"Fake News" Specialists

  By Florida Bill

                                       With all of the controversy about so-called "fake news," it is a fair question to ask if journalists abide by any  code of conduct, or are they free to say anything about any person or event in the public eye?  Does anyone watch the watchers? 
                                        Just recently NBC and CNN and other networks have been pushing a phony story that President Trump sought to accelerate the build up of atomic bombs by a factor of 10. His proposals caused Secretary of State Tillerson to call him a "moron." And, yes, it was all based upon NBC's unnamed  "sources."
                                         The President and all cabinet members at the meeting have forcefully denied the report.  The respected Secretary of Defense, General Mattis, said that the report was completely false, and he labeled the network as "irresponsible."  Secretary of State Tillerson also denied the story, as did other cabinet members present. A smug NBC said that it cannot reveal its sources.   
                                        Critical stories of figures in the news will always generate gripes and denials even when true.  Revelations from factually true reports are among the benefits of a free press which holds the feet of government and its representatives to the fire.  
                                        But when journalists fabricate and carve  stories in such a way that they are counterfeit or simply "fake," and then use these reports to hammer candidates, office holders and politicians---Is that to be accepted as the price to be paid for having a country which guarantees freedom of speech and an unshackled press? No way.   Such conduct was never intended to be a tool of journalists provided for in the First Amendment. 
                                       When the hot news is a reporter's creation, which it too often is, and the accusations leveled against  "public figures" are clearly false, does the news station or anchor take a hit? Where is the accountability, the correction, the apology? The sloppiness and irresponsibility of today's media, and its incredible, bullet proof arrogance, is often beyond belief.                                                                       Some months ago, CNN and its biased friends claimed that there was a report that then President-elect  Trump had engaged in immoral activities during a visit to Europe. The story had no "legs," and was designed to humiliate Trump, its arch enemy and the target of its "tell all" reports. The FBI said that story was false. "Sources," said CNN.
                                        After the "atomic build up tale" President Trump reminded NBC and its affiliates and other networks that  stations are licensed and have an obligation to reject the dissemination of false and fabricated news stories. Freedom of the press is a guarantee of the First Amendment, but intentional fabrication of stories might interfere with a license for access to the airways.  Something to think about, he noted.  
                                       The plain truth is that no one holds the media accountable. Having watchers who watch public actions, riding herd on public figures, is a good thing, one of the hallmarks of our democracy.  When public officials fail to live up to the public trust, it is the press that calls them out and demands action. But when the media lies, and fabricates out of personal enmity or political bias, who takes them to task?  The answer is no one. 
                                       Some say there are libel and slander laws which provide appropriate sanctions.  Not so.  Libel and slander are fairly effective when the defamed person is an ordinary citizen outside the public arena. But these anti-defamation laws are virtually meaningless in situations involving the media and public figures such as office holders and candidates for public office. 
                                        Jim Strong a retired Chicago Tribune reporter and labor editor, sees libel laws relative to politics as a "fraud."  "They allow corrupt publishers and writers to  profit from publishing or broadcasting garbage without any fear of the victims they beat up on," he said.  Anything goes, no matter how outrageous. "Absence of malice" is always the "get out of jail free" card for a reporter and the company he or she works for.                                                                                                                                                                     Journalism professors established the        
 Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) in 1908, which drafted a journalist's "Code of Ethics." It encourages honesty and integrity and spells out guidelines for reporters.  
                                        Yet it is not a set of rules, opines Don Kirk, a veteran Asian correspondent for various newspapers, but only a guide that encourages all who engage in journalism to take responsibility for the information they provide, regardless of medium. But the missing element in the SPJ dicta is the prescribed enforcement mechanism of its recommended code. Consequences for sending out phony news reports attacking the character of public figures do not exist.                                                                                                           Journalists must come together and enact codes of enforceable conduct with due process rights accorded alleged violators.  It is not enough to spell out how a reporter must handle the job of covering the news in a moral and professional way. Lying journalists should face a loss of press credentials, and their employers should be made to defend their right to have a license. 
                                       It is possible to uphold freedom of the press and still penalize reporters who dishonor it with their lies and fabrications. It is time that the media starts weeding out its own bad actors.
                                                    xxx