# Regulators Reject Proposal That Would Bring Fox-Style News to Canada **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 4, 2011, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427 "2011-03-04T00:06:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2011, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/21 "2011-03-05T06:59:40Z")
We can’t say “fuck” on the Radio or Broadcast Television, and the Supreme Court has said that’s ok. The Fairness Doctrine was upheld by the Supremes also. I can see problems with the Fairness Doctrine, and the Equal Time Rule. What’s fair? What if an issue has more than two sides? But I can’t see any good argument for allowing the deliberate broadcasting of lies on broadcast news. If our citizens are being _deliberately misinformed_, democracy can’t function properly. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2011, 7:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/22 "2011-03-05T07:12:42Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > I can’t see any good argument for allowing the deliberate broadcasting of lies on broadcast news. If our citizens are being _deliberately misinformed_, democracy can’t function properly. There’s the First Amendment issue. But the main problem - and this was the main topic of the thread I linked to earlier - is in the implementation. Who gets to decide what a lie is? Are you comfortable with the Federal Communications Commission determining what’s true and what isn’t on complex issues, and who is incorrect and who is lying? I think you can almost guarantee the decisions would be based on the political orientations of the FCC directors. ---
**Author:** ![Acid\_Lamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Acid\_Lamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acid_Lamp)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2011, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/23 "2011-03-05T12:31:02Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Why would they watch it then? Why would it be available on Canadian cable and satellite services if there was not market for it or for it’s particular brand of ‘news’? Personally, even had your OP been accurate I’d say that the fact that some non-zero number of Canadian’s in fact DO watch Fox News pretty much means that blocking new ‘Fox-Style News to Canada’ is at best a moot point (at worst, of course, this was a complete distortion and predicated on ignorance of the fact that Fox is already available in Canada). In fact, I’d think that Canadian’s, yearning for a Fox-Style News organization of their very own, would be a bit pissed, since it means that US Fox maintains a monopoly on this brand of news. > > I think it’s a very bad idea for the government to get involved in the truth game and try to regulate what is ‘fair’ and ‘balanced’. Basically, if people want what Fox has to offer then let them have it. If people want midget porn then let them have that. If they want to howl at the moon and believe in the 9/11 Truth movements brand of BS, then let them have that. > > Of course, Canadian’s are free to implement such a program if that’s what they really want. However, based on the fact that some Canadian’s do in fact watch Fox and will continue to do so unless you erect a Great Firewall of Doom, it seems sort of silly to block like minded Canadian’s the opportunity to build their own right wing spin machine, if that’s what they really want. I mean, if Canadian’s really don’t want such a thing then won’t they vote with their pocketbooks?? > > -XT That’s probably not the best argument to make. There is market for _everything_ no matter how insane, bizarre, or hateful. That doesn’t mean that the market should dictate everything. One of the functions of any good government is to make sure that it represents the views of the broad majority while ensuring the rights of the minority. In this case they aren’t restricting the right to free speech, they are restricting access to a specific medium. Pointedly the one that the broadest numbers of citizens use daily. As you pointed out, there really is no way to eliminate access to the material completely, but in this case it seems that the government is simply saying: “Not on our airwaves.” I can only assume that is because they find that only a small minority is interested in this type of programming, and they find it has little _factual_ value when compared to the trouble it generates. If they want it they can watch online, via satellite, etc.. I think that is a reasonable solution. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2011, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/24 "2011-03-05T17:12:51Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > There’s the First Amendment issue. But the main problem - and this was the main topic of the thread I linked to earlier - is in the implementation. Who gets to decide what a lie is? Are you comfortable with the Federal Communications Commission determining what’s true and what isn’t on complex issues, and who is incorrect and who is lying? If the broadcast networks disagree with the FCC’s rulings, I say let them take it to a jury of 12 average citizens. If the jury thoroughly reviews the facts, and finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the broadcaster made a false claim, or a claim with reckless disregard for the truth, then that broadcaster has to suffer some penalty. As long as they advertise what they broadcast as “News”, it should be held to a rigorous standard. If they want to broadcast bullshit and clearly label it as “Opinion”, then I’m fine with that. But there should be a very clear delineation between those two things. I’m currently attending a Community College. If I write a term paper, and I’m caught making a false claims, I will probably get a big fat zero, or an F if I’m very lucky. I don’t see why a major broadcast network should be held to a lower standard than a college freshman! ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2011, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/25 "2011-03-05T18:31:38Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > The thought of a United States Department of Truth bothers me. Such a department may have suppressed dissent during the War in Vietnam. Nevertheless, the airwaves are public. I do not watch FOX News, but it has been documented that many of Rush Limbaugh’s arguments are based on lies. > > [FAIR — Page 1895 — FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation.](http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1895) > > There should be some cost to making assertions on the air that are simply not true. I am constantly tickled by how easily lefties on these boards toss about the word “lies”. I’m left to ponder whether they really are so ignorant as to not know what the word means, or they do and that misusing it it just hunky-dory in their world. Then I realize that it doesn’t matter which of those two options is correct. The result is the same: :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2011, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/26 "2011-03-05T18:33:32Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Canada has news? You learn something every day on this MB! In Canuckistan, news covers YOU! ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2011, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/27 "2011-03-05T18:52:41Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I am constantly tickled by how easily lefties on these boards toss about the word “lies” I’m left to ponder whether they really are so ignorant as to not know what the word means, or they do and that misusing it it just hunky-dory in their world. Then I realize that it doesn’t matter which of those two options is correct. The result is the same: :rolleyes: Could you give us some examples of how you believe lefties misuse the word “lie”? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2011, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/28 "2011-03-05T18:59:35Z")
Simple fix: require “news” and “news entertainment” programming to go on separate stations. Keeps _Faux_ from trotting out the line about how _Fox & Friends_ or whoever isn’t hard news, but entertainment, whenever they get caught telling fibs (or MSNBC, if you prefer). Fox can roll its hard news and Fox Business News programming into one channel, and Beck et al into another. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2011, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/29 "2011-03-05T19:21:49Z")
It’s easy to cry about “Free Speech” but I frame it as an issue of False Advertisement instead. I’d require explicit disclaimers at the beginning of all “commentary” shows that the following statements are for entertainment, and don’t adhere to the Federal Truth In Broadcasting Law (or whatever we want to call it). Kind of like how people are allowed to buy as much placebo herbal “medicines” as they like, as long as there’s a label on the bottle saying it’s not FDA approved to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2011, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/30 "2011-03-05T20:20:23Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > Could you give us some examples of how you believe lefties misuse the word “lie”? Just look at the post I was responding to. Let’s say that what he was alluding to coming from Rush is even 100% wrong, do you really think that Rush knows it’s wrong? Believes it to be factually wrong, yet still decides to make statements counter to it? Ridiculous. For something to be a “lie”, the statement uttered not only has to be wrong, but the person putting it forth has to know it to be wrong. This is one of the reasons that you’re not allowed to accuse another poster of lying in GD. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2011, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/31 "2011-03-05T22:33:13Z")
Paying attention to Fox News just gives it more credibility. Here in the U.S., The [evening newscast](http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2011/02/23/world-news-with-diane-sawyer-narrows-total-viewing-and-demo-gaps-with-nbc-both-week-to-week-and-year-to-year/83501)on NBC gets 9 million viewers. ABC’s evening newscast gets about 8 million. Meanwhile, [the most watched program on Fox News](http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2011/03/04/cable-news-ratings-for-thursday-march-3-2011/84673)is The \*O’Reilly Factor \*with 3.2 million. However, _[American Idol](http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/content_display/community/programming-insider/newsletters/e3ie736550cbcb13613ea346beeb77373a4)_ is drawing almost 22 million viewers. And more than twice as many people watch \*[Jersey Shore](http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2011/03/05/thursday-cable-ratings-jersey-shore-leads-fairly-legal-rises-archer-beyond-scared-straight-more/84672)\*than watch O’Reilly! So Fox News’ most-watched program gets watched by about 1 percent of the people in the U.S. Banning it simply makes it appear bigger and stronger than it really is. