1 of 1- RadioActive
- Moderator
Offline 
Former Fox Execs. Apologize For Helping To Create Fox News Network
Now there's something you don't see every day - three of the people behind the creation of the Fox TV Network openly apologizing to the world for once being part of an organization that now knowingly spreads false information to the public, via its cable all-news channel
Part of their remarkable statement reads as follows:
"For what little it may, or may not, be worth at this point, Preston Padden, Ken Solomon and Bill Reyner wish to express their deep disappointment for helping to give birth to Fox Broadcasting Company and Fox Television that came to include Fox News Channel — the channel that prominently includes news that, in the words of Sidney Powell’s counsel, “no reasonable person would believe.”
“We never envisioned, and would not knowingly have enabled, the disinformation machine that, in our opinion, Fox has become,” they claimed, arguing that Fox News “has had many negative impacts on our society.”
Former Fox Executives Apologize For Helping Birth ‘Bile-Filled Network’ That ‘Has Had Many Negative Impacts On Our Society’
- paterson1
- Member
Offline
Re: Former Fox Execs. Apologize For Helping To Create Fox News Network
I still don't understand why there has been no penalty or consequences for Fox by the FCC or some other government body. Great that these three regret decades later what they were a part of, but talk is cheap, and this has zero impact on FOX News Network.
FNN has been proven to be liars, deliberately misleading the public, irresponsible broadcasters with no ethics. They have been hurting and undermining democracy much more than anything positive.
The sad part is that they have been doing this for years and yet because they are a cable channel, there appears to be no accountability. If CBS or NBC behaved this way with news programming the FCC or other government organization would have yanked them off the air.
What a stupid system....
Last edited by paterson1 (July 12, 2023 10:49 pm)
- Dial Twister
- Member
Offline
Re: Former Fox Execs. Apologize For Helping To Create Fox News Network
One word sums it up best.
Freedumb
- Carl Patrick
- Member
Offline
Re: Former Fox Execs. Apologize For Helping To Create Fox News Network
It's a bit like closing the barn door after the horse has bolted. They could reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, but that's highly unlikely.
- tvguy
- Member
Offline
Re: Former Fox Execs. Apologize For Helping To Create Fox News Network
paterson1 wrote:
I still don't understand why there has been no penalty or consequences for Fox by the FCC or some other government body. Great that these three regret decades later what they were a part of, but talk is cheap, and this has zero impact on FOX News Network.
FNN has been proven to be liars, deliberately misleading the public, irresponsible broadcasters with no ethics. They have been hurting and undermining democracy much more than anything positive.
The sad part is that they have been doing this for years and yet because they are a cable channel, there appears to be no accountability. If CBS or NBC behaved this way with news programming the FCC or other government organization would have yanked them off the air.
What a stupid system....
A couple of things. The U.S. "first amendment" has been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Sullivan v. Ny Times, very broadly, to protect news organizations, even when they publish defamatory or conspiracy theory laden news. There is a very high bar set in the U.S. for proving defamation. So FOX, and other so-called news networks can basically get away with everything. If Smartmatic goes to trial, that could change the equation, but not by much. We don't have an equivalent "1st amendment" free speech right in Canada. Our Charter of Rights and Freedoms is tempered by anti-hate legislation that has been upheld in the courts. Essentially Canadian law, allows freedom of speech, as long as you don't yell "fire" in a crowded theatre...when there is no fire. I know that's a strange way of putting it, but Canadian law, is not wide open as to what you can say/broadcast and get away with.
At one time I did a travelling road show, with colleagues to do a libel/defamation and broadcast CBSC code 101 for broadcast and print journalists. I used to use the Rob Ford clip on ZoomerTV, where he insinuated that Daniel Dales was up to no good, peering over his fence. Dales you may recall took legal action...Ford did not have a leg to stand on. In the U.S. Rob Ford might have gotten away with it.....but I digress....
Our defamation laws, as interpreted by Canadian courts, are much narrower when it comes to "news" reporting. Case in point the James Keegstra holocaust denier case, he went to prison for his publications.
Two. The FCC has never regulated "cable networks". They are not licensed and not overseen by the FCC in any way.
Three look at the bizarro figures in the U.S. congress. Their "leading" lights, Jim Jordan, Marj Taylor Green, and others thrive on the conspiracy theory laden telecasts of Fox, and the lesser news outlets. These networks are essential to get their rants and hate filled claims to their G.O.P. base. So Congress is going to do nothing. FOX during the Trump years, became the Trump/G.O.P. delivery system. Look at the Senate...the GOP had a slim majority for many years, and their leadership used FOX as their message delivery system. Pathetic.
Four, and this is of concern to me. Canadian broadcasters must abide by the CBSC codes, the RTNDA journalism codes, and the CAB codes. If a broadcaster does not adhere to the codes, they can have a lot of trouble at licence renewal. It basically keeps everyone in Canada in line. Maybe the codes go too far at times, if you've read some of the CBSC decisions and the recent case involving CBC and the N-Word. But I'm not complaining. Fox would not last a week in Canada if it was required to abide by the Canadian codes.
