FOX NEWS CORPORATION - some facts

[woody60707]

Can you outline any lies done by Fox that have been taken to court that i may care about. Like not a story about cows?

A court case, about Bush and Fox news lying would be one i would like to see.

 

[GinandTonic]

Hmmmm....the debate you are proposing is that CNN is not guilty of distorted assertions on a deliberate scale, correct? Then I hope you enjoy this!

Where did I ever mention CNN? I dont give a rats behind about CNN.

What I am saying is that FOX basing a law suit on their lying and further their right to lie represents an abject failure to adhere to any sort of journalistic standards.

This is not a question of subtle bias, this is FOX saying "we lied, and we defend our right to lie" under oath.

If you believe that this represents acceptable professional behaviour then defend it.

All professions have governing bodies and codes of conduct, indeed it is what originally defined the term "profession". Many professions are self governing, and the government intervenes where they prove to be incapable of self governance. The British Medical Association is presently facing loosing its self governing status after a couple of cases where it was felt the MD's were overly concerned with taking care of their own rather than maintaining the necessary confidence in their profession - its not going to happen but the stick is being waved to make them set their house in order.

This is not a freedom of speech issue, it is about a profession being able to regulate itself and maintain public confidence in its probity. If the SPJ cannot set its house in order then the FCC must. Personally I want to see the profession self regulate, but perhaps they need a kick up the behind to motivate them?

 

[GinandTonic]

Can you outline any lies done by Fox that have been taken to court that i may care about. Like not a story about cows?

Journalistic ethics and proberty being thrown out the window in court matters. Be it about cows or presidents this sets precident.

If someone steals a 1985 Morris Metro should they not be prosicuted because it wasnt an Aston Martin DB9? Or is stealing a car wrong irrespective?

 

[Murky]

I haven't watched faux news since before the 2004 elections.

 

[bhsup]

That's not correct dear aneeshm. Government and industry regulate. People consume based upon the result. Once again, I urge to err away from such simplistic comments.

It's called freedom of speech and freedom of the press. They can say pretty much whatever they want. It's written in this little thing we have called a Constitution. Freedom loving people are familiar with it.

 

[Rambuchan]

It's called freedom of speech and freedom of the press. They can say pretty much whatever they want. It's written in this little thing we have called a Constitution. Freedom loving people are familiar with it.

Therein lies the problem and contradiction with news agencies operating under your Constitution, as the Akre & Wilson case found out. There's freedom of speech - with responsibility. And there's also Freedom of the Press - with professional Code of Conducts in mind. They are hardly "The Press" if they do not follow those Codes of Conduct.

 

[Turner]

And then there's down right lies masquerading as "news".

Yes. We call that 'The National Enquirer'.

Seriously, you raise a good point. I think tho, that just by our nature Americans look at things differently than other freedom-loving-citizens of other nations.

 

[bhsup]

Yeah, I guess that "freedom loving people" jab was a bit too callous as different nations can have differing, yet still valid, ideas of what freedom of speech and press entail.

Still, the thought of the government interfering with news reporting in any way, be it against CNN, FOX, The Limbaugh Letter, or the Village Voice is repugnant to me.

 

[GinandTonic]

Yeah, I guess that "freedom loving people" jab was a bit too callous as different nations can have differing, yet still valid, ideas of what freedom of speech and press entail.

Still, the thought of the government interfering with news reporting in any way, be it against CNN, FOX, The Limbaugh Letter, or the Village Voice is repugnant to me.

Then why are the professional bodies so unable to keep there own house in any sort of order?

This is vital. We are talking about one of the pillars of a free and fair democracy here. An informed citizenry and an free press to check the power of the other pillars of state is as vital as an independent judiciary etc.

 

[bhsup]

Heh, do you really want me to go off on what I think of an independent judiciary and how they've usurped powers they've no right to? Let's stick to news and reporters.

 

[sonorakitch]

Where did I ever mention CNN? I dont give a rats behind about CNN.

What I am saying is that FOX basing a law suit on their lying and further their right to lie represents an abject failure to adhere to any sort of journalistic standards.

This is not a question of subtle bias, this is FOX saying "we lied, and we defend our right to lie" under oath.

If you believe that this represents acceptable professional behaviour then defend it.

All professions have governing bodies and codes of conduct, indeed it is what originally defined the term "profession". Many professions are self governing, and the government intervenes where they prove to be incapable of self governance. The British Medical Association is presently facing loosing its self governing status after a couple of cases where it was felt the MD's were overly concerned with taking care of their own rather than maintaining the necessary confidence in their profession - its not going to happen but the stick is being waved to make them set their house in order.

This is not a freedom of speech issue, it is about a profession being able to regulate itself and maintain public confidence in its probity. If the SPJ cannot set its house in order then the FCC must. Personally I want to see the profession self regulate, but perhaps they need a kick up the behind to motivate them?