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/32 "2011-03-06T00:40:30Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Just look at the post I was responding to. Let’s say that what he was alluding to coming from Rush is even 100% wrong, do you really think that Rush knows it’s wrong? Believes it to be factually wrong, yet still decides to make statements counter to it? Ridiculous. > > For something to be a “lie”, the statement uttered not only has to be wrong, but the person putting it forth has to know it to be wrong. All right. How about I coin a new word to describe this phenomenon: **Truthslaughter**. It differs from lying in the same way murder differs from manslaughter. Truthslaughter is uttering a statement with reckless disregard for its veracity, where a reasonable person would have done fact checking beforehand. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/33 "2011-03-06T01:57:39Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > All right. How about I coin a new word to describe this phenomenon: **Truthslaughter**. It differs from lying in the same way murder differs from manslaughter. Truthslaughter is uttering a statement with reckless disregard for its veracity, where a reasonable person would have done fact checking beforehand. You may want to consult Colbert. He’s better at that stuff. But here’s an idea, how about just saying the person is “wrong”, or that you think he is wrong? You’ll always be on solid ground and he’ll be on whatever ground he laid out for himself. I’ve argued quite a bit on these boards, passionately. I’ve laid into people with venom. But I think I may have called someone a liar 2 or 3 times. And those times I could point to why it was fair to call what they were saying a lie. ---
**Author:** ![Acid\_Lamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Acid\_Lamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acid_Lamp)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/34 "2011-03-06T12:37:26Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > You may want to consult Colbert. He’s better at that stuff. But here’s an idea, how about just saying the person is “wrong”, or that you think he is wrong? You’ll always be on solid ground and he’ll be on whatever ground he laid out for himself. I’ve argued quite a bit on these boards, passionately. I’ve laid into people with venom. But I think I may have called someone a liar 2 or 3 times. And those times I could point to why it was fair to call what they were saying a lie. Being Wrong implies an honest mistake. What we are talking about though isn’t your uncle Larry, or your serious minded co-worker. They can be wrong all day long on anything, big or small. We are talking about media outlets that represent themselves as News; presenters of factual, researched information to the public. We expect that what we hear on these programs is a legitimate, accurate reporting of the facts. If a program is entertainment, then we can suspend that expectation and enjoy the ride knowing that we are in a world where things will be stretched, torn, or made up out of whole cloth. In these “infotainment” programs (of any stripe), consumers have a blended presentation. There is no distinct line, and the facts are often spun hard, phrased oddly or ambiguously, and when “wrong” retractions are extremely brief. A four second “oops” sound bite isn’t much to the 45 minute editorial tirade they launched into the previous show. That tiny blip doesn’t eliminate all the memes, talking points, and spin they erroneously presented. I’m not certain being “wrong” is good enough linguistically or otherwise. I absolutely hate the idea of the suppression of free speech, but I also strongly believe that you must be responsible for what you say. A news outlet is in a position of trust by the public. We trust that the “news” is accurate and factual and _impartial_. Irresponsible reporting packaged as “news” is dangerous speech, though I’m at a loss as to what, (if anything) we should do about it. The best I have to offer is the creation of strong definitions or guidelines for the separation of news and entertainment, and enforcement of disclaimers. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/35 "2011-03-06T19:51:23Z")
> [@Acid\_Lamp](#): > > I absolutely hate the idea of the suppression of free speech, but I also strongly believe that you must be responsible for what you say. A news outlet is in a position of trust by the public. We trust that the “news” is accurate and factual and _impartial_. Irresponsible reporting packaged as “news” is dangerous speech, though I’m at a loss as to what, (if anything) we should do about it. The best I have to offer is the creation of strong definitions or guidelines for the separation of news and entertainment, and enforcement of disclaimers. Well, we have no problem with the notion of false advertising. The product should match the description on the box. If you are selling “news” then that news needs to comport with the truth of what is happening. Deception and outright falsehoods should be punishable. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2011, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/36 "2011-03-07T00:20:05Z")
> [@Acid\_Lamp](#): > > True, but perhaps it could require a rejoinder type stinger when such programