“Regulators invited public comment on whether the US broadcast license for Fox Corp.’s TV station in Philadelphia should be renewed after a grassroots organization asked that it be denied, saying Fox knowingly broadcast false news about the 2020 election.”

  • Good ole mass media, telling you something big is going down, and giving you absolutely no clue as to how to get involved.

    The FCC has made the comment process extremely difficult to navigate, but it looks like the hearing is on docket 23-293 (commenters, please correct me if I’m wrong). You should be able use the form here to place a comment on the proceeding. Use 23-293 in the proceedings field to bring it up for selection.

    Here’s a more detailed view of the Media and Democracy Project’s petition, which includes a supporting filing from Jamie Kellner, former president of Fox Broadcasting.

  •  TehPers   ( @TehPers@beehaw.org ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3910 months ago

    I mean, this should be a no brainer. Aren’t there regulations in place, regardless of amendment-this-or-that, on what can be broadcasted in the US as “news”? I’d have to go check, but regardless, knowingly spreading lies to manipulate your audience isn’t really something I’d consider news, just propaganda.

    • There used to be. It was called the fairness doctrine. It was introduced in 1949 and was abolished in 1987. It required news broadcasters to present controversial issues to fairly reflect differing viewpoints - in other words, you can’t have overt, blatant, “This will cause liberals to eat your babies” propaganda.

      There are some issues with it, but it’s clearly better than what we’re allowing now. The crux, though, is that it only matters for FCC-aligned issues, so actual broadcasting. Cable and internet sources would still be able to lie with impunity, and they make up a huge portion of our disinformation compared to what existed even in the early 2000s.

        • Not exactly. The fairness would include allowing the other side it’s refutation on the facts.

          News companies have never been required to report falsehoods just because someone famous said them. They’ve chosen to do that since the fairness doctrine was upended, because it aligns with their corporate interests.

        •  ArtZuron   ( @ArtZuron@beehaw.org ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          6
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          If the viewpoints are based on blatant falsehoods, then they really shouldn’t be presented at all IMO. That is to say, ideally that’s how it would be. It doesn’t really work like that IRL

      •  TehPers   ( @TehPers@beehaw.org ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Seems like now more than ever is a good time to bring back something to regulate these companies. At the very least, there should be a strong penalty to companies spreading misinformation.

        The article pointed out that there was a defamation lawsuit caused over lying about voting machine rigging. That should honestly be criminal, especially knowing what happened after that election.

    •  FlowVoid   ( @FlowVoid@midwest.social ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      There are no special regulations on what constitutes a “news” broadcast in the US.

      If you lie in public, whether on TV or Facebook, you can be sued for defamation. Which is exactly what happened to Fox.

      In specific circumstances, you can be prosecuted for criminal libel but those circumstances do not apply to Fox.

  •  Hot Saucerman   ( @dingus@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3010 months ago

    Seemingly only affects a single local station in Philadelphia. While it should be denied and hopefully that will push for more denials to follow, this isn’t going to shut down FOX News the cable channel. It is at least a decently sized market, but still just one stations local news.

  •  Steve   ( @Steve@communick.news ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    This seems like multiple people have confused the local Fox broadcast affiliate, with the national Fox News cable network.

    They’re entirely separate and unrelated. Or am I missing something.