Fake news or fake story about fake news?
There's a bit of controversy about whether P.T. Barnum really said "There's a sucker born every minute". No matter - whoever said it was right.
Andrew Buncombe of the Independent knows it. And he artfully used that principle to stir up the left by livening up this Bloomberg story about corporate video news releases (subscription required, full text quoted here) with some old news, fake news, and innuendo.
Here's the thrust of the original Bloomberg article:
May 25 (Bloomberg) -- Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin ordered a probe of dozens of television stations after a report found they aired advertisements as if they were news reports, people familiar with the inquiry said.
The April report by the non-profit Center for Media and Democracy found at least 77 stations, including 23 affiliates of Walt Disney Co.'s ABC network and seven Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc. stations, ignored an FCC warning to disclose sponsors. The maximum fine for each violation is $32,500, rising to $325,000 for multiple infractions, said FCC spokesman Clyde Ensslin.
Got that? It's about TV stations and corporate-made Video News Releases (VNR). Nothing else. But as we've seen so often in the media, anything can and will become a Bush-bashing story.
Bush 'planted fake news stories on American TV'
Federal authorities are actively investigating dozens of American television stations for broadcasting items produced by the Bush administration and major corporations, and passing them off as normal news. Some of the fake news segments talked up success in the war in Iraq, or promoted the companies' products.
Investigators from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) are seeking information about stations across the country after a report produced by a campaign group detailed the extraordinary extent of the use of such items.
Buncombe provides a reference to an administration-produced VNR and infers that it's part of the investigation:
The range of VNR is wide. Among items provided by the Bush administration to news stations was one in which an Iraqi-American in Kansas City was seen saying "Thank you Bush. Thank you USA" in response to the 2003 fall of Baghdad. The footage was actually produced by the State Department, one of 20 federal agencies that have produced and distributed such items.
This particular example occurred prior to the FCC issuing it's warning on the use of VNRs last year, and was not part of the report that prompted the FCC investigation. The report can be found here, and here's an interesting snippet from a NYT writer on its contents:
Three of the 88 releases in the report were done for government agencies but were not broadcast, the report said.
Of course, we've seen this kind of thing before, so there's nothing really unique about this story. I'm documenting it mostly because of the effect this kind of dishonest reporting has. A small but growing amount of buzz has been generated on the left side of the blogosphere, and all of it based on the parts of Buncombe's article that are fake. And while it appears that few bloggers bothered to read the report referenced in the article, a surprising number apparently passed on reading the article they cut and pasted into their own posts. For example, Jason at My Observations quotes most of the Independent article and adds the headline:
Democracy At Work? - Bush Investigated For Propaganda
Which is a claim that Buncombe, even as distorted as his article was, didn't make. And had Jason actually read the very first sentence of the article, he'd know that.
Sean (he's a Libra) introduces the quoted article with:
In the following case, the "corporation" in question is the Bush Administration... and apparently our trusted media outlets didn't feel obliged to make clear that distinction for their viewers.
Sean should worry less about his teeth and more about shaken Libra syndrome when he sees that b-ball coming for him. Another breathless and uninformed headline:
More Media Whores for Bushitler
Barkeep, I'll have some of what he's having... There's also the occasional embellishment - most on the left seem to dislike Fox News, so this seems to be a natural for the dragonflyeye.net blog:
But back to these so-called VNR’s (Video News Releases). That the Administration and Corporate America seem to be engaged in exactly the same types of deception ~ and by all accounts, primarily through the collusion of Fox media outlets ~ is the kind of thing that should give even those cynical of media independence reason to pause.
Never mind that the report's top offenders were ABC affiliates - it's so much fun to bust on Fox, right?
Here's one that obviously had time to get creative with font sizes and animations, but no time to read the article.
I know, the above examples are not the larger mainstream lefty blogs. Okay, How 'bout Digby?
And about that disinformation and propaganda, I think we have a little hint about where that's going in this era as well...
