Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

riqster

(13,986 posts)
Tue Dec 2, 2014, 12:52 PM Dec 2014

The Problem is: it’s Perfectly Legal for Them to Lie to Us. [View all]

https://bluntandcranky.wordpress.com/2014/12/02/the-problem-is-its-perfectly-legal-for-them-to-lie-to-us/

Source info at the link.

This always surprises people: the Courts have ruled that news organizations can tell lies whenever they choose. Freedom of speech, don’tcha know. Jane Akre, an award-winning Journalist, was hired by Fox News affiliate WTVT to be, well, a journalist. You know, someone who reports news.

To Fox’s surprise, she and her team found some news. News that one of Fox’s sponsors did not like at all. So Fox ordered her to put some lies in the broadcast, to keep the sponsors happy and the money rolling in. Ms. Akre refused, on grounds of professional ethics.

Fox then fired her and her husband; they sued, and the court’s ruling, incredibly, made it clear that there was no law requiring that news organizations provide truthful content. None. Nada. Zippo. Zilch. Lies are A-OK for those upon whom we rely for accurate reporting.

That ruling, as we look back, opened the Falsehood Floodgates the rest of the way for politicians and their BFFs in the Infotainment Industry. One may still sue for libel, although it is very hard to win and takes years. One may sue over a false advertisement, but those cases are likewise hard to win and take years as well.

Meanwhile, Fox and their compadres repeat their lies so often in the interim, the lies wind up being believed to be true by a large majority of Americans. A few recent examples: Benghazi, Obama’s birth certificate, and much of the Michael Brown coverage.

This writer loves him some First Amendment, yes he does. However, there is no reason not to be able to require that news providers at least put a label on lies: call ‘em “editorials”, or “speculative”, or “unproved”. It would be better to make the lies illegal, but the Roberts court ain’t gonna outlaw lies. Not with the current load of Bushbots and Reaganistas forming the majority, anyway.

So, Gentle Reader, remember that you really CAN’T trust anything you read in the papers or see on the TeeVee. You are being lied to 24/7/365 by at least some of the “news” sources you have heretofore relied upon for information. You’ll have to keep a line open to Snopes, FactCheck, Politifact, and other such sources before you can believe Thing One the newsies tell you.

Because in modern America, it’s legal for rich corporations, “news” outlets and politicians to lie to you whenever they want, about whatever they want, however they want.
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Problem is: it’s Perf...