Objectivity vs profit
We can’t know exactly what the founding fathers had in mind with the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but the story below explains a lot of the impunity (and arguably double standards, and faux outrage,) we’ve seen from the Fox network over the past 6 years or so.
In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.
Does truth only matter in accounting?
Does truth matter on the application of somebody applying for a job at Fox?
Just when is it OK to lie?
The court implied there was no restriction against distorting the truth. Technically, there was no violation of the news distortion because the FCC’s policy of news distortion does not have the weight of the law…
What is more appalling are the five major media outlets that filed briefs of Amici Curiae- or friend of FOX – to support FOX’s position: Belo Corporation, Cox Television, Inc., Gannett Co., Inc., Media General Operations, Inc., and Post-Newsweek Stations, Inc. These are major media players! Their statement, “The station argued that it simply wanted to ensure that a news story about a scientific controversy regarding a commercial product was present with fairness and balance, and to ensure that it had a sound defense to any potential defamation claim.”
Never, ever doubt that a commercial media outlet is driven by profit. Most of us get an idea of objective journalism as we go through school, but objectivity goes out the window when your boss wants ratings because ultimately the big boss wants ad revenues that translate into PROFIT.
In Florida, the Court held that a threat by Jane Akre (part of a Fox “Investigators” team at WTVT in Tampa Bay) to report the station’s actions to the FCC did not deserve protection under Florida’s whistle blower statute, because Florida’s whistle blower law states that an employer must violate an adopted “law, rule, or regulation.”
The decision above reverses an earlier judgment against Fox, although it’s hard to believe that the absence of a law about telling the truth is really tantamount to saying, “it’s OK to lie.” We can’t know what the founding fathers had in mind when they protected free speech, but it seems unlikely that their intent was to protect the right to profit from untruths.
Don’t play small. Rise above the profit motive. The fate of the future is formed by our actions today. The fact that Murdoch’s actions are profit-driven is self-evident. What will you work for?
RSS - Posts
The hullabaloo on social networking sites and at Fox suggests that it’s either
1) useful to somebody to draw attention to Fox network’s “we’re just victims of a powerful president” posture/narrative/story-line, or
2) useful to somebody to keep Fox upset and unbalanced.
Sure, it’s free speech at Fox. We get that.
But we have to grant that there are fairly savvy people in both Murdoch’s empire and the White House (albeit these are very different sorts of organizations.) So just who benefits – or profits – from this being the story du jour?
I saw the observation elsewhere that in USA one of the phrases that echoes through everybody’s unconscious is “Truth, Justice, and the American Way” as the reason for people getting riled up when Fox seems to be exploiting the first amendment in pursuit of ratings by distorting what they “report” in ways that resemble news programs on other networks.
That basic wrongness irks a lot of people, while the mimicry fools others. I’d say what resonates most strongly with the collective American psyche is a desire for fairness. Those colonists didn’t revolt against taxes, remember, they revolted against taxation without representation.
So as arrogant as it may sound, the folks on the “left” may well be upset with Murdoch’s group for what they see as duping their neighbors on the “right” more than they are about his profits and/or his willingness to exploit the decision reported above.
From my friend Ben:
Worst of all, James Inhofe (R-OK) is the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works commitee … and he continues to deny the reality of global warming.
Here’s the truth: For those who actually study climate and understand the history and data, 97% of them believe that climate change is real, and that humans have something to do with its causes.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/19/eco.globalwarmingsurvey/index.html
It’s almost laughable, except for the fact that there is so much money funding so much ignorance and misinformation.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/20/806300/-30,000-Scientists-Sue-Al-Gore-for-Fraud