Randy Cohen
The problem with Randy Cohen's thinking is that the news media is a powerful position that can very definitely influence where America goes. I believe Randy Cohen knows his power, has a position and produces propaganda that supports his position.
Propaganda is not truth, because it presents only one side of a story by including certain information and excluding other information..
I believe Randy Cohen would present only negative stories about the Boys Scout because Randy Cohen supports homosexuality. I believe Randy Cohen would present only negative stories about the Catholic church because Randy Cohen supports abortion. I believe Randy Cohen would present only negative stories about Christians, Conservatives and Republicans because Randy Cohen supports homosexuality and abortion.
Since Randy Cohen is not presenting truth, but rather position and belief, he should not be employed as a news journalist, but rather as an opinion journalist. As a private citizen Randy Cohen can do anything he wants, but not as a journalist.
Maybe news anchors need to start each broadcast by stating, "I am an Atheist, who hates Republicans, now on to the news".
I believe that everyone in America has an opinion, thus the only real way to present news is to have two or more people present their opinion on every news story. The PBS NewsHour is doing this with most issues they discuss.
PS: Maybe I should have started this discussion by stating I am a Christian, Conservative, Republican.
-----------------------------
By Bill Dedman
Investigative reporter
MSNBC
Updated: 5:08 p.m. ET June 25, 2007
TV reporter who supported candidate is out, Cartoonist also let go, and newspaper drops column by Times ethicist
Reporter Calvert Collins, right, is no longer working at an Omaha TV station. MSNBC.com published on Thursday this photo from Facebook.com of her posing with Democratic congressional candidate Jim Esch. She was listed in federal records as giving $500 to Esch, and she urged her friends to vote for him.
------------------------------
The Ethicist - Randy Cohen
Randy Cohen, who writes "The Ethicist" for The New York Times, says donations to MoveOn.org should be allowed if it's OK to give to the Boy Scouts or the Roman Catholic Church. The newspaper in Spokane, Wash., decided on Thursday to drop the ethics column of Randy Cohen, who writes "The Ethicist" for The New York Times. The paper had been scheduled to begin carrying the column this weekend.
"Had he been a Spokesman-Review staff member, he would have faced suspension, at least, for his misstep," editor Steven A. Smith explained. "So, we're dropping the column. We'll look elsewhere for a publishable ethicist."
Cohen had given $585 to MoveOn.org in 2004, when it was organizing get-out-the-vote efforts to defeat Bush. Cohen at first told MSNBC.com that he thought of donating to MoveOn.org as no more out of bounds than giving to the Boy Scouts.
"We admire those colleagues who participate in their communities — help out at the local school, work with Little League, donate to charity," Cohen said in an e-mail. "But no such activity is or can be non-ideological. Few papers would object to a journalist donating to the Boy Scouts or joining the Catholic Church. But the former has an official policy of discriminating against gay children; the latter has views on reproductive rights far more restrictive than those of most Americans. Should reporters be forbidden to support those groups? I'd say not."
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Code of Ethics for Journalists
Code of Ethics for Journalists
A Code of Ethics exists for journalists, the problem is that it is totally voluntary and there are no penalties associated with the code.
A) Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics
Preamble
Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility. Members of the Society share a dedication to ethical behavior and adopt this code to declare the Society's principles and standards of practice.
Seek Truth and Report It
Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
Journalists should:
* 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.
* Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability.
* Always question sources' motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.
* 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.
* Never distort the content of news photos or video. Image enhancement for technical clarity is always permissible. Label montages and photo illustrations.
* Avoid misleading re-enactments or staged news events. If re-enactment is necessary to tell a story, label it.
* 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
* Never plagiarize.
* Tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it is unpopular to do so.
* Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.
* Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status.
* Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.
* Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.
* Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.
* Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.
* Recognize a special obligation to ensure that the public's business is conducted in the open and that government records are open to inspection.
Minimize Harm
Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.
Journalists should:
* Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
* Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
* 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.
* Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects or victims of sex crimes.
* Be judicious about naming criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.
* Balance a criminal suspect's fair trial rights with the public's right to be informed.
