Chris Wallace Fluffs James O’Keefe On Fox News Sunday

For much of the past week, Fox News has been promoting the exclusive appearance of James O’Keefe, the ersatz pimp who produced the ACORN entrapment videos, on their Sunday interview program. The actual segment, it turns out, was not an interview at all, but an overtly favorable puff piece. O’Keefe was heralded as the Fox News Sunday Power Player of the week:

This blatant adoration of O’Keefe had no news content whatsoever. It was pure puffery from start to finish. The only items worthy of note were 1) O’Keefe’s answer to Wallace’s question on whether he broke the law. O’Keefe’s answered “I don’t know what the law is.” 2) Wallace’s search for what drove O’Keefe. Wallace said that what he found was “A special outrage with liberal hypocrisy.” 3) O’Keefe’s admission of intent to do harm in his “reporting” saying that “If you use their rules against them, you can really just tease them and mock them and really destroy them.”

So O’Keefe wants to destroy the liberals and doesn’t seem to care about what laws he breaks to do it. He also doesn’t care about what journalistic ethics he violates. A short examination of the Code of Ethics as enumerated by the Society of Professional Journalists, reveals numerous breaches. These are just a few, with some particularly egregious transgressions highlighted:

  • Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.
  • Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.
  • Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
  • Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information except when traditional open methods will not yield information vital to the public. Use of such methods should be explained as part of the story
  • Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.
  • Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
  • Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.
  • Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
  • Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
  • Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
  • Clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct.
  • Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.

With so many infractions of credible behavior, it is interesting that Fox News chose this character to honor as a Power Player. O’Keefe’s avowed prejudices and absence of professionalism would lead most reputable news enterprises to denouncement rather than tribute. But instead, Fox celebrates this journalistic parasite. It is a testament to the lack of credibility of Fox News itself.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Fox News Is Soliciting Donations For ACORN Foe Hannah Giles

In yet another example of the interconnectedness of Fox News to blatantly partisan political activities, a “news” link on the Fox Nation website actually goes to a defense fund donation page for ACORN foe, Hannah Giles. You may recall that Giles is the YAFfie who dressed up as a hooker and accompanied her ersatz pimp, James O’Keefe, on a mission to entrap ACORN workers on hidden video.

The defense fund site was set up by the Plano, TX, based Liberty Legal Institute, an organization whose mission statement describes as their purpose…

“To achieve expanded religious freedom and family autonomy through litigation and education designed to limit the government’s power, increase the religious rights of citizens and promote parental rights.”

A defense fund for Giles appears to be outside the mandate of LLI, as it has nothing to do with religious and/or parental rights. Nevertheless, the right-wing organ has assumed responsibility for raising cash on behalf of the pseudo-journalist. The site’s administrator is Roe Ann Estevez, Director of Marketing for the LLI affiliated Free Market Foundation. Despite its name, it is also a faith-based enterprise that seeks to impose religious principles into government affairs.

However, the big problem here is that Fox has partnered with these conservative organizations to provide legal funds and cover to an individual who is an avowed activist for conservative causes, and who is presently being investigated for violations of privacy laws. The link at the Fox Nation will not land you on an article about the defense fund, but on the fund’s donation page. It does not provide information about the legal efforts on behalf of Giles or the groups organizing those efforts. It simply provides you with a solicitation to contribute.

The closeness of this association flies in the face of Fox’s recent attempts to distance themselves from the activities of Giles and O’Keefe. When ACORN announced that they would be suing the pair, along with Fox News, Fox complained that they had nothing to do with the video stunt. They asserted that they were merely broadcasting a story brought to them by a couple of independent reporters with whom they had no affiliation. But by openly promoting a defense fund for Giles, Fox can no longer pretend that there is no relationship between them.

As further evidence of Fox’s complicity with the anti-ACORN punkers, James O’Keefe will be interviewed this Sunday by Chris Wallace. This is another in a long line of appearances on Fox, the only network where the pair will agree to be questioned.

This fundraising project by Fox is an egregiously inappropriate affront to journalistic ethics. What would Bill O’Reilly say if CBS News directly promoted a defense fund for the fired ACORN workers? That is simply not within the purview of a legitimate news organization. And there is the key word: legitimate. Fox News is proving once again that they can make no claim to legitimacy. They are an unabashedly partisan player with an open interest in advancing their own political agenda. Nothing more.


Sean Hannity Pimps Convicted Ex-Governor

The Providence Journal caught an interesting news bite while watching Sean Hannity’s program recently. Hannity had just finished pouring gasoline on the ACORN fire with his usual bombastic sensationalism. It was the routine right-wing attack formula. Then Hannity announced that it was time for a word from his sponsors…

“[A]fter he broke for a commercial, Hannity returned with what he calls his ‘Great American Panel,’ including one Vincent Cianci. The show described him as the former mayor of Providence, R.I., without mentioning how he lost his job: He went to federal prison as a convicted felon for running city hall (with the help of our tax dollars and public power) as a criminal enterprise.”

So after condemning ACORN for engaging in activities for which no laws were broken, he proudly welcomed his felonious guest without even disclosing that this “Great American” was a bona fide ex-con.


Fox News Is Both The Most And Least Trusted News Network

Illustrating the ever-widening rift in American politics, a new poll by the Sacred Heart University shows that Fox News is the most trusted news organization (30%), as well as the least trusted (26.2%). That adds up to a 3.8% net trust for Fox. By comparison, CNN was most trusted by 19.5% and least trusted by 8.5%, for an 11% net trust.

Much of the rest of the poll’s results were decidedly negative for the media as a whole. Respondents consider them to be biased and more concerned with ratings than quality reporting. But the most profound observation in the survey, in my view, dealt with public perceptions of the media business and the monopolistic enterprises that dominate it:

“Nearly three-quarters, 71.0%, believed it is very (31.8%) or somewhat (39.3%) important that limits be placed on how many media outlets one company should own. Another 24.7% believe such limits are somewhat unimportant (8.4%) or not at all important (16.3%). Some, 4.4%, were unsure.”

“Over half of all respondents, 56.7%, believed it’s “bad for democracy” that six companies currently own almost all the major media outlets in the United States. Another 30.4% suggested it does not matter while 7.8% indicated it was good for democracy.”

That’s a particularly encouraging response from a survey that also reports majorities who believe that the media is predominantly liberal. With that kind of support for expanding diversity in media ownership, the prospects increase substantially for responsible regulations. This may portend one of the best opportunities for efforts to roll back the destructive consolidation that ensued since the passage of the ill-advised Communications Act of 1996.

Update: Bill O’Reilly cited this study in his Pinheads and Patriots segment. Except the only part he cited was that Fox News is the most most trusted network. He conveniently neglected to mention that it was also the least trusted. Does that make him a pinhead?


The Glenn Beck Blackboard Challenge

Let’s face it…Glenn Beck is insane. He rattles off loopy conspiracy theories that connect dots that only he can see. He makes wild and unsubstantiated accusations against his perceived enemies. He weeps incessantly over unexplained threats to “his” country. And, best of all, he draws pictures of his hallucinations that he thinks makes everything oh-so-clear.

It occurred to me that he might be able to use a little help (OK, a lot of help). So I drew up a few pictures of my own that convey a bit of the altered reality that infests Beck’s brain. This is my contribution to enhancing the understanding of a profoundly disturbed individual going through a very public psychological collapse.

If you are so inclined, feel free to make your own contributions and leave links to your work in comments.

Have at it.

And just to put some perspective on the impact of Beck, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC poll reveals that most respondents don’t know who the heck he is:

“According to the poll, 24 percent have a “positive” view of the Fox News host, while 19 percent view him negatively. Interestingly, 15 percent were “neutral” and 42 percent said they didn’t know Beck or weren’t sure.”

That’s comforting. And I wouldn’t worry about the 24% positive. It’s probably the same deadenders that support Bush, Palin, and Joe the Plumber.


What The News Emmys Tell Us About The News

The 30th Annual Emmy awards for News and Documentaries were announced last night. While I’m sure the winners are all grateful for the recognition, and many are respectable productions, there is much to learn from who did NOT win.

