Brandon Vandenburg and the Fairness Doctrine

newspaperoncomputerQuick post peeps.

The problem with justice in America is…people are unaware the news has been jacked.   People who work too hard, come home, attend to family needs, then relax.

They relax by watching a game on TV,  or in my case, The Good Wife.  At some point people are just too tired to learn. So they depend on the news to keep them informed.

Initially, it wasn’t a terrible idea.  But that was then and this is now. So, warning:

Depending on the News Media for Accurate Information – is a bad idea

It’s a bad idea for a couple reasons. News

Ever since schools dropped basic Civics classes, most people really don’t know how government actually, works.   Including when they most need to.  Such as:

  • 1.  Most people know they can be charged with a crime if they lie to the police.
  • 2.  Most people don’t know it is perfectly legal for the police to lie to people, during the course of their investigations.  (Charmingly referred to as, “An investigative technique.”)

But, I digress.

Since the views of most people following criminal matters are based on what is reported,  reporting lacking the heft of the Fairness Doctrine, signals a big problem.

The Fairness Doctrine:

The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission’s view, honest, equitable and balanced.

Also, radio and television stations were required to set aside thirty minutes a day to present programs in the public interest, in order to keep their license.  (Stations got around this somewhat by broadcasting these programs when most people were asleep.)

Now for the bad news

The Fairness Doctrine was repealed by the FCC in a 4-0 vote in 1987; about the same time Television station owners were allowed to buy newspapers.  So the plan was for rich corporations to change how news was reported and turn reality upside down. Upside down house  It worked.

Also, news departments now had to generate income.   Which explains how news “reports” began to feature those corporations spending big time advertising dollars…and lagging behind when they screwed up.

(This explains why it took so long for say, defective car recalls, to hit the media.)

Add to this toxic mix;  the changing of the phrase “in the public interest.

Anyone remember the last time they watched a thirty minute program regarding the “public interest” or saw even a 30 second Public Service Announcement?

Me either.

The FCC also changed “in the public interest” to mean “matters in which the public expresses an interest.”

In my area, the local CBS affiliate deemed football games were matters in which the public was interested.  So broadcasting football games fulfilled their public interest requirement to keep their FCC license.

Then, in a crazy Fox News kind of way – Janke Akre and her husband, Steve Wilson, both Fox Producers, were fired for trying to present both sides of a news segment.   (I found this at Daily Kos and edited because their page was jiggy.)

Jane Akre - Steve Wilson

Fox producers Jane Akre and Steve Wilson

In December 1996, Fox hired Jane Akre and her husband, Steve Wilson, as “Investigators” a Tampa Bay, “team” in Florida.  One of their assignments was to investigate bovine growth hormone (BGH), the controversial substance manufactured by Monsanto Corporation.

Fox executives and their attorneys wanted the reporters to use statements from Monsanto representatives that the reporters knew were false and to make other revisions to the story that were in direct conflict with the facts. Fox editors then tried to force Akre and Wilson to continue to produce the distorted story.

Akre and Wilson refused and threatened to report Fox’s actions to the FCC.

Both were fired.  They sued and won.  Fox appealed.  Fox won.

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.

Yep.  FOX claimed there are no written rules against distorting news in the media.  FOX, being foreign owned, might not be clear on the concept of fairness.  After all, the second largest FOX stockholder is a Saudi Prince.

Anyway as reported by Daily Kos, FOX lawyers argued under the First Amendment, that broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves.

On February 14, 2003 the Florida Second District Court of Appeals  overturned the settlement awarded to Akre.

The Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a “law, rule, or regulation,” it was simply a “policy.” Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly.

During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.

Part of the issue, is people.  People who have no idea any this is going on.  If you’d like to change that so news is real, and not just politics, please write to Tom Wheeler.  He’s head of the FCC now.

Tom Wheeler - FCC - is Media getting women killed

Tom Wheeler, Head of FCC

You can reach Tom by email:  Tom.Wheeler@fcc.gov

 I encourage you to write Tom, and be a part of the solution.

Doing so will produce a better America.  And one last thing.  Send this to your friends.

 

Advertisements

About bonnie russell

It's not about me....but working with and sometimes against attorneys, I *do* find interesting people doing interesting things.
This entry was posted in Government, Journalism, Law, Media, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Brandon Vandenburg and the Fairness Doctrine

  1. Moms Hugs says:

    Thank you for posting the truth. I’ve been telling friends & family this for the past 25 years so they’ll be getting a link to your wise post!! I also recommend ProPublica and Democracy Now! for news without hype.

    Like

    • Thanks. I have been using ProPublica for years. Here’s one example.

      If you go to the “About Us” section of my company, here and consider my report in November of 2010, concerning the number of San Diego Doctors who earn extra fees from big Pharam, you’ll notice I list the names and amounts, paid to many doctors for which their patients might be unaware. (I covered the pay periods for two quarters.)

      Compare my report to the NBC piece nearly a year later, on September 2011 which was the lead story, but which failed to name a single doctor or amount.

      Good journalists do their research. Media companies often, don’t.

      P.S. I wrote for the Examiner for a couple years and always complained their publishing tools were hideous. Six hours before a story could upload was not my idea of journalism. So now I write here.

      Like

  2. Moms Hugs says:

    I recommend ProPublica and Democracy Now! for independent journalism without hype. Also recommend Bill Moyer & Charlie Rose for excellent interviews.

    Like

  3. nancyg43 says:

    Did I miss a connection to Vandenburg somewhere here? I did not see one, but loved your article, and think the Fairness Doctrine needs to be brought back, but how? A public campaign will be kicked out by the media owners, I am sure!

    Like

  4. Sorry. My bad. Media facilitated in part, the retrial. 20/20 did a story on the case, which included a video that was never seen before….that had been leaked. A guy in prison – for a sex crime involving a cooperating juvenile, wondered why the since grown juvenile, now adult, was the jury foreman. (How this didn’t come out with Voir Dire remains a mystery.) Not mentioned during the trial, (that will begin anew soon) was the background of some of Brandenburg’s attorneys. My view is if the Fairness Doctrine were in place, we would have more competitive, accurate, reporting.
    But I didn’t make that clear. My bad.

    Like

  5. Nope. Not you. Me. Sorry. Working on a long post for Monday. And it’s hot and humid. My apologies.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s