sammon has admitted that during the 2008 campaign, he repeatedly told viewers that Barack Obama believed in socialism, even though he knew such claims were “rather far fetched.”
The revelations came forth today in an article by respected journalist Howard Kurtz. His complete article can be found here.
Coming from Fox News, it is not surprising. Nonetheless, here is my dilemma. Millions of well intentioned, tough perhaps misguided viewers each day turn to Fox News to receive “the news.” And when they see reports of some of my former colleagues mentioned above, they actually do get “the news.” But what happens when Adam Housley signs off from Tokyo, or Tom Whitaker files his report from Tripoli, and moments later on the same “news” station, you have reporters knowingly spreading false information? It not only unfairly influences public opinion, it denigrates legitimate news programs. And it unfairly creates a contentious atmosphere in America where, as we have seen in recent years, there is so much name calling and so much animosity, little gets accomplished.
Historically, we have known the difference between fact and opinion in broadcast. It was clearly labeled as such, just as the editorial page is separated in newspapers. But with the demise of the Fairness Doctrine, which marked the end of an era where broadcasters actually were required to be “fair and balanced,” the lines between fact and opinion have mostly dissolved. As a result, viewers will see a report from Japan on the latest disaster recovery efforts in one minute, and the next minute they will be told that Obama is a socialist (or doesn’t have a US birth certificate, or is a Muslim, or ….).
I am not for more government regulation, but even I wonder how far can American society go without some sort of mandate that requires honesty in journalism. Opinion is fine, but it should be labeled as such. Any attempt by a so-called “news” organization to misrepresent opinion as fact to sway the public’s perception is … well, it’s worse than socialism.
1 comment:
Originally, broadcasters were granted a license operate on the public's airwaves... in the "Public Interested, convenience and necessity." The fairness doctrine assured "fair and balanced" used of the public airwaves. All opinion was labeled as opinion. When the FCC revised the conditions for granting a license, the model became one based on monetary concerns and the Fairness Doctrine was abandoned much to the detriment of modern discourse in America. The price for with holding funding for Public Broadcasting should be the re-instatement of The Fairness Doctrine. America would be a better place for it.
Post a Comment