Act Independently
Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know.
Journalists should:
* Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
* Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
* Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.
* Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
* Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.
* Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
* Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.
Be Accountable
Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.
Journalists should:
* Clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct.
* Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media.
* Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
* Expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.
* Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.
B) Recommended Additions to Code of Ethics
1) All news stories must have a peer review and sign-off before publication. This is a normal Quality Assurance process for all business.
2) All news stories will contain comparative information if available. If the item is a common occurrence it should be stated. If the same thing has happened before the relative magnitude must be stated. A part of the comparative information should be an evaluation of previous situations. The democrats have totally failed to do almost everything, but when the Republicans do something they get criticized because they do not do it perfectly.
3) The number of people represented by a news story must be stated. 20 people can be made to look like a football stadium is full but represent only .00001 percent of the population thus distorting the presentation.
3) All news stories will have data presented in as many ways as possible in order that it be as clear as possible. Usually percentages are a better representation than numbers. To state a particular number can be misleading. 1000 deaths many seem large, but not out of 200 million people.
4) The source of all information used in a news story must be identified.
5) Credibility information must be presented for all sources of information. A terrorist account of an event is not as credible as the soldiers.
6) Only news (events) should be reported, thus speculation of future events should be eliminated.
7) Views by news anchors and reporters should be eliminated. Reports by differing opinions should be presented in a balanced manner.
8) News Media people must stay out of politics/social issues. No money, time, endorsements, etc. should be made available to political/social causes by News Media people.
9) Reporters are required to immediately report to authorities any illegal activity they discover. The first responsibility of any reporter is to assure the proper authorities are notified and that any possible help be rendered, then begin filming or reporting. The news media knew what was happening in New Orleans but failed to report to local and federal authorities. Instead the kept the cameras running to get good film footage.
C) Penalties for Violation of Code of Ethics
The main reason the news media has been able to get away with trash has been the reluctance of the judicial system to take action against the news media because of the freedom of the press Constitutional issue. A lot of the item that are involved are political in nature, so there is a question of who used who.
The Republicans have never been successful proving the news media is biased, and the democrats get the benefit so nothing ever gets done. I believe the real harm is the American people who do not get the best government possible because of the news media bias so it is the America people that should be allowed to sue and who should be allowed to sue the news media.
The news media is big business and get more money for more bazaar things. The news media is basically a pornography distributor because they play on the base nature of humans to see bloody images and hear stories of weird sexual events.
It is time consuming to prove that something is a half-truth or a fabrication. Most people do not have the time to spend on investigations, where their results will never be paid for. Fines punish the guilty and reward the person that did the investigative work.
Fines/Damages
(to be awarded by court and paid to the person that exposed the situation)
$1,000,000 for proof of Treason - New York Times Wire Tap and Money Tracking Stories
$100,000 for fabricated lie - Dan Rather story about Bush
$10,000 for failure to research sources -
$1000 for violation of Code of Ethics
The person who revealed the letter that Dan Rather used against President Bush was produced by a word processor and not a typewriter should have been paid $100,000.
With fines and rewards to people who investigate the news media, there will be an effective check and balance that is defiantly needed.
D) Need for National Association for Responsible Journalism - NARJ
A Code of Ethics should be required by congress, but neither Republicans nor democrats will tackle this issue and private citizens do not have the time or money to pursue the court battle that will be required to get a Code of Ethics in place.
A Code of Ethics needs to be established and all journalists held accountable to that Code of Ethics.
I am establishing a NARJ to pay individuals for proof of Code of Ethics violation and to pay for legal fees to get a Code of Ethics established by suing relative to a Code of Ethics that should be in place. If the lawsuit is won, the Code of Ethics now has legal standing.
If you would like to support the NARJ, please respond to this blog.
http://narj-clirus.blogspot.com/
A Code of Ethics exists for journalists, the problem is that it is totally voluntary and there are no penalties associated with the code.
A) Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics
Preamble
Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility. Members of the Society share a dedication to ethical behavior and adopt this code to declare the Society's principles and standards of practice.
Seek Truth and Report It
Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
Journalists should:
* 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.
* Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability.
* Always question sources' motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.
* 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.
* Never distort the content of news photos or video. Image enhancement for technical clarity is always permissible. Label montages and photo illustrations.
* Avoid misleading re-enactments or staged news events. If re-enactment is necessary to tell a story, label it.
* 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
* Never plagiarize.
* Tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it is unpopular to do so.
* Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.
* Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status.
* Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.
* Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.
* Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.
* Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.
* Recognize a special obligation to ensure that the public's business is conducted in the open and that government records are open to inspection.
Minimize Harm
Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.
Journalists should:
* Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
* Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
* 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.
* Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects or victims of sex crimes.
* Be judicious about naming criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.
* Balance a criminal suspect's fair trial rights with the public's right to be informed.
Act Independently
Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know.
Journalists should:
* Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
* Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
* Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.
* Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
* Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.
* Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
* Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.
Be Accountable
Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.
Journalists should:
* Clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct.
* Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media.
* Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
* Expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.
* Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.
B) Recommended Additions to Code of Ethics
1) All news stories must have a peer review and sign-off before publication. This is a normal Quality Assurance process for all business.
2) All news stories will contain comparative information if available. If the item is a common occurrence it should be stated. If the same thing has happened before the relative magnitude must be stated. A part of the comparative information should be an evaluation of previous situations. The democrats have totally failed to do almost everything, but when the Republicans do something they get criticized because they do not do it perfectly.
3) The number of people represented by a news story must be stated. 20 people can be made to look like a football stadium is full but represent only .00001 percent of the population thus distorting the presentation.
3) All news stories will have data presented in as many ways as possible in order that it be as clear as possible. Usually percentages are a better representation than numbers. To state a particular number can be misleading. 1000 deaths many seem large, but not out of 200 million people.
4) The source of all information used in a news story must be identified.
5) Credibility information must be presented for all sources of information. A terrorist account of an event is not as credible as the soldiers.
6) Only news (events) should be reported, thus speculation of future events should be eliminated.
7) Views by news anchors and reporters should be eliminated. Reports by differing opinions should be presented in a balanced manner.
8) News Media people must stay out of politics/social issues. No money, time, endorsements, etc. should be made available to political/social causes by News Media people.
9) Reporters are required to immediately report to authorities any illegal activity they discover. The first responsibility of any reporter is to assure the proper authorities are notified and that any possible help be rendered, then begin filming or reporting. The news media knew what was happening in New Orleans but failed to report to local and federal authorities. Instead the kept the cameras running to get good film footage.
C) Penalties for Violation of Code of Ethics
The main reason the news media has been able to get away with trash has been the reluctance of the judicial system to take action against the news media because of the freedom of the press Constitutional issue. A lot of the item that are involved are political in nature, so there is a question of who used who.
The Republicans have never been successful proving the news media is biased, and the democrats get the benefit so nothing ever gets done. I believe the real harm is the American people who do not get the best government possible because of the news media bias so it is the America people that should be allowed to sue and who should be allowed to sue the news media.
The news media is big business and get more money for more bazaar things. The news media is basically a pornography distributor because they play on the base nature of humans to see bloody images and hear stories of weird sexual events.
It is time consuming to prove that something is a half-truth or a fabrication. Most people do not have the time to spend on investigations, where their results will never be paid for. Fines punish the guilty and reward the person that did the investigative work.
Fines/Damages
(to be awarded by court and paid to the person that exposed the situation)
$1,000,000 for proof of Treason - New York Times Wire Tap and Money Tracking Stories
$100,000 for fabricated lie - Dan Rather story about Bush
$10,000 for failure to research sources -
$1000 for violation of Code of Ethics
The person who revealed the letter that Dan Rather used against President Bush was produced by a word processor and not a typewriter should have been paid $100,000.
With fines and rewards to people who investigate the news media, there will be an effective check and balance that is defiantly needed.
D) Need for National Association for Responsible Journalism - NARJ
A Code of Ethics should be required by congress, but neither Republicans nor democrats will tackle this issue and private citizens do not have the time or money to pursue the court battle that will be required to get a Code of Ethics in place.
