"Friendly Reminder": Fox's Unbalanced Ethics Threaten Democracy

by Wendell Potter — December 9, 2010 - 2:12pm
  • Topics: Journalism, Democracy, Ethics
    • Share/Save Share this

    Anyone who still clings to the notion that Fox News is actually a news organization rather than a propaganda machine for special interests -- and that it actually is led by journalists who adhere to the code of ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists -- must read the leaked memos Media Matters disclosed this morning.

    Under the heading of "Fox boss caught slanting news reporting," Media Matters shared on its Web site an internal memo that Bill Sammon, Fox News' Washington managing editor, sent a memo "at the height of the health care reform debate" to his network's so-called journalists, directing them not to use the phrase "public option."

    Instead, Sammon told them, they should use focus-tested Republican and insurance industry talking points "to turn public opinion against the Democrats' reform efforts."

    In his October 27, 2009 memo to his staff, Sammon offered what he called a "friendly reminder." "Let's not slip back into calling it the "public option." Instead, he ordered:

    1. Please use the term "government-run health insurance" or, when brevity is a concern, "government option," whenever possible.
    2. When it is necessary to use the term "public option" (which is, after all, firmly ensconced in the nation's lexicon), use the qualifier "so-called," as in "the so-called public option."
    3. Here's another way to phrase it: "The public option, which is the government-run plan."
    4. When newsmakers and sources use the term "public option" in our stories, there's not a lot we can do about it, since quotes are of course sacrosanct.

    As I wrote in my book, Deadly Spin, PR firms representing the health insurance industry routinely furnished conservative pundits and so-called journalists with talking points their consultants developed to scare people away from reform.

    The insurance industry has spent millions of our premium dollars over the years on linguistic research and message testing to assist it in disseminating false and misleading information to manipulate public opinion.

    I devoted an entire chapter to the industry's "Playbook." Here is one of the tactics I said included in the Playbook:

    Feed talking points to TV pundits and frequent contributors to op-ed pages. They will know how to get talk show hosts with big audiences like Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly or Glenn Beck to say things on the air to support your point of view and discredit your opponents.

    This morning, the grassroots advocacy coalition Health Care for America Now asked its supporters to "reject Fox News and its attempts to continually attack the Affordable Care Act and the people who support it under the guise of legitimate 'reporting.'"

    I am calling on Rupert Murdoch to fire Sammon, and I am calling on Fox's so-called journalists and the network's producers -- many of whom I know and have worked with over the years -- to denounce Sammon's partisan approach to reporting and commentary. I am further calling on them, and the news staff at the Wall Street Journal, also owned by Murdoch, to dedicate themselves to truly being "fair and balanced" and to familiarize themselves with the profession's code of ethics.

    Nothing short of our democracy is at stake here, folks.

    Comments

    Comment viewing options

    Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

    Republicans

    Submitted by Becky in SWVA (not verified) on December 21, 2010 - 4:04am.

    As a wise man once said, "There are only two kinds of Republicans: the ones who are rich, and the ones who are too stupid to know what the rich ones are doing."

    Which party is in bed with big government

    Submitted by Dennis O (not verified) on December 16, 2010 - 10:40pm.

    One more thought while I am on the warpath... Democrats say the Republicans are the party of big corporations -- the rich. I have two questions: 1) Why do rich corporations shift their political donation percentages back and forth between the two parties? When Republicans are in power, corporations donate 70-80% to the Republicans, 20-30% to the Democrats. The percentages are reversed when the Dems are in power. Why is that? 2) If rich corporations are in bed with the Republicans, why is it that the Rockefellers, B & L Gates, Fords, Heinz' and other corporations use their foundations to support the causes of the far-left? And what about George Soros? In my estimation, rich corporations will use both parties to increase their riches. The statement that Republicans are the party of the rich is just a propaganda ploy. Both parties are corrupt.

    Try having an original thought, for once.

    Submitted by waterflaws in Denver (not verified) on December 17, 2010 - 9:50am.

    The Gates Foundation recently supported Right-Wing agriculture giant (monster?) Monsanto by buying large amounts of their stock and promoting their incursion into Africa. They are currently involved in promoting the privatization of Public Schools.

    Yes, both parties' LEADERSHIP is corrupt (having been co-opted by RIGHT-WING Corporations/The Rich - NOT a liberal bastion!). You just won't recognize that they are BOTH "conservative" and Right-Wing.

    I'm SICK of you Righties bringing up George Soros all the time. It's because, out of the MULTITUDE of Billionaires supporting Right-Wing causes, he's the ONLY ONE you can come up with who you consider a liberal! I wouldn't be surprised if you cut-and-pasted your post directly from a Fox, or Republican Party website. You obviously DON'T read CMD/PRwatch much.

