Fox News Facing Probe In U.K.

[Rokenn]

Fox News Facing Probe In U.K.

The Fox News Channel could be forced off the air in Britain if an investigation currently under way by the watchdog Independent Television Commission determines that it violated ITC's "due impartiality" rules during its coverage of the war in Iraq, Britain's Guardian newspaper reported today (Thursday). The newspaper quoted Julian Petley, chairman of the Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom, as favoring IT action against the Rupert Murdoch-owned channel. "I'm not in favor of censorship," he said, "but Murdoch would like to do with British television news what he has done with newspapers, which is to force people to compete on his own terms. So if we allow into Britain the kind of journalism represented by Fox, that would bring about a form of censorship." In a caustic editorial, the Guardian observed that if Murdoch wants to continue using his Sky News satellite service to advance his political views, he might have to move his base of operations to another country. The editorial concluded, "It would be a delicious irony if Mr Murdoch, a committed anti-European, moved to the continent so he could pollute sober fact with pointed opinion."

[Attalus]

Remind me to bring this up when someone else complains that boycotting the Dixie Chicks is censorship. No, no, I'll say, this is censorship.

[Chewbacca]

Media conglomerates have a history of skewwing the truth and public perception.

The mysterious and feared " vast liberal media conspiracy" is an example of an imaginary biased conglomerate.

The Hearst corporation's untruthful and misleading media assult on marijuana in the 30's and 40's is a real example.

Any media conglomerate that skews the truth for ratings or political gain deserves to be censored, if thats the case here.

The aforementioned article is little short on all the facts on why Fox is being investigated, besides some people thinking it is a lil bit sensationalistic and almost near jingoistic.

[Barry the Sprout]

Originally posted by Attalus: Remind me to bring this up when someone else complains that boycotting the Dixie Chicks is censorship. No, no, I'll say, this is censorship.

Sadly, this is not quite as exciting as that. Its basically a hangover from a nationalised television system - the convention is that in a newspaper you can print whatever you like but on a tv station you have to be as impartial as possible. Even commercial TV over here is supposed to be neutral - something Fox is most definately not.

Now, don't get me wrong - I'm not arguing that not being neutral is necessarily a bad thing, just that its the convention over here and everyone sticks to it. Frankly, its a seperate discussion from right or wrong I'm interested in - its whats legal and what isn't.

[Epona]

What you have to bear in mind is that here in the UK television is regulated to ensure that programming, including the news, is 'balanced' - ie. presents both sides of a debate. While I think that most of the time our TV falls far short of balance (ie. the regulatory bodies are often biased in favour of the government and/or media moguls), I thought it was pertinent to point this out in the context of this thread before anyone starts jumping up and down talking about the right to freedom of speech, freedom of the press etc.

EDIT to say Barry got that in milliseconds before I posted!

[ 05-08-2003, 08:12 PM: Message edited by: Epona ]

[Reeka]

It was important to clarify what is legal and acceptable in Britain as opposed to the US. I guess if Mr. Murdock wants to have his station in the UK he should play be the UK rules. It is not that way in the US though. (You just have to watch any news channel to see that.) I personally would hope that people would be well enough informed on important issues on their own via TV, internet, newspaper, magazine, etc., to cut through the crap and arrive at an informed position.

[Davros]

Originally posted by Attalus: Remind me to bring this up when someone else complains that boycotting the Dixie Chicks is censorship. No, no, I'll say, this is censorship.

LOL - insisting on a lack of bias in news reporting - good for the UK I say [img]smile.gif[/img] . What a chuckle I got out of reading this . And as most everyone agrees, FOX is most definitely neither balanced or unbiased.

[Donut]

There's nothing wrong with Murdoch advancing his own agenda in the UK. What he can't do is masquerade as a news channel.

[Davros]

Originally posted by Donut: There's nothing wrong with Murdoch advancing his own agenda in the UK. What he can't do is masquerade as a news channel.

LOL [img]smile.gif[/img]

How are you tonight Donut - I am in a good mood today [img]smile.gif[/img]