Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Politicalchat.org discussion boards > Politics and the Environment
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #21  
Old 02-09-2013, 05:14 PM
CarlV's Avatar
CarlV CarlV is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SF east bay
Posts: 4,456
Quote:
Originally Posted by mini me View Post
Ah, yes. The Fox news "won the right to lie" internet myth continues to propagate. If it helps you to believe that, go right ahead. However, the last time I checked, Freedom of the press applied to news network affiliates, local news anchors had general managers. and the general managers get to tell their employees what to say on the air.

I suppose if CNN fired Anderson Cooper for picking and choosing the stories that he chooses to pursue, you'd take similar exception with CNN?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas View Post
"Picking and choosing" stories isn't the same as broadcasting deliberate lies. That's what FOX won the right to do in court. If you can prove me wrong on that, be my guest. Otherwise, your sarcasm is pretty pointless.

John
"Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie.

By Mike Gaddy. Published Feb. 28, 2003

On February 14, a Florida Appeals court ruled there is absolutely nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a major press organization. The court reversed the $425,000 jury verdict in favor of journalist Jane Akre who charged she was pressured by Fox Television management and lawyers to air what she knew and documented to be false information. The ruling basically declares it is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a television broadcast."

...


The court did not dispute the heart of Akre's claim, that Fox pressured her to broadcast a false story to protect the broadcaster from having to defend the truth in court, as well as suffer the ire of irate advertisers. Fox argued from the first, and failed on three separate occasions, in front of three different judges, to have the case tossed out on the grounds there is no hard, fast, and written rule against deliberate distortion of the news.

The attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch, argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves.

In its six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals held that the Federal Communications Commission position against news distortion is only a "policy," not a promulgated law, rule, or regulation.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-decision-2003






Carl
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:39 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.