    There's PLENTY here exposing the "Left's" malfeasances - look up "Geithner", and see how many articles there are. Want a candid look at how corrupt YOUR side is? Read Lisa Graves' current article 'More on Fox "News" and its Party' http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=HgSjgG%2B4Snlhj1Shz6LTU%2FVI%2Fv43O9C9

    Try having an original thought, for once. Quit mynah-birding your brainwashers.

    fair and balanced?

    Submitted by Dennis O (not verified) on December 16, 2010 - 10:23pm.

    You say Fox is a propaganda machine? What about MSNBC, ABC, CBS, et al. When it comes to politics, NOTHING is fair and balanced

    READ THE TITLE!!

    Submitted by waterflaws in Denver (not verified) on December 17, 2010 - 9:58am.

    READ THE TITLE!! THIS article is about Fox!

    Please be pertinent - comments like this are a waste of time.

    the Republican way

    Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on December 16, 2010 - 9:19am.

    Now if Gingrich and his cohorts would just play well with others, the country would be better off. But they talk a good game and then have Fox to cheer them on when they are giving away the store to their financial supporters.
    Co-operation? Not in this lifetime when a takeover of the government and a return to Puritanism and the plantation economy are the goals.....
    Respect? One has to earn it and the people who earn my respect are those who believe in social equality instead of rule by the force of the most powerful......
    People who don't study history are most surprised when history repeats itself......
    Propaganda rules and we never forget that as we watch it all unfold.
    SCOTUS has sealed our fate..... we have no chance now of avoiding oligarchy......

    fox

    Submitted by fritz (not verified) on December 10, 2010 - 6:22am.

    thank you for your efforts.
    now then, what do we do?
    the only people who do not understand the destructive power of fox are the ones still watching, they are about exactly half of voters and there does not seem to be any power on earth capable of bringing them to the light. we still laugh when sarah palin gets mentioned as a predidential candidate, but we forget that these people elected little george. twice.
    it does not seem nearly so pertinent that one needs little more than a gun, a bible, a flag and a bumper sticker to win the republican vote than answering the question of what do we do now? That is, there comes a point where you have to move beyond preaching to your own choir an let's all start doing something.
    yes they are terribly ignorant, yes they are about half of us and they are absolutely, positively a spectacularly destructive power. Now what?

    Fox News

    Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on December 14, 2010 - 4:38pm.

    I love Fox News; I love all of the reporters on there and I hold each of them in high esteem ...

    You article here was ridiculous.

    Certainly Fox News is slanted to the right, although commonly they entertain other points of
    view. Geraldo and Juan Williams are two very respected journalists and they typically report
    from a liberal slant.

    The way you speak about the bible is interesting. That shows your amount of respect for
    the bible.

    Republicans did have ideas, but Democrats went behind closed doors with the insurance
    companies and wrote the health care bill. There was no transparency.

    Then when Congress voted on it, Pelosi said, "we need to hurry up and vote on this bill so that
    we can find out what is in it."

    You expect the American people to respect that?

    Many of us do not respect that type of legislation.

    While there are health care problems and I can agree on fixing many of them,
    you were so unwilling to take Republicans into meaningful debate and discussion to solve
    problems.

    Newt Gingrich suggested time and time again, to just take one problem at a time, and discuss and
    vote on it,

    such as pre-existing conditions ... deal with that in one bill.

    That would have been do-able,

    but you wouldn't do it.

    You wanted to shun Republicans, conservatives,

    liberal?

    Submitted by Gary M (not verified) on December 17, 2010 - 8:01am.

    Anyone who believes that Geraldo Rivera and Juan Williams present liberal perspectives has a warped view of the political spectrum. They are, at best, moderates.

    FOX news has periodically been caught giving misleading information, and, sometimes, just plain lies. Remember that Roger Ailes, he of the infamous Willie Horton Ad, helped make FOX a big deal. FOX insisted, more than once, that WMD's had actually been found in Iraq.

    Here's the big difference between FOX and, say, MSNBC: FOX claims to be doing news. MSNBC claims to be doing commentary. One requires facts, the other consists of opinion. FOX often presents opinions as facts, and many of its viewers go right along with it, because FOX is, generally, confirming their opinions, regardless of how biased, bigoted, or small-minded they may be.

    Does anyone remember the

    Submitted by Graham (not verified) on March 21, 2013 - 9:05pm.

    Does anyone remember the DOCTORED video in the wake of the Adam Lanza shooting that was released and confirmed by ABC, NBC, MSNBC, and the like? But that's fine, it's commentary, I forgot. I apologize for using my brain.
    The Obama Admn. has been shown to use loopholes in laws to further the President's increasingly authoritarian agenda. Mandating hospitals to perform abortions regardless of the religious orientation of said hospitals? I don't claim to be any sort of intellectual by any means, but the hypocrisy of the left on fact-checking and transparency matters pertaining to media and Presidential Administrations is utterly astounding.

    Your's truly,
    A 17 year old.