Emmys awarded to Cable News Networks:

  • Fox News – 0
  • MSNBC – 0
  • CNN – 1

Now, I don’t think anyone would have expected Fox to win an award for news. The Academy probably stipulates that any recipient for a news award has to actually produce news programming. And MSNBC hasn’t really gone out of its way to produce extraordinary programs either, though their cousins at NBC came in third in the trophy stakes, following PBS and CBS. It’s somewhat interesting that the two lowest rated networks took home the most awards.

But there is something disconcerting about the fact that the 24 hour networks devoted exclusively to news performed so dismally. The single Emmy amongst them (CNN) was for election night coverage. It seems to me that if you have a network that specializes in the production of a single genre of programming, you ought to be able to deliver some that deserves the recognition of your peers. All of the other winners were employed by networks for whom news was just a small part of their schedule.

If the cable news networks can’t deliver product that achieves a level of excellence worthy of an award or two, then maybe they are in the wrong business.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

The Sacred Trust Of Fox News

A little over a week ago, Fox News sponsored a rally in Washington, D.C. to vent their bitterness over having lost the election last year to a black man. The 9/12 Tea Party Project was conceived and promoted entirely by Fox televangelist Glenn Beck, and for six months it was peddled to his viewers with the help of just about every other personality on the network. The whole affair could have had a Fox logo stamped on the bottom.

Then, a few days ago, Media Matters posted a video showing a Fox News producer stage managing a live event at the Tea Party by whipping up the crowd to cheer for correspondent and ambusher, Griff Jenkins. It was an obvious violation of journalistic ethics caught on videotape, but I had no intention of writing about it because it seemed a rather insignificant incident for a network that had fabricated an entire rally. Jenkins’ reporting (and everything of Fox News) was already drenched with bias before this producer sought to manufacture the crowd response.

But now, in the aftermath of that embarrassing display, Fox News VP and Washington Managing Editor, Bill Sammon, has issued a memo on the subject of “standards” that raises the bar for irony:

For those of us who have only been at Fox for a relatively short period of time, it’s useful to remind ourselves that, as journalists, we must always be careful to cover the story without becoming part of the story. At news events, we’re supposed to function as dispassionate observers, not active participants. We are there to chronicle the news, not create it.

That means we ask questions in a fair, impartial manner. When approaching interviewees, we identify ourselves, by both name and news organization, up front. We seek out a variety of voices and views. We take note of the scene in order to bring color and context to our viewers.

We do not cheerlead for one cause or another. We do not rile up a crowd. If a crowd happens to be boisterous when we show it on TV, so be it. If it happens to be quiet, that’s fine, too. It’s not our job to affect the crowd’s behavior one way or the other. Again, we’re journalists, not participants – and certainly not performers.

Indeed, any effort to affect the crowd’s behavior only serves to undermine our legitimate journalistic role as detached eyewitnesses. Remember, our viewers are counting on us to be honest brokers when it comes to reporting – not altering -the important events of the day. That is nothing less than a sacred trust. We must always take pains to preserve that trust.

The fact that Sammon finds it necessary to remind his colleagues that journalists do not create the news is pretty sad to begin with. But it’s all the more astonishing when Fox News is presently plastering its air with reports about ACORN by James O’Keefe who explicitly states that…

“I’m not just reporting on something, I’m becoming something I’m reporting on.”

Sammon is being disingenuous and dishonest by pretending that he is interested in dispassionate observations. His pathetic admonitions sound like a scolding to the staff of a junior high school newspaper. His own appearances on Fox News are littered with prejudice and intended to sway the opinion of the audience. His confirmed partisanship is revealed in his reporting as well as the collection of books he has written.

The fallacy that Sammon is perpetuating that Fox News is either fair or balanced is beyond a joke. They do not seek out a variety of voices and views. They routinely cheerlead for one cause. It’s impossible for them to undermine their legitimate journalistic role because that would presuppose they were legitimate. What’s more, the last thing their viewers are counting on is for them to be honest brokers. To the contrary, their viewers are counting on them to provide the non-stop partisan propaganda that feeds their paranoia and rage. That’s the only sacred trust Fox News seeks to preserve.