A Code of Ethics needs to be established and all journalists held accountable to that Code of Ethics.
I am establishing a NARJ to pay individuals for proof of Code of Ethics violation and to pay for legal fees to get a Code of Ethics established by suing relative to a Code of Ethics that should be in place. If the lawsuit is won, the Code of Ethics now has legal standing.
If you would like to support the NARJ, please respond to this blog.
http://narj-clirus.blogspot.com/
Friday, June 22, 2007
News Media Bias
News Media Bias
Further proof of the bias of the news media, and the need for a mandatary enforced Code of Ethics for Journalists. A Code of Ethics exists, but it is voluntary.
Every major occupation has a Code of Ethics, except journalists.
http://narj-clirus.blogspot.com/
---------------------------
MSNBC.com investigative reporter Bill Dedman
Bill Dedman
Investigative reporter
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113455
The following 144 journalists made campaign contributions from 2004 through the first quarter of 2007, according to Federal Election Commission records studied by MSNBC.com.
MSNBC.com checked the Federal Election Commission records from January 2004 through the first quarter of 2007 and attempted to contact each journalist. If a person donated during that period, earlier donations are also listed here.
MSNBC.com limited its search to:
— Federal candidates, PACs and parties, not state or local campaigns.
— The period January 2004 through the first quarter of this year.
— Donors in news jobs, not corporate executives or publishers, who are allowed by nearly every news organization to donate.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113485/
MSNBC.com identified 144 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 17 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.
But with polls showing the public losing faith in the ability of journalists to give the news straight up, some major newspapers and TV networks are clamping down. They now prohibit all political activity — aside from voting — no matter whether the journalist covers baseball or proofreads the obituaries. The Times in 2003 banned all donations, with editors scouring the FEC records regularly to watch for in-house donors. In 2005, The Chicago Tribune made its policy absolute. CBS did the same last fall. And The Atlantic Monthly, where a senior editor gave $500 to the Democratic Party in 2004, says it is considering banning all donations. After MSNBC.com contacted Salon.com about donations by a reporter and a former executive editor, this week Salon banned donations for all its staff.
What changed? First came the conservative outcry labeling the mainstream media as carrying a liberal bias. The growth of talk radio and cable slugfests gave voice to that claim. The Iraq war fueled distrust of the press from both sides. Finally, it became easier for the blogging public to look up the donors.
Further proof of the bias of the news media, and the need for a mandatary enforced Code of Ethics for Journalists. A Code of Ethics exists, but it is voluntary.
Every major occupation has a Code of Ethics, except journalists.
http://narj-clirus.blogspot.com/
---------------------------
MSNBC.com investigative reporter Bill Dedman
Bill Dedman
Investigative reporter
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113455
The following 144 journalists made campaign contributions from 2004 through the first quarter of 2007, according to Federal Election Commission records studied by MSNBC.com.
MSNBC.com checked the Federal Election Commission records from January 2004 through the first quarter of 2007 and attempted to contact each journalist. If a person donated during that period, earlier donations are also listed here.
MSNBC.com limited its search to:
— Federal candidates, PACs and parties, not state or local campaigns.
— The period January 2004 through the first quarter of this year.
— Donors in news jobs, not corporate executives or publishers, who are allowed by nearly every news organization to donate.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113485/
MSNBC.com identified 144 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 17 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.
But with polls showing the public losing faith in the ability of journalists to give the news straight up, some major newspapers and TV networks are clamping down. They now prohibit all political activity — aside from voting — no matter whether the journalist covers baseball or proofreads the obituaries. The Times in 2003 banned all donations, with editors scouring the FEC records regularly to watch for in-house donors. In 2005, The Chicago Tribune made its policy absolute. CBS did the same last fall. And The Atlantic Monthly, where a senior editor gave $500 to the Democratic Party in 2004, says it is considering banning all donations. After MSNBC.com contacted Salon.com about donations by a reporter and a former executive editor, this week Salon banned donations for all its staff.
