Finally!! FCC fines local TV stations for airing fake news.

[Cal33]

Fox is long overdue for its come-uppance.

http://www.readersupportednews.org/off-site-news-section/132-132/5415-fcc-fines-tv-stations-for-airing-fake-news

[derby378]

1. That's going in my homeopathy book project for sure

Matrixx Initiatives funded one of these VNRs? Wow.

[DeSwiss]

2. The Fox News ruling.....

...says they http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre">can lie. A federal appellate court judge ruled that the http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZkDikRLQrw&feature=player_embedded">FCC didn't have the power to make teevee station tell the truth.

- This should be interesting.....

K&R

[bananas]

10. Yup - it's legal for Fox News to lie - according to a court decision where they did in fact lie

and if I recall, they fired their journalists for refusing to lie on tv,
and the court said that fox did nothing wrong.

[no limit]

22. Since Fox "News" is cable they have a different set of rules than local stations

[Cal33]

23. How lacking in common sense. The main thing is disseminating

information to the public. What difference does the means of
dessiminating the info make? Even Jesus Christ made complaints
about interpreting the letter of the law, and not its spirit.
Lawyers were this way, even 2,000 years ago!

[no limit]

24. Well if you get FCC invovled in cable that becomes a slippery slope

What's next? The internet? DU is disseminating information to the public, I would hate for the FCC to have a say on what can and can not be posted here.

[LanternWaste]

29. I don't think that the FFC denied Fox the opportunity or ability to lie

As per the story, I don't think that the FFC denied Fox the opportunity or ability to lie, merely to relevantly identify program sponsors.

[Cal33]

31. As I wrote in Reply #28 of this thread, I wish we had a law like they

do in Canada, which does not allow the deliberate airing of
false news.

[LanternWaste]

36. So do I...

So do I. But it seems our American broadcasters believe that Freedom of Speech is the equivalent to Freedom from Consequences.

[nxylas]

26. It was a Fox Network affiliate, not Fox News

The latter is outside the FCC's jurisdiction, the former isn't.

[Pab Sungenis]

3. I used to work for WMGM.

I was the news guy on duty there on 9/11. How sad that the new owners (the old owner, Howard Green, died in 2002) have brought the station down to such a level.

[Cal33]

20. "The new owners have brought the station down to such a level."

Yes. So many aspects of American life have degenerated to such a level. With so many
sick people holding high positions, America has fallen into decay.

[dipsydoodle]

4. The scam started with Jane Akre and Steve Wilson

after they'd both been sacked by Fox.

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/media-can-two-reporters-take-on-murdoch-and-win-1119040.html

It was subsequently found that Fox could invent news or words to that effect.

More details here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre

[Bozita]

5. Jane and Steve must be smiling today!

[Cal33]

11. Thanks for the highly interesting info.

[dipsydoodle]

12. I've seen the whole documentary which included that subject.

and it stuck in my mind. We had it on normal TV here in the UK a few years back - The Corporation.

Their bit is here : http://www.personalgrowthcourses.net/video/media_censorship_video.

[rosesaylavee]

6. Gee. Who published that story on Friday?

From Google news search for 'FCC Fines'

Wiley Rein LLP > FCC Issues Fines for Airing Video News Releases Without ...
Linex Legal (press release) (registration) - ‎19 hours ago‎
FCC Issues Fines for Airing Video News Releases Without Sponsorship Identification Kathleen A. Kirby and Ari Meltzer* On March 24, 2011, the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC or Commission) Enforcement Bureau issued Notices of Apparent Liability ...

FCC Fines Affiliates for Fake News Reports
TheWrap - Cassie M. Chew - ‎20 hours ago‎
Two network affiliates must each pay a $4000 fine for failing to identify the sources behind news segments they broadcast that featured company-produced video news releases. The FCC imposed the fines against the licensees of ...


KMSP-TV fined by FCC for 2006 video
Bizjournals.com - Ed Stych - ‎Mar 25, 2011‎
KMSP-TV in the Twin Cities has been fined $4000 by the Federal Communications Commission for using corporate video without telling viewers where it got it, the FCC said Friday. Fox 9 News used video from General Motors for a 2006 report on convertibles ...