Glenn Beck: McCain Would Have Been Worse Than Obama

Katie Couric is premiering a new Internet interview program tomorrow. Her first guest will be Glenn Beck. In a teaser for the episode, Couric asks Beck what he thinks of Hillary Clinton. That set off an interesting exchange:

Beck: How about this? I think John McCain would have been worse for the country than Barack Obama. How’s that?

That’s pretty remarkable. Considering that Beck has alleged that Obama is marching the nation to socialism; he asserts that Obama is both a Marxist and a fascist; he connects Obama to all sorts of figures that Beck regards as evil and/or corrupt; he believes emphatically that Obama is intent on destroying every principle on which our country was founded; he insists that, due to this administration, these are the most dangerous and frightening days of his lifetime.

I have to wonder then, how does it get worse than that? What does Beck think McCain might have done that would exceed in horror the destruction of America? Beck’s characterization of McCain as a “weird progressive like Theodore Roosevelt,” doesn’t seem to be enough to validate his fear. After all, Roosevelt served as president for eight years and the country survived and is still here a hundred years later.

I will be interested to see if Beck explains his position further in the Couric interview. Can he possibly present a coherent argument that justifies his bombastic assertion? And if he does, then how on earth can he remain silent about such an existential threat that still occupies a prominent place in the United States government?

Ever since Obama was inaugurated, Beck has been on a televangelistic crusade against some relatively low level administration advisors and non-governmental organizations. But McCain is the ranking member of the powerful Senate Armed Services Committee, he serves on several other important committees, and he is a frequent guest on television news programs. Yet despite the risk Beck sees in him, Beck has never bothered to alert his audience to the danger. If McCain is truly worse than Obama, shouldn’t Beck do a week-long series exposing him? Shouldn’t McCain be driven from office to protect our nation’s future?

On the surface, I have to agree with Beck (did I just say that?). McCain would indeed have been worse than Obama. But my reasons for that opinion have nothing to do with a paranoid and foreboding sense of doom, nor even a belief that McCain would have reduced America to rubble. This outburst is just further evidence that Beck is suffering from a dementia that may be deeper than modern psychology can address.


CNN’s Rick Sanchez To Fox News: You Lie!

An advertisement for Fox News appeared in today’s Washington Post. The headline for the ad said:

“How did ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, and CNN miss this story?”

The premise that Fox News is posing is that these other networks neglected to cover the Fox-sponsored Tea Bagging in Washington, DC. The truth is that they all covered the event, despite how little news value it contained. They all had correspondents at the scene and they filed updates at least hourly.

It is remarkable how Fox gets away with these attacks on their competitors who generally do nothing in response or in their defense. Last April I published an extended essay on the failure of the broader media community to stand up for itself. I included documentation of Fox’s repeated insults that were met only with silence. And I made the case for why it is imperative to speak up when your detractors are falsely disparaging you. Well, today, Rick Sanchez of CNN spoke up.

In this rare defense, Sanchez made some withering rebuttals. For instance, one of the photos in the Fox ad was actually of coverage provided by CNN. Let that sink in. In the very ad in which Fox was lambasting CNN for neglecting to cover the event was a photo of CNN covering the event. Furthermore, Fox’s own Bill O’Reilly referenced CNN’s coverage on his program. Sanchez also played multiple clips of their coverage of the event throughout the day.

In summing up his deconstruction of Fox’s dishonesty, Sanchez noted that Fox’s claim of covering the event was less than accurate. In fact, he notes, they were promoting it. That is something that was proven unequivocally by viewing the reports from Fox’s Griff Jenkins, who actually rode along with the Tea Party Express bus. And in closing, Sanchez pulled no punches by adopting Joe Wilson’s trademark exclamation which he directed at Fox News: You Lie!

This is not the first time that Sanchez has called out Fox for lying. Back in June of this year Bill O’Reilly asserted that no network other than Fox reported on the shooting of Pvt. William Long. On that occasion O’Reilly had to issue a correction, but typically, he lied while correcting himself.

