The Fox company has become a propaganda network for the Republican Party.
Or should the name be the Repo Potty? That's only fair, since its members use the term Democrat (not Democratic) Party for their opposition. No matter. It's legal in America to make jokes about your opposition. Unless you cross the line into libel.
In a free society, journalists watch what people do and listen to what they say, and report their observations to the general public.
Government, however, monitors these reports and tries to persuade journalists to bend their coverage in government's favor. Political parties do the same.
Public officials do this quietly, and sometimes succeed, becoming "anonymous sources," especially when they deal with controversial issues. This can be beneficial for both sides. Reporters get the story, and officials remain anonymous.
If they choose.
But they cannot prevent a reporter from talking to the opposition and writing about each side.
Nevertheless, they try.
If they cannot do it legally or even forcibly, they try through friendship and political alliance. And if political alliance can block journalists from accurate reporting of an issue, that becomes the goal.
However, that quickly crosses the line into propaganda, and cannot be considered journalistic reporting.
In effect, that is what has happened at the Fox company, so much so that it can no longer be legitimately be called a "news" network.
And this explains why so many of their top-rated journalists have left the company.
Or should the name be the Repo Potty? That's only fair, since its members use the term Democrat (not Democratic) Party for their opposition. No matter. It's legal in America to make jokes about your opposition. Unless you cross the line into libel.
In a free society, journalists watch what people do and listen to what they say, and report their observations to the general public.
Government, however, monitors these reports and tries to persuade journalists to bend their coverage in government's favor. Political parties do the same.
Public officials do this quietly, and sometimes succeed, becoming "anonymous sources," especially when they deal with controversial issues. This can be beneficial for both sides. Reporters get the story, and officials remain anonymous.
If they choose.
But they cannot prevent a reporter from talking to the opposition and writing about each side.
Nevertheless, they try.
If they cannot do it legally or even forcibly, they try through friendship and political alliance. And if political alliance can block journalists from accurate reporting of an issue, that becomes the goal.
However, that quickly crosses the line into propaganda, and cannot be considered journalistic reporting.
In effect, that is what has happened at the Fox company, so much so that it can no longer be legitimately be called a "news" network.
And this explains why so many of their top-rated journalists have left the company.
No comments:
Post a Comment