Posted on 11/04/2004 4:53:53 PM PST by jmstein7
Please take a few moments to send the following email to the Federal Communications Commission at: Michael.Powell@fcc.gov; fccinfo@fcc.gov
Or, CLICK HERE to generate a pre-addressed email.
Subject: Two Alleged FCA Violations
Dear Chairman Powell,
The FCC has previously has ruled that broadcasters, as public trustees, may not intentionally distort the news. The FCC has stated that "rigging or slanting the news is a most heinous act against the public interest." I am writing to alert the FCC to two potential violations of this ruling that have occurred over the past two weeks. The FCC must carry out it's statutory duty -- i.e. implementing the Federal Communications Act -- and investigate these potentially serious violations of the FCA. Clearly the FCC is the appropriate fact-finding and adjudicatory body to carry out these investigations. The FCC has access to investigatory "tools" that are simply not available to the public and must be the body that investigates these heinous potential violations
First Alleged Violation: Reporting a Highly Prejudicial "News" Story Without Proper Due Diligence, Purposefully, Recklessly, or Negligently.
In the week prior to the 2004 Presidential Election, the New York Times, a newspaper not subject to the FCA, published a front page story regarding allegedly missing explosives in Iraq. Even before the story was published, it became clear that the facts reported the story were in dispute, and that the New York Times had not conducted proper due diligence before reporting the story. That notwithstanding, all three major broadcasting networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) headlined their newscasts, almost every day of the week, with the fallacious story from pages of the New York Times.
There is no question that the networks knew or should have known of the lack of due diligence conducted by the New York Times and the fact that the very underpinnings of the story were unquestionably in dispute. There is no question that the networks knew or should have known that reporting this unvetted story on their nightly news broadcasts would be highly prejudicial in the final days of a Presidential campaign. Nonetheless, the networks purposefully, recklessly, or negligently went ahead and, despite all they knew or should have known, opted to broadcast this highly prejudicial story -- one week before a hotly contested Presidential election. Public opinion polls taken over that period indicate that the broadcasting of this story may have cost the President 2-3% reduction in public support. This is significant.
This is unacceptable, certainly a heinous act against the public interest, and the FCC must discover all the facts and hold the proper parties accountable.
Second Alleged Violation: Generating a Reporting Intentionally Distorted Exit Polling Data to have a "Chilling Effect" on Voter Turnout.
Dick Morris, an internationally recognized expert on public opinion polling, wrote the following, in relevant part, in the November 4, 2004 issue of The Hill:
"By now it is well-known and a part of the 2004 election lore how the exit polls by the major television networks were wrong. . . . Exit polls are almost never wrong. They eliminate the two major potential fallacies in survey research by correctly separating actual voters from those who pretend they will cast ballots but never do and by substituting actual observation for guesswork in judging the relative turnout of different parts of the state.
So reliable are the surveys that actually tap voters as they leave the polling places that they are used as guides to the relative honesty of elections in Third World countries. . . . But this Tuesday, the networks did get the exit polls wrong. Not just some of them. They got all of the Bush states wrong. So, according to ABC-TV’s exit polls, for example, Kerry was slated to carry Florida, Ohio, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada and Iowa, all of which Bush carried. The only swing state the network had going to Bush was West Virginia, which the president won by 10 points.
To screw up one exit poll is unheard of. To miss six of them is incredible. It boggles the imagination how pollsters could be that incompetent and invites speculation that more than honest error was at play here.
The mistaken exit polls infiltrated all three networks and the cable news outlets and had a chilling effect on the coverage of election night. . . . Indeed, one network hesitated to call Mississippi for Bush because of the uncertainty injected by the bogus exit polls. Dark minds will suspect that these polls were deliberately manipulated to dampen Bush turnout in the Central, Mountain, and Pacific time zones by conveying the impression that the president’s candidacy was a lost cause.
The exit pollsters plead that they oversampled women and that this led to their mistakes. But the very first thing a pollster does is weight or quota for gender. Once the female vote reaches 52 percent of the sample, one either refuses additional female respondents or weights down the ones one subsequently counted. . . . Next to the forged documents that sent CBS on a jihad against Bush’s National Guard service and the planned “60 Minutes” ambush over the so-called missing explosives two days before the polls opened, the possibility of biased exit polling, deliberately manipulated to try to chill the Bush turnout, must be seriously considered.
At the very least, the exit pollsters should have to explain, in public, how they were so wrong. Since their polls, if biased or cooked, represented an attempt to use the public airwaves to reduce voter turnout, they should have to explain their errors in a very public and perhaps official forum.
This was no mere mistake. Exit polls cannot be as wrong across the board as they were on election night. I suspect foul play."
The FCC must carry out it's statutory duties and investigate these allegations of intentionally distorted news broadcast over the public airwaves. I trust the FCC will do the right thing and promptly announce that it is launching investigations. These are very, very serious matters, and the FCC must take them seriously.
Sincerely,
Action BUMP!
Why don't you petition Drudge to stop spreading unverified gossip instead?
Thanks for the link.
Whoops... a few spelling errors, etc.
I've already heard Dick Morris call for a criminal investigation (he has no power to initiate the investigation but he has voiced in support).
LOL. This is non of the FCC's business, and the suggestion that they should intervene is absurd.
ping
The collusion between the DNC and the MSM on several stories designed to tarnish the Bush campaign are particularly significant examples of abuse of power (e.g. "The forged National Guard memos")
Don't forget the ABC "smoking gun" memo:
Halperin Memo Dated Friday October 8, 2004
It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite grave
I do not want to set off (sp?) and endless colloquy that none of us have time for today - nor do I want to stifle one. Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion.
The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done.
Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win.
We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.
I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.
It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right.
Thanks for the information. I'm also going to contact my congress critters about this matter too. It's about time we drop a bomb on these MSM hotshots. We have to keep the pressure on them. Wouldn't it be nice to turn on the evening news and not have to see Pee-tah Jennings? He's the one I'd like to see go first. 8-)
Drudge makes about $2 million a year. Hope that keeps you awake at night. I know it does David Brock.
LOL!
Voter Fraud is currently a Class 5 Felony. It used to be a misdemeanor. Effective today, it is a Class ONE Felony.
>>Drudge makes about $2 million a year. Hope that keeps you awake at night. <<
He dates Ann Coulter as well, doesn't he?
Any investigation will do little more than shine a light on some doing (legal or illegal). So, you want a bright light. The brightest lights are those from special investigative bodies with members appointed by both the Administration and the Congress like the 9/11 Commission. The second most bright light comes from special Presidential commissions with members appointed by the President like the Warren Commission. Third are joint Congressional (House and Senate) investigative bodies. Fourth are investigations by either house of Congress. Fifth are GAO investigations. Last are agency investigations. If you want an impact you had best shoot a little higher than the FCC.
Thanks for the ping!
BTTT!!!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.