What changed? First came the conservative outcry labeling the mainstream media as carrying a liberal bias. The growth of talk radio and cable slugfests gave voice to that claim. The Iraq war fueled distrust of the press from both sides. Finally, it became easier for the blogging public to look up the donors.
Monday, June 18, 2007
Media Bias
Media Bias
A BBC spokeswoman said: "This report is about looking forward and how we are going to face the challenges of impartiality in the modern world."
This should be a report to schools of journalism all over the world that ask how the schools are going to teach impartiality instead of bias.
I believe the PBS Newshour format is the best available for now. The PBS Newshour format is to bring in two people (not journalists) of opposing views on a news subject and let the two answer questions posed by the news reporter. This is an honest format if the opposing views are not affiliated to PBS.
Other formats have tried having opposing views presented by paid news staff, but the views always seem to be in support of the position taken by the people that pay them.
-------------------------------------------
BBC report finds bias within corporation
By Gary Cleland
Last Updated: 1:09am BST 18/06/2007
The BBC has failed to promote proper debate on major political issues because of the inherent liberal culture of its staff, a report commissioned by the corporation has concluded.
The report claims that coverage of single-issue political causes, such as climate change and poverty, can be biased - and is particularly critical of Live 8 coverage, which it says amounted to endorsement.
It warns that celebrities must not be pandered to and allowed to hijack the BBC schedule.
advertisement
After a year-long investigation the report, published today, maintains that the corporation's coverage of day-to-day politics is fair and impartial.
But it says coverage of Live 8, the 2005 anti-poverty concerts organised by rock star campaigners Bob Geldof and Bono and writer Richard Curtis, failed to properly debate the issues raised.
Instead, at a time when the corporation was renegotiating its charter with the government, it allowed itself to effectively become a promotional tool for Live 8, which was strongly supported by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.
Geldof, Bono and Curtis were attempting to pressure world leaders at the G8 Summit in Gleneagles, which was taking place at the same time, to help reduce poverty in developing countries under the banner 'Make Poverty History'.
Mr Blair said the campaign was a "mighty achievement". The huge Live 8 concerts across the world were its culmination and the BBC cleared its schedules to show them, with coverage on BBC One, Two and Three and Radio One and Two.
Around the same time it also screened a specially-written episode of Curtis's popular sitcom The Vicar of Dibley that featured a minute long Make Poverty History video and saw characters urged to support it. And it aired another Curtis drama, The Girl in the Café, in which Bill Nighy falls in love with an anti-poverty campaigner - even giving Gordon Brown an advance copy.
The BBC also ran a week long Africa special featuring a series of documentaries by Geldof and a day celebrating the National Health Service, prompting Sky News political editor Adam Boulton to tell a House of Lords select committee it was in danger of peddling government propaganda.
The report concludes BBC staff must be more willing to challenge their own beliefs.
It reads: "There is a tendency to 'group think' with too many staff inhabiting a shared space and comfort zone."
A staff impartiality seminar held last year is also documented in the report, at which executives admitted they would broadcast images of the Bible being thrown away but not the Koran, in case Muslims were offended.
During the seminar a senior BBC reporter criticised the corporation for being anti-American.
The report was jointly commissioned by BBC managers and the board of governors and will be published by the BBC Trust, which has since replaced the governors.
It has been approved by a committee headed by BBC trustee and former ITN editor-in-chief Richard Tait. Other members include BBC deputy director-general Mark Byford, head of BBC News Helen Boaden and creative director Alan Yentob.
Writing in The Observer yesterday, Mr Tait said that "the BBC cannot allow its output to be taken over by campaigning groups" and added: "At the BBC impartiality is and must remain non-negotiable because it is vital to safeguard the BBC's independence."
The report offers 12 new principles for the corporation to adopt to safeguard its impartiality.
These include: "Impartiality is no excuse for insipid programming. It allows room for fair-minded, evidence-based judgements by senior journalists and documentary-makers, and for controversial, passionate and polemical arguments by contributors and writers."
A BBC spokeswoman said: "This report is about looking forward and how we are going to face the challenges of impartiality in the modern world."
A BBC spokeswoman said: "This report is about looking forward and how we are going to face the challenges of impartiality in the modern world."