KMSP fined by FCC
Minneapolis Star Tribune (blog) - Neal Justin - ‎Mar 25, 2011‎
The Fox 9 News team made a bit of news of its own when it got fined $4000 Thursday by the Federal Communications Commission for using video without identifying where it came from. The 2006 complaint from the Free Press and the Center for Media and ...


McAdams On: VNRs and the Right to Know
Television Broadcast - ‎Mar 25, 2011‎
LOS ANGELES: Do people have a legal right to know where “news” comes from? That's debatable, I suppose. Does the government have an obligation to assure the integrity of news? To a limited degree, yes. The Federal Communications Commission has ...


FCC Levies Fines On KMSP, WMGM
TV News Check - ‎Mar 25, 2011‎
The Minneapolis and Philadelphia market stations were fined by the FCC for airing video news releases during newscasts without properly identifying them. They were each fined $4000. The charges were brought against them by Free Press and the Center for ...


FCC Fines Local TV Stations for Airing Fake News
The Latest | Free Press - ‎Mar 25, 2011‎
WASHINGTON -- On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission fined a pair of television stations for airing commercials masquerading as news segments. These video news releases (VNRs) are advertisements produced to be virtually indistinguishable ...


FCC Fines Fox $4000 Over 2006 Video News Release
Broadcasting & Cable - John Eggerton - ‎Mar 25, 2011‎
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 3/25/2011 1:11:41 PM Dismissing First Amendment and other arguments, the FCC Friday proposed fining Fox's KMSP-TV Minneapolis $4000 for failing to identify a video news release it used in a June 2006 news story ...


Fox Station Fined $4000 for Omission of Sponsorship ID
Television Broadcast - ‎Mar 25, 2011‎
WASHINGTON: A Fox-owned TV station in Minneapolis has been fined $4000 for failing to identify the sponsor of a Video News Release. The Federal Communications Commission

***********

Not too many people will find it from the above sources. Six years after the incident and only $4000? Pffft. Really, I am with you 110% but I am not rejoicing over this. Someone no doubt is getting their jollies from this. I would like to see fines that bite and have a response/ruling within a week of the infraction. All that will come of this is some poor company selling zinc tabs is going to suffer. A little.

[Cal33]

7. This beginning is small. Let's hope it will grow and include

the big ogres -- like Fox.

[rosesaylavee]

9. I've got all the hope in the world

but this doesn't add to it. 5 years after the complaint was registered. $4,000 fine. Those two things are not going to stop what's happening at FOX, or CNN or even MSNBC now. In fact, this would only encourage them.

[sakabatou]

8. Is parody safe?

[dipsydoodle]

13. Only in the USA

if you mean with regard to libel.

[sakabatou]

18. No, stuff like the Onion News Network

[dipsydoodle]

14. Watch the 10 minute video here

and be suitably horrified.

http://www.personalgrowthcourses.net/video/media_censorship_video

[Wilms]

15. Recommended for a thread of it's own.

Thanks dipsy.

[Cal33]

16. I agree with Wilms. This post should have a thread of its own. It's of general interest, and

it's also too important.

[KharmaTrain]

17. FCC Has No Jurisdiction Over Faux Noise...

It's a cable channel whereas the stations fined were over the air and thus the FCC can and did fine them. There was a similar case of stations airing VNRs without attributing them around 2004...methinks those stations got their hands slapped.

[Cal33]

21. Sticking to the letter of the law, and not its spirit. It's sad.

[spanone]

19. i'm sure they'll exempt faux

[zorahopkins]

25. You Mean Those Infomercials I See At 2:00 a.m. Are True News?

Oh. My. God.

Another bubble burst.

I thought those nice people on the air at 2:00 a.m. were real newscasters.

