My limited understanding of election law is that buying negative stories about a candidate or pledging to write false negative stories about a candidates opponent are in-kind donations to a campaign that must be reported as such and subject to dollar limits.
This is not a 1st Amendment question as 1) paid stories that aren’t published aren’t speech (people ARE free to shut their trap all day long but paying to shut people up is something different), 2) reporting payments or value of payments in no way restricts free speech - unless someone were to argue that reporting income to the IRS is a violation of free speech.
Cable news has its place for me -- in getting a quick introduction to news that's truly breaking, or getting an on-scene view of what's happening. The Jan. 6 insurrection is a good example. But the focus of cable news tends towards the sensational. I rely on (online) newspapers to give me a more realistic overview of what's important. They are my go-to source for news.
I don’t know if anyone ever read the National Enquirer or similar tabloids to get real news facts, but even if you don’t read them, the blaring headlines are unavoidable as you stand waiting in the checkout line. They are like the subliminal advertisements that work by worming their way into your brain without you really being aware of it. The stories were just one more straw on the camel’s back, Trump excels at one thing and one thing only: promoting himself by dominating the media. Your senses become overwhelmed with stories, information, disinformation, opinions, sound bites, etc. Depending on your BS detecting abilities you either swallow it all and think of him as some kind of stable genius, or you see him for what he has always been, a pathological narcissist and con man.
"Over the decades, there were several times where sources asked us to pay for information." Isn't that news? Name just one of the "several times" this happened. Fact or Fiction?
Freedom of the press is not an absolute like freedom of speach.
Freedom of press is subject to other constraints in the form of professional standards or codes of conduct.
These standards were established as fundamental to the unfettered functioning of a free press as a watchdog for the discovery and exposure of lies and corruption.
Among these ethical standards are truthfulness, accuracy, and the avoidance of harm.
It is incombent upon the press to credential its members. See the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics. While not laws or legally enforceable, journalists could and should recognize unethical journalistic practices and could and should make violations matters of public disapprobation.
As an aside, given the record-breaking defamation lawsuit settlement and testimony by its owner of promulgating fake news, I'd characterize Fox News as the National Enquirer of television news.
Thanks, Ken - we tend to forget what real journalism actually IS!
I watch Jon Stewart - wish there were more of him - comedian? for sure - satirist - absolutely, and his interviews with people I am not terribly familiar with - i.e., Salmon Rushdie, Lina Khan (FTC chairman) & a couple others beat out any "commenters" on most channels. (I AM a fan!!)
As someone who listens to podcasts of MSNBC, gotta say I would not be offended if they gave coverage to Columbia students going over the line. I want to be aware of excesses by the left as well as the right. Bulwark does that to some extent anyway. Bill Kristol and Mona Charen are not wearing Che Guevara t-shirts yet.
Thanks again, Ken! Still miss the daily, fresh every morning news coverage provided by the Post Star. Both local reporting and national and international coverage by the Associated Press. In spite of attacks on The NY Times, it is still the best source for objective NEWS on the national and international scenes. One may disagree with some of its editorials and op-Ed’s, but its news coverage is unsurpassed. “All the news that’s FIT to print”—unlike the tabloids.
I can remember when I was a child and we had to go to my little Italian Grandmother's home for dinner. We were bored and sat in the living room, my sister and cousins and I would sit with a copy each of the Enquirer and yell out headlines hoping we chose the most insane story and get everyone to laugh the loudest. At 10 years old we had their number. I refer to the New York Post as the Modern Enquirer. FOX is the verbal 24 hour Enquirer. Fairy tales and horror stories.
My mother loved the Enquirer and the Star, she would tell me to wait and see, they will appear in other news, I think we all love a little scandal, it's just separating truth from fiction
“Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed; everything else is public relations.”- George Orwell
How refreshing!
Great points on journalism. Another example was the mainstream media's lack of journalism on the Hunter laptop case.
My limited understanding of election law is that buying negative stories about a candidate or pledging to write false negative stories about a candidates opponent are in-kind donations to a campaign that must be reported as such and subject to dollar limits.
This is not a 1st Amendment question as 1) paid stories that aren’t published aren’t speech (people ARE free to shut their trap all day long but paying to shut people up is something different), 2) reporting payments or value of payments in no way restricts free speech - unless someone were to argue that reporting income to the IRS is a violation of free speech.
Cable news has its place for me -- in getting a quick introduction to news that's truly breaking, or getting an on-scene view of what's happening. The Jan. 6 insurrection is a good example. But the focus of cable news tends towards the sensational. I rely on (online) newspapers to give me a more realistic overview of what's important. They are my go-to source for news.
I don’t know if anyone ever read the National Enquirer or similar tabloids to get real news facts, but even if you don’t read them, the blaring headlines are unavoidable as you stand waiting in the checkout line. They are like the subliminal advertisements that work by worming their way into your brain without you really being aware of it. The stories were just one more straw on the camel’s back, Trump excels at one thing and one thing only: promoting himself by dominating the media. Your senses become overwhelmed with stories, information, disinformation, opinions, sound bites, etc. Depending on your BS detecting abilities you either swallow it all and think of him as some kind of stable genius, or you see him for what he has always been, a pathological narcissist and con man.
"Over the decades, there were several times where sources asked us to pay for information." Isn't that news? Name just one of the "several times" this happened. Fact or Fiction?
Freedom of the press is not an absolute like freedom of speach.
Freedom of press is subject to other constraints in the form of professional standards or codes of conduct.
These standards were established as fundamental to the unfettered functioning of a free press as a watchdog for the discovery and exposure of lies and corruption.
Among these ethical standards are truthfulness, accuracy, and the avoidance of harm.
It is incombent upon the press to credential its members. See the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics. While not laws or legally enforceable, journalists could and should recognize unethical journalistic practices and could and should make violations matters of public disapprobation.
As an aside, given the record-breaking defamation lawsuit settlement and testimony by its owner of promulgating fake news, I'd characterize Fox News as the National Enquirer of television news.
Thanks, Ken - we tend to forget what real journalism actually IS!
I watch Jon Stewart - wish there were more of him - comedian? for sure - satirist - absolutely, and his interviews with people I am not terribly familiar with - i.e., Salmon Rushdie, Lina Khan (FTC chairman) & a couple others beat out any "commenters" on most channels. (I AM a fan!!)
As someone who listens to podcasts of MSNBC, gotta say I would not be offended if they gave coverage to Columbia students going over the line. I want to be aware of excesses by the left as well as the right. Bulwark does that to some extent anyway. Bill Kristol and Mona Charen are not wearing Che Guevara t-shirts yet.
Thanks again, Ken! Still miss the daily, fresh every morning news coverage provided by the Post Star. Both local reporting and national and international coverage by the Associated Press. In spite of attacks on The NY Times, it is still the best source for objective NEWS on the national and international scenes. One may disagree with some of its editorials and op-Ed’s, but its news coverage is unsurpassed. “All the news that’s FIT to print”—unlike the tabloids.
I can remember when I was a child and we had to go to my little Italian Grandmother's home for dinner. We were bored and sat in the living room, my sister and cousins and I would sit with a copy each of the Enquirer and yell out headlines hoping we chose the most insane story and get everyone to laugh the loudest. At 10 years old we had their number. I refer to the New York Post as the Modern Enquirer. FOX is the verbal 24 hour Enquirer. Fairy tales and horror stories.
My mother loved the Enquirer and the Star, she would tell me to wait and see, they will appear in other news, I think we all love a little scandal, it's just separating truth from fiction