You contested that my comparison of CNN being as guilty as FOX as slanted reporting was false. I believe you used the word Nope in response to my post.

My point is that CNN is equally as guilty for hypersensationalism and misleading news reports.

Trying to regulate the news outlets is a very dangerous idea and one that could lead to society in which none of us want to live in. Let the media run its course and I guarantee you justice will run its course.

~Chris

 

[scipian]

I'm not going to read all the responses but:

Freedom of the Press!
and
CNN=Fox I don't watch either. Both are flaky and biased.

 

[Rambuchan]

Let the media run its course and I guarantee you justice will run its course.

What makes you so sure?

 

[GinandTonic]

You contested that my comparison of CNN being as guilty as FOX as slanted reporting was false. I believe you used the word Nope in response to my post.

I didnt comment on your CNN comparison except to say I didnt care about it or CNN. I believe I said I didnt give a rats behind, that being the accepted minimal possible level of concern about anything.

My point is that CNN is equally as guilty for hypersensationalism and misleading news reports.

1 - I dont care about CNN. Its not the point.

2 - This is an attempt to muddy the waters and diver the discussion from the key point you refuse to address.

3 - There is a profound difference between FOX and, as far as I am aware, any other news source. That is FOX has sworn under oath it has lied. Defends its right to lie to the public. Seeks to set a legal precedent that journalists refusing to knowingly lie are in breach of contract.

Trying to regulate the news outlets is a very dangerous idea and one that could lead to society in which none of us want to live in. Let the media run its course and I guarantee you justice will run its course.

A journalist is bound by journalistic ethics and a professional code of conduct. If they refuse to abide by such a code of conduct - while they are free to express themselves as they wish - they are not a journalist.

I am free to advise people as I wish about their financial affairs. I am not free to call myself a financial adviser unless I satisfy their professional body of my competence and abide by a code of conduct.

Let the media run its course and I guarantee you justice will run its course.

The pillars of liberal democracy are mutually constitutive. If one fails they all fail. The fourth estate is as necessary and an independent judiciary or a separate executive/ legislature.

 

[sonorakitch]

I didnt comment on your CNN comparison except to say I didnt care about it or CNN. I believe I said I didnt give a rats behind, that being the accepted minimal possible level of concern about anything.



1 - I dont care about CNN. Its not the point.

2 - This is an attempt to muddy the waters and diver the discussion from the key point you refuse to address.

3 - There is a profound difference between FOX and, as far as I am aware, any other news source. That is FOX has sworn under oath it has lied. Defends its right to lie to the public. Seeks to set a legal precedent that journalists refusing to knowingly lie are in breach of contract.

I think you misunderstood my post then. I was responding to accusations that FOX deliberately presents misleading news stories. My first post:

Come on, the same crap can be said about CNN and Turner on the other side of the table.

Your response:

Nope. The point is fox has asserted, under oath, that it has lied and deliberately misled the public. Indeed it has lodged a suit based on this assertion. AFAIK this is the only news source on earth to do so, and thus if we take it at its word we must regard it as the most untrustworthy news source on earth.

I do not excuse FOX's behavior in this matter (and by the way, the lawyers suggested it is inclusive in the first amendment for the right to lie, not that they actually lied, but hey, it depends on what the meaning of is is). My point is that CNN and other media outlets also have a record of misleading reporting. So if you don't give a rats bottom, you are not being consistent. If several news agencies falsify reports and you only lambast one, that is hypocritical. If your sole complaint with FOX is the courtroom drama back in 2003, then I will relenquish.

A journalist is bound by journalistic ethics and a professional code of conduct. If they refuse to abide by such a code of conduct - while they are free to express themselves as they wish - they are not a journalist.

I am free to advise people as I wish about their financial affairs. I am not free to call myself a financial adviser unless I satisfy their professional body of my competence and abide by a code of conduct.

I believe all senior news editors with FOX are accredited with SPJ and all have accredited degrees as well. What News Corp's mouthpieces stated in a courtroom shouldn't be a blanket statement regarding all top level journalists affiliated with FOX news and nor should they be; it is a disgrace what happend with Jane Akre of course.

Needless to say, there is a code of conduct and some journalists refuse to follow this in many organizations, including FOX. To declare FOX an invalid news agency because of this incident and not lambast other outlets (see Dan Rather) is dishonest.

The pillars of liberal democracy are mutually constitutive. If one fails they all fail. The fourth estate is as necessary and an independent judiciary or a separate executive/ legislature.

So you propose for the first three pillars to regulate the fourth? Sounds scary to me....all four pillars are supposed to be independent I thought?

Government regulation of journalism is not a sound idea at all.

~Chris