[onenote]

27. The violation and fine have nothing to do with the accuracy of the information aired

The rule that the station was found to have violated is the "sponsorship identification" rule -- a longstanding requirement designed to ensure that when specific programming material -- whether news or entertainment -- is broadcast by a station in return for valuable consideration, the source of the material must be disclosed to the public through an on-screen sponsorship notification. As the FCC has stated, "the bligation to provide such a disclosure for material 'furnished without a charge or at a nominal charge for use on, or in connection with, a broadcast' is triggered when the use of the material falls outside of the involves “an identification of any person, product service, trademark or brand name
beyond an identification reasonably related to the use of such service or property on the broadcast.” The FCC fined the station because the matter broadcast included a "Video News Release" produced by GM that was incorporated into a story run by the station and that VNR referred exclusively and repeatedly to GM products.

In short, this isn't a stepping stone towards regulation of the content of news programming. Indeed, the FCC specifically concluded that the sponsorship ID rule didn't raise First Amendment concerns because it is simply a notice provision -- the station can broadcast whatever it wants as long as it follows the sponsorship ID rule.

[Cal33]

28. Too bad. We should have a law forbidding deliberately airing

false news. Rupert Murdoch was trying to get into Canadian TV, but was not
accepted because they have a law against deliberate falsification of news.
Even with the Canadian president's help (he's a friend of Murdoch's),
Rupert was not successful.

Do the laws of our country encourage deliberate lying? It sure looks that way.
So much for our legal morality. What kind of a nation are we becoming?

[onenote]

30. Its a good thing there's no prohibition on "false news" on the Internet

since most of your post is wildly inaccurate.

First, Murdoch has not been trying to get into Canadian TV -- the station in question, Sun TV, is owned by Quebecor and Murdoch has no interest in it. Its been described as a "Fox News" clone not because Murdoch owns it but because its owners have characterized it as having a "patriotic" and "conservative" point of view.

Second, the station wasn't refused a license because of the Canadian law against broadcasting false news -- a provision that has never been enforced in Canada to my knowledge. Indeed, the station wasn't completely denied a license. Rather, it was denied what is called a "Category 1" license -- a license for a station that would have been entitled to mandatory carriage on all Canadian cable systems -- a right that Fox News doesn't have in the US. The reason for the denial is that the Canadian authorities generally will not grant a new Category 1 license for a station that occupies a niche that is already served by a Category 1 station and since Sun TV's niche, news programming, already is occupied by one or more Category 1 stations, it got shot down.]

Third, after losing out in its attempt to get a Category 1 license, Sun TV asked for and received a Category 2 license. That license puts it in the same position as Fox News and other non-broadcast stations in the US -- cable systems are not obligated to carry it, but can do so if they want to. The station is supposed to launch next month. And to the best of my knowledge, it will be subject to the "false news" prohibition (which I believe applies to both Category 1 and Category 2 stations, although I could be mistaken about that).

I'm no fan of Fox News and choose not to watch it. And if I was in Canada, I would be no fan of Sun TV and would be urging my cable provider not to add it, but to add some other service instead. But its simply not true that Sun TV has decided not to pursue a license to operate in Canada because of Canada's "false news" prohibition.

[Cal33]

32. You seem to know more about this than I do. I read about

Murdoch trying to get into Canadian TV unsuccessfully, and merely repeated
what I read. I don't intend to check every article that I read. I don't
intend to spend my time that way, even though I am retired. :o) Also, this
is a far cry from publishing news from a news medium.

[onenote]

33. which is why one shouldn't believe everything they read on the Internet

and folks should be careful about repeating things they read on the Internet without making some attempt to verify them.

As for the fact that there is a difference between the Internet and broadcasting -- that's true today but becoming less true by the minute. For younger people, surveys suggest that the Internet is more often their principal source of news and information, not television. And for the population as a whole, the Internet has passed newspapers and eventually will catch up with the news media. At that point, the slippery slope set in motion by laws regulating the "truthiness" of broadcasting will run smack dab into the Internet and that's a bad thing.

PS The reason I know so much about this is that I'm a communications lawyer so I follow this sort of stuff

[Cal33]

34. I check occasionally when I have to. To do so regularly would only slow down

my reading to an unacceptable level. So I'll chance it and take my lumps. :)

[Shagbark Hickory]

35. This is different than Fox news and I am THRILLED they went after these turds.

You know msnBS was airing commercials like these repeatedly several months ago for some housing refinance bullshit. A lady would come on and pretend to be a news anchor and say how the new programs were so great and just call the number on your screen...