This should be a report to schools of journalism all over the world that ask how the schools are going to teach impartiality instead of bias.
I believe the PBS Newshour format is the best available for now. The PBS Newshour format is to bring in two people (not journalists) of opposing views on a news subject and let the two answer questions posed by the news reporter. This is an honest format if the opposing views are not affiliated to PBS.
Other formats have tried having opposing views presented by paid news staff, but the views always seem to be in support of the position taken by the people that pay them.
-------------------------------------------
BBC report finds bias within corporation
By Gary Cleland
Last Updated: 1:09am BST 18/06/2007
The BBC has failed to promote proper debate on major political issues because of the inherent liberal culture of its staff, a report commissioned by the corporation has concluded.
The report claims that coverage of single-issue political causes, such as climate change and poverty, can be biased - and is particularly critical of Live 8 coverage, which it says amounted to endorsement.
It warns that celebrities must not be pandered to and allowed to hijack the BBC schedule.
advertisement
After a year-long investigation the report, published today, maintains that the corporation's coverage of day-to-day politics is fair and impartial.
But it says coverage of Live 8, the 2005 anti-poverty concerts organised by rock star campaigners Bob Geldof and Bono and writer Richard Curtis, failed to properly debate the issues raised.
Instead, at a time when the corporation was renegotiating its charter with the government, it allowed itself to effectively become a promotional tool for Live 8, which was strongly supported by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.
Geldof, Bono and Curtis were attempting to pressure world leaders at the G8 Summit in Gleneagles, which was taking place at the same time, to help reduce poverty in developing countries under the banner 'Make Poverty History'.
Mr Blair said the campaign was a "mighty achievement". The huge Live 8 concerts across the world were its culmination and the BBC cleared its schedules to show them, with coverage on BBC One, Two and Three and Radio One and Two.
Around the same time it also screened a specially-written episode of Curtis's popular sitcom The Vicar of Dibley that featured a minute long Make Poverty History video and saw characters urged to support it. And it aired another Curtis drama, The Girl in the Café, in which Bill Nighy falls in love with an anti-poverty campaigner - even giving Gordon Brown an advance copy.
The BBC also ran a week long Africa special featuring a series of documentaries by Geldof and a day celebrating the National Health Service, prompting Sky News political editor Adam Boulton to tell a House of Lords select committee it was in danger of peddling government propaganda.
The report concludes BBC staff must be more willing to challenge their own beliefs.
It reads: "There is a tendency to 'group think' with too many staff inhabiting a shared space and comfort zone."
A staff impartiality seminar held last year is also documented in the report, at which executives admitted they would broadcast images of the Bible being thrown away but not the Koran, in case Muslims were offended.
During the seminar a senior BBC reporter criticised the corporation for being anti-American.
The report was jointly commissioned by BBC managers and the board of governors and will be published by the BBC Trust, which has since replaced the governors.
It has been approved by a committee headed by BBC trustee and former ITN editor-in-chief Richard Tait. Other members include BBC deputy director-general Mark Byford, head of BBC News Helen Boaden and creative director Alan Yentob.
Writing in The Observer yesterday, Mr Tait said that "the BBC cannot allow its output to be taken over by campaigning groups" and added: "At the BBC impartiality is and must remain non-negotiable because it is vital to safeguard the BBC's independence."
The report offers 12 new principles for the corporation to adopt to safeguard its impartiality.
These include: "Impartiality is no excuse for insipid programming. It allows room for fair-minded, evidence-based judgements by senior journalists and documentary-makers, and for controversial, passionate and polemical arguments by contributors and writers."
A BBC spokeswoman said: "This report is about looking forward and how we are going to face the challenges of impartiality in the modern world."
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
WIKIPEDIA Support
WIKIPEDIA Support
Would seem WIKIPEDIA supports the Atheistic Liberal News Media accusation that I present.
I do not accept the concept that biased reporting is protected under the freedom of the press in the Constitution. It is free speech, but nothing more.