Hook, line, and sinker - if it's anti-Bush, it must be gospel, right, Digby?
When I want the rabid anti-constitutionalist view from the left, I always trot over to Glenn Greenwald's blog. And there's no disappointment here, as Glenn is out on his book tour and Hume's Ghost fills in with a magnificent BDS inspired rant:
Allthough it hasn't managed to garner much attention, the FCC is currently investigating one of the most significant (at least to me) scandals of the Bush administration.
What's stunning is that he links several of the same sources that I use above, and still manages to conclude that the FCC is investigating an administration scandal. And on the left, this is apparently what passes for an influential blog - another blog called Outside the Spectrum links the post and comments:
More news today about the administration’s continued efforts to subvert the media from Glenn Greenwald’s blog. Apparently 77 different broadcast stations have used pre-packaged “news” items without identifying them as such, concerning subjects like how well the Iraq War is really going.
Um, barkeep? Maybe I should pass after all. Blindness and delusions aren't desirable side-effects.
What's sad is that in another month this will be likely become established "conventional wisdom" among the left, taking its place among such intellectually bereft gems as "Bush Lied", and "Domestic wiretapping". No critical thought applied. No research. As ubiquitous as it is dishonest.
Hume's Ghost closes his post with a question - "...why are we still even discussing this?". Because, Ghost, you and all the others want to believe. You went into the light - and ignored the signs that said "Bug Zapper". On one point I do agree with Hume's Ghost, though. No one could possibly mistake him for a pedant.
P. T. Barnum would have loved the modern left.
Update: If you really want to see fake news, try this instead. Michelle has a roundup with lots of real examples.


Comments
LB,
Due respect, but what about what's actually going on? You make a lot of critcisms about the left, myself included, for not being entirely accurate but you gloss over the entire issue of the legitimacy of the VNR's. Truth be told, this is actually a trend started by the Clinton and not the Bush Administration. I say that to forstall the inevitable "Clinton started it" rant. The fact is that they're out there and becoming more commonly used by the Administrative Branch; irrespective of what issue or policy they are being used to support, don't you think that the trend alone is worth fighting against?
Much of the media handling style of the Bush Adminstration is, in at least it's nuts-and-bolts and it's basic theory, a derivation on Clinton-era politics. Presidential politics are generally cumulative in this way. We can, therefore, make a strong case that the next presidential administration ~ be it Liberal, Conservative or whatever ~ will undoubtably employ these types of tactics if they are not squashed. President Bush has seen fit to use signing statements to go around the Constitution and around the Congress, what makes you think he won't go around an organ *of the adminsitrative branch* which he controls?
We almost certainly disagree on a wide swath of our politics, but surely you cannot be so cavalier about institutionalizing propaganda?
Posted by: DragonFlyEye | June 4, 2006 8:49 AM
Thanks for the comment, DragonFlyEye. Good questions.
I hope you're not offended, but I'm elevating your comment to a post and addressing it there.
LB
Posted by: LB | June 4, 2006 10:56 AM
It looks like you're missing some context here for your post. Working backwards, the FCC started an official investigation last week after the Center for Media and Democracy examined and caught 77 or so stations doing something they were specifically warned against. Last year, the FCC warned them (paraphrasing) "no more undisclosed VNRs. Use them if you want, but you must disclose the source."
Many TV stations failed to do so, hence the investigation and possible fines.
But the reason the reason the FCC made the warning in the first place was because of several cases, which you may be aware of, where the Bush administration used VNRs to promote its agenda.
So no, the current report on VNRs isn't focused on government VNRs. And there have been some decent articles on the VNR-abuse in general. I'm not surprised the only ones that mention the Bush connection get more play (the media, even print media seems to want the broader questions to just go away). But that doesn't mean the story is bogus, just that some articles on it are slanted.
Posted by: AB | June 4, 2006 10:45 PM