The Love Chronicles

This article is not so much about the fact that Fox News lies, distorts, and just leaves out news it does not like, but why the loophole is allowed to stay in effect that allows them to it. To be fair, as I know I may send this to Jim, Fox News is not the only one who is guilty of the above statements I have made, but I do feel they take it to a whole new level! The link  http://foxnewsboycott.com/resources/fox-can-lie-lawsuit/, tells the story of a husband and wife team that were fired from Fox for refusing to knowingly include false information in their report concerning the Monsanto Company’s production of RBGH, a drug designed to make cows produce more milk. The case is also chronicled at the Wiki site, which the article does mention.

I also looked up the fairness law in broadcasting that used to be in effect. It was struck down during the Reagan years. Basically it stated that news agencies must report on stories that would in some way effect the lives of its viewers, and that both sides of the debate must be broadcast with no editing by the news channel, hence the word “fairness”. It was struck down because as the internet and other media came into existence the Reagan lawyers argued that there was enough places where arguments or opinions could be presented that news organization did not have to participate in presenting both sides of a debate, argument, or opinion. Just search fairness law in broadcasting followed by Wiki and you will get a lot of info.

After the fairness law regulation was struck down congress tried to make it a law, but Reagan vetoed it. It was tried again under Bush, but was again, vetoed. So in the comment sections of the link people are asking why this loophole has been allowed to exist making it legal to lie? My answer is politics, money,  and so far two presidents! Now the language in the legalese of the decision in this case does not use the word lie, but I can look up the definitions of words that are used, if you like, and they are definitely saying it is ok to lie. So I am demonstrating why this loophole is alive and well. It was first put into effect in 1949 and then struck down by the Reagan administration, as I stated earlier. It has since been twice resurrected as a proposed law and vetoed by Reagan and Bush, again, as previously stated. So this does not give Fox any more right to lie or distort, or simply not report news it does not agree with than anyone else, but consider what I say next. Find me a news organization that has fired broadcasters for refusing to knowingly include a lie in their reporting of the news as was ordered by Fox, I say you cannot do it! Also be aware that Fox does not deny that they did this, they only argue that regulations now in effect are not actually laws, so technically they did not break the law! Now they had to go through several judges and layers of counter-suits to find a judge who agreed, but they finally were successful. If you read the article I included the link to, it explains all this.

I wrote this because, using a Robert Kennedy article as a template, I said that Fox News could not broadcast in Canada because they do not allow you to lie. They did have a similar law, which was also struck down using some of the same free speech jargon used in the U.S., but that case was not about Fox, and did not ever stop them from broadcasting in some form or other, so I deleted the post after some reflection. This case in Florida is about Fox however.

Again, to be fair, all of the reporting by news outlets takes advantage of the fact they are not held to an absolute standard when it comes to telling the truth, or any versions of the truth they decide to broadcast! I just know, in certain areas, Fox is all that is watched because it reinforces pre-conceived notions that are popular in those areas!  So the truth cannot be known in my opinion, unless you hunt for it, which most are unwilling to do because  they would have to change the dogma they live by!