Fox News has long had a reputation for shoddy journalism. Surveys show that their viewers are decidedly less informed than consumers of other media outlets. Studies have proven that it is Fox News that has failed to cover important and newsworthy events. For instance, they broadcast fewer reports on the Iraq war than any of their cable news colleagues. So it is the height of cynicism for them to publish ads that criticize their competitors and aggrandize themselves. In fact is beyond cynicism. It is deliberately false and an insult to news consumers everywhere.

In other words, it’s Fox News.

[Update:] The networks are issuing their responses. ABC, NBC and CBS have all criticized Fox for their demonstrably false advertisement. Fox is defending their ad saying:

“Generally speaking, it’s fair to say that from the tea party movement … to Acorn … to the march on 9/12, the networks either ignored the story, marginalized it or misrepresented the significance of it altogether,” said Michael Tammero, vice president of marketing for Fox News.”

It seems, though, that Fox is defending an ad they didn’t run. This ad has nothing to do with ACORN or any event other than the 9/12 rally. The Tea Bagging was a Fox-sponsored program from the start, and other news enterprises have no obligation to help to promote Fox’s programming.

Also, the Washington Post is defending their having printed the ad:

“The Post will not reject an advertisement based on its content or sponsor, unless the ad is illegal, false, advocates illegal actions, or is not in keeping with standards of taste. When we do not see anything in a particular ad that is contrary to these standards, we will not place limits on speech or content. That was our review and judgment in this case.”

They further claimed that the ad wasn’t false because Fox News was merely “expressing its opinion.” Of course, an opinion can also be (and in this case was) false, so that’s a pretty lame defense. An objective and independent observer would have to conclude that this ad violated the standards of the Post.

And CNN fires back:


The Pimp Show: Exclusively On Fox News

It should surprise no one that Fox News is hammering the ACORN affair with characteristic rightist zeal. They have featured the story across their media platforms on TV, radio, print, and the Internet, almost to the exclusion of all other news. Watching Fox would leave one with the impression that ACORN and a police car chase were the only stories available to tell. Fox News’ hooker and pimp show, starring Hannah Giles and James O’Keefe, has virtually taken over the schedule.

But the so-called “fair and balanced” network is demonstrating how inapt their slogan is and how transparently they manipulate what they call news.

ACORN’s CEO, Bertha Lewis, has been making the media rounds the past couple of days to rebut the charges against the organization. While taking responsibility for their shortcomings, she has announced that they will be conducting an independent review to uncover any and all misbehavior and will let the chips fall where they may. In addition, she has aggressively defended ACORN’s mission to increase voter registration and their work on behalf of low income citizens who are seeking assistance with housing.

Lewis’ appearances have raised important questions about the attacks on ACORN. For instance, the raw, unedited tapes are still being withheld from independent reviewers. This brings into question whether they were altered to intentionally create a false impression. Also, O’Keefe has steadfastly refused to turn over the tapes from dozens of their stings where they were thrown out of the ACORN office. This is deliberate deception intended to disguise the fact that, by far, the majority of ACORN employees are honest and moral.

These questions remain unanswered despite Lewis’ having raised them during interviews with journalists across the dial. She has submitted to multiple inquiries from the likes of Bill O’Reilly, Ed Schultz, Rick Sanchez, and others, on all of the cable news networks without regard to ideology. By contrast, O’Keefe and Giles have refused all interviews except for those on Fox News. They have already appeared on Hannity, Beck, Fox & Friends, and America’s News HQ. All Fox programs. The other news networks have standing requests for them to appear but, so far, none have been accepted. What do you think they are afraid of? They clearly have time available for the media, so long as it’s the friendly variety that will embrace them in a protective cocoon.

Obviously O’Keefe and Giles are either afraid, unprepared, or they are not being permitted to stray from the santcuary of Fox by their handlers. They refer to themselves as journalists, and O’Keefe went further describing himself as “the future of journalism” and told the New Jersey Star-Ledger that:

“The tone of my videos is unique. I’m not just reporting on something, I’m becoming something I’m reporting on.”

So he’s becoming a pimp? That would explain his association with Fox News. But if O’Keefe and Giles are unwilling to have their work be reviewed for accuracy, and they can’t defend themselves in independent forums, then how can they pretend that they are journalists? How can anything they report be regarded as credible?

How are they different than Borat?