Now here's the strange thing. Canadian law, going back several decades. to a high court ruling, says, in essence U.S. broadcasters are bound by Canadian law, particularly defamation law, when their broadcasts are distributed in Canada, i.e. via cable. Technically any litigant could sue FOX for defamation in Canada, and could win a big award. But no one bothers.
I am concerned that there is a double standard, because the CRTC allows FOX to be distributed, but subject to no rules whatsoever. Every Canadian broadcast journalist is subject to a set of rules that the courts have determined are reasonable and proportionate.
Pardon my rant, but it pisses me off that FOX gets a free pass in Canada.
Last edited by tvguy (July 13, 2023 9:58 am)
- paterson1
- Member
Offline
Re: Former Fox Execs. Apologize For Helping To Create Fox News Network
Excellent explanation and overview tvguy. Thanks for the information and clarification.
Surely the 1st amendment was never intended to allow any broadcaster or media company the right to willingly lie and manipulate the news. That is the opposite of freedom, free speech and a free press. I am not sure when freedom became the right to do this with no consequences. Freedom also includes responsibility and maturity from individuals, companies and governments.
Does the FCC not license networks like Fox News at all? So any slap on the wrist for Fox would need to be from cable companies that could basically pull them from their service? Why has there been virtually no comment or concern from the public regarding Fox News Network?
I agree that Fox gets a free pass here. I think the only redeeming thing is the fact that Fox News Network doesn't appear to be very popular. But again with companies like Numeris who don't release anything of value to the public anymore it is hard to know. It would be nice to see the ratings for the news networks in Canada including Fox, MSNBC and CNN.
- RadioActive
- Moderator
Offline
Re: Former Fox Execs. Apologize For Helping To Create Fox News Network
And on that note, this may be the most frightening thing you'll read all day. Worth noting that the Rasmussen Polls tend to lean conservative. But still, this is pretty scary.
Survey: Voters Say Fox News Is The Most Trusted Source For Cable News
- •
Thread Starter- tvguy
- Member
Offline
Re: Former Fox Execs. Apologize For Helping To Create Fox News Network
Hello Paterson1. To clarify, no the FCC does not licence CNN, FOX News Channel, HBO, ESPN or any other "cable" channel that does not broadcast "over the air". The FCC has no jurisdiction whatsoever in relation to Cable Channels, never has, probably never will. But the reality is, many FOX OTA stations that are affiliated with the FOX TV Network broadcast material generated by FOX News Channel. But FCC oversight of OTA broadcast content has been crushed by Trump and other administrations. Basically they are regulating the "7 words that you can't say on TV" that George Carlin did a major comedy riff about. Also they regulated theJanet Jackson "nipple" exposure at the SuperBowl. I believe there was a big fine levied for the "nipple".
Apparently nipple exposure is not protected by the First Amendment Right in the USA.
But all kidding aside, the FCC's regulatory powers were stripped away long ago, and are fairly limited to obscene language - that's about all. If you are a fan of Terry O'Reilly's "Under the Influence" there was an "ask Terry" episode, where he explains succinctly, the U.S. laws governing election advertising, and "why" U.S. politicians are able to (legally) air advertising that is completely false. Worth a listen. I'm a big Terry O'Reilly fan. About the only thing I listen to these days on CBC.
One last thought. Unfortunately some Canadian news directors that I worked with over the years, didn't take my "broadcast 101" course. I had an argument -about 50 years ago - with Robert Holiday about the use of "pleaded innocent" - on CFTR and CHFI newscasts. His argument was that if you used the words "pleaded not guilty" (which is the Canadian legal plea), the newsreader might mess up and omit the word "not" and the station would be in a lot of trouble - like they might be successfully sued for defamation. (his contention). Of course that was utter B.S and I told him so. But I don't think he would ever believe or take advice from a 20-something year old, who had actually studied the law. LOL.
The "innocent" plea, was something of U.S. fiction. In fact in addition to pleading "not guilty" in the U.S., there is a (different) plea in the U.S. which is "no contest". We don't have such a "no contest" plea in Canada. Yep, in Canada it's "guilty" or "not guilty". Anyway, Holiday did what he wanted to do. He was not the first nor the last news director that I encountered who "thought" U.S. law...prevailed in Canada, in terms of what Canadians plead in Canadian courts of law. A few decades later and with some grey in my hair. I think I was finally able to get through to truculent news directors and reporters who might have skipped the defamation lecture at broadcasting school.
Last edited by tvguy (July 13, 2023 2:52 pm)
- paterson1
- Member
Offline
Re: Former Fox Execs. Apologize For Helping To Create Fox News Network
Thanks again for the information tvguy, you know your stuff. 