Should Media Outlets Be Allowed To Doctor Audio And Video Without Consequence??

[LockeJaw]

We already have all the solutions to the problems listed above.

In law it's Libel, in the market place it's called a remote control.

Well why is it allowed to continue then?

I'm no legal expert, just somewhat of a first amendment purist.

My guess is that this problem is happening less than ever... just getting reported on more due to the expanding media market. In a more competitive market individual stations can ill afford these kinds of mistakes (or blatant lies). New media will pounce on them.

That is why corrections came out so fast whereas in the olden days it would be slow if at all. Speaking for myself I'm glad trust in the media islower than ever. People will just have to start thinking for themselves.

Good thing Al Gore invented the interwebs.

Weather Zimmerman is guilty or not though he still might have the right to sue some asses off. (I dunno the specific legalities here)

I'm not talking about government regulations on free speech or anything of the sort. I'm talking about a private non-partisan organization that's sole purpose is to make truth in reporting the most important part of news. Boycotts work short term, I'm not asking for that at all though. Just an idea, but having this group place ads and give your news station or whatever credibility. Ofcourse they'd have to start off with building their own credibility and good name.

 

[LockeJaw]

I'm not in favor of more stringent FCC regulations. If the media outlet gets caught intentionally doctoring information the consumer punishes them.

I can tell I should've started this in media now. Wasn't sure at first. We both agree on no government solution and no new law.

I'm talking about making "the consumer punish them for lies" a reality in a free market way.

 

[Ragnar]

Well why is it allowed to continue then?

I'm no legal expert, just somewhat of a first amendment purist.

My guess is that this problem is happening less than ever... just getting reported on more due to the expanding media market. In a more competitive market individual stations can ill afford these kinds of mistakes (or blatant lies). New media will pounce on them.

That is why corrections came out so fast whereas in the olden days it would be slow if at all. Speaking for myself I'm glad trust in the media islower than ever. People will just have to start thinking for themselves.

Good thing Al Gore invented the interwebs.

Weather Zimmerman is guilty or not though he still might have the right to sue some asses off. (I dunno the specific legalities here)

I'm not talking about government regulations on free speech or anything of the sort. I'm talking about a private non-partisan organization that's sole purpose is to make truth in reporting the most important part of news. Boycotts work short term, I'm not asking for that at all though. Just an idea, but having this group place ads and give your news station or whatever credibility. Ofcourse they'd have to start off with building their own credibility and good name.

I'd buy a Blue Book or Consumer Report that graded the media. I just can't imagine who I'd believe had the intellect and integrity to create one.