People should be allowed to sue the news media for liable, slander, etc.
http://narj-clirus.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States
Claims of a liberal bias
Liberal bias in the media is the result of liberal principles and ideas influencing the coverage or selection of news stories.
Critics of the media say this bias exists within a wide variety of media channels including network news shows of CBS, ABC, and NBC, cable channels CNN and MSNBC as well as major newspapers, news-wires, and radio outlets, especially CBS News, the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, the Associated Press, and National Public Radio.[13]
ABC News political director Mark Halperin supports the concept of a liberal media bias, saying that as individuals most journalists, and news producers, hold liberal political views and that these views affect their reporting.[14] In a survey conducted by the American Society of Newspaper Editors in 1997, 61% of reporters stated that they were members of or shared the beliefs of the Democratic Party. Only 15% say their beliefs were best represented by the Republican Party.[15]
A 2002 study by Jim A. Kuypers of Dartmouth College, Press Bias and Politics, investigated the issue of media bias. In this study of 116 mainstream US papers, including The New York Times, the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and the San Francisco Chronicle, Kuypers found that the mainstream press in America tends to favor liberal viewpoints.[16] They found that reporters expressed moderate or conservative points of view were often labeled as holding a minority point of view.[16] Kuypers said he found liberal bias in reporting a variety of issues including race, welfare reform, environmental protection, and gun control.[16]
Would seem WIKIPEDIA supports the Atheistic Liberal News Media accusation that I present.
I do not accept the concept that biased reporting is protected under the freedom of the press in the Constitution. It is free speech, but nothing more.
People should be allowed to sue the news media for liable, slander, etc.
http://narj-clirus.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States
Claims of a liberal bias
Liberal bias in the media is the result of liberal principles and ideas influencing the coverage or selection of news stories.
Critics of the media say this bias exists within a wide variety of media channels including network news shows of CBS, ABC, and NBC, cable channels CNN and MSNBC as well as major newspapers, news-wires, and radio outlets, especially CBS News, the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle, the Associated Press, and National Public Radio.[13]
ABC News political director Mark Halperin supports the concept of a liberal media bias, saying that as individuals most journalists, and news producers, hold liberal political views and that these views affect their reporting.[14] In a survey conducted by the American Society of Newspaper Editors in 1997, 61% of reporters stated that they were members of or shared the beliefs of the Democratic Party. Only 15% say their beliefs were best represented by the Republican Party.[15]
A 2002 study by Jim A. Kuypers of Dartmouth College, Press Bias and Politics, investigated the issue of media bias. In this study of 116 mainstream US papers, including The New York Times, the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and the San Francisco Chronicle, Kuypers found that the mainstream press in America tends to favor liberal viewpoints.[16] They found that reporters expressed moderate or conservative points of view were often labeled as holding a minority point of view.[16] Kuypers said he found liberal bias in reporting a variety of issues including race, welfare reform, environmental protection, and gun control.[16]
Saturday, June 9, 2007
What ever happened to Cindy Sheehan?
What ever happened to Cindy Sheehan?
There was a time that Cindy Sheehan was a major news maker. That time was when she was criticizing Republicans. The minute she started criticizing democrats, she became a ugly stepchild. When Cindy Sheehan was no longer a useful idiot, the Atheistic Liberal News Media dumped her.
Just further proof of the Atheistic Liberal News Media involvement in the Cultural War in America.
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
There was a time that Cindy Sheehan was a major news maker. That time was when she was criticizing Republicans. The minute she started criticizing democrats, she became a ugly stepchild. When Cindy Sheehan was no longer a useful idiot, the Atheistic Liberal News Media dumped her.
Just further proof of the Atheistic Liberal News Media involvement in the Cultural War in America.
There is a cultural war in America between Christians and Atheists. This war is being fought on the battlefield of politics. The battles are in the voting booth. The prize in the cultural war is the hearts, minds and souls of the children. The Atheistic liberal news media greatly influences both domestic and foreign policy by constantly reporting only bad news about Christians, conservatives and Republicans and only good news about atheists, liberals and democrats. The agenda of the Atheistic liberal news media is to promote extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle by having democrats in control of government.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)