| On February 14, a Florida Appeals court ruled there is
absolutely nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a major
press organization.
The court reversed the $425,000 jury verdict in favor of journalist Jane Akre who
charged she was pressured by Fox Television management and lawyers to air what she
knew and documented to be false information. The ruling basically declares it
is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the
news on a television broadcast.
On August 18, 2000, a six-person jury was unanimous in its conclusion that Akre was
indeed fired for threatening to report the station's pressure to broadcast what jurors
decided was "a false, distorted, or slanted" story about the widespread use of
growth hormone in dairy cows. The court did not dispute the heart of Akre's claim, that
Fox pressured her to broadcast a false story to protect the broadcaster from having to
defend the truth in court, as well as suffer the ire of irate advertisers.
Fox argued from the first, and failed on three separate occasions, in front of
three different judges, to have the case tossed out on the grounds there is no hard, fast,
and written rule against deliberate distortion of the news.
The attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron Rupert Murdock, argued the First
Amendment gives broadcasters the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on the
public airwaves.
In its six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals held that the Federal
Communications Commission position against news distortion is only a "policy,"
not a promulgated law, rule, or regulation.
Fox aired a report after the ruling saying it was "totally vindicated" by the
verdict.
© 2003 SierraTimes.com
[Editor's Note: This case was also joined by companies like Belo and Viacom. This case
dirctly involved a station in Florida, not Fox News on Cable, but still of the Fox family] |
