Forget the fairness doctrine. Not even progressive broadcasters support it (despite the right-wing hand wringing). Thom Hartmann has warned it would be a double-edged sword, allowing right-wingers to demand equal time on AAR for GOP talking points. And as Stephanie Miller has said, what we need is fairness, not the fairness doctrine.
Ed Schultz says the root cause remedy is ownership—and a study has shown that independent stations have more balanced broadcasting. True. But last week Schultz too quickly dismissed a caller with a great idea: That media lying be regulated. And the idea is not new.
I agree with her. Truth is important, or else Fox would not have gone to court in 2003 to virtually nullify the FCC rule against intentionally lying in the news.
Schultz feared an anti-lie rule would be unenforceable, and a double-edge sword to let the GOP harass progressive voices.
But it is a sword we should not fear. We in the fact-based universe are already striving to tell the truth—and when we unintentionally put out misinformation, we correct it willingly. I have even seen Rachel run a correction for mispronouncing a name.
And as for being hard to enforce—yes, much of it. For example, it would be hard to contest the ubiquitous Fox "some say" (as in "Some say Obama is a Moslem"). And even such inanities as the "Obama terrorist fist bump" could squeeze through.
But the right-wing media is generous, giving us a flood of flat-out lies. For example, recently Fox's Gretchen Carlson lied that "there was varying discussion" about whether Fitzgerald had asked Obama to hold off talking about Blagojevich. No, there was no such discussion. Fitzgerald made the request, and to claim otherwise was a bald-faced lie.
And fighting lies is well worth the effort. As Gore Vidal told David Bender a few weeks ago, without lies, the GOP would cease to exist. Lying is essential to their survival.
(Hence—I believe—the media double standard. When McCain said Iran was training Al Quaida, it was ex-Dem Liebermann who jumped in and corrected him. He was thinking the media would call McCain on it. Silly Rabbit, truth is for Democrats. Republicans can lie all they want, because everyone knows they HAVE too.)
And it was not that long ago that media lying COULD be regulated in the media (at least in theory, if not practice).
But here's what happened: In 1997, two Fox reporters uncovered unsavory facts about a BHG/Monsanto/dairy scandal in Florida, and were ordered by Fox to falsify their news reports on it. The reporters used the FCC policy against purposeful lying to sue Fox. And in 2003, they lost. The Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States. Their logic: A "policy" is not a rule. So it's okay to lie and call it news.
And Fox has made good use of the ruling. As Fox ex-employee David Shuster has admitted, Fox reporters "just make things up."
Hey Obama administration. How about another look at that FCC "non-rule"?
No need to send people to jail (although that would be nice). Just make them run retractions (something non-right-wing media already does routinely).
Fox and their ilk will still misrepresent and slant, but at least let’s make it a little more challenging for them. And in their honor, let's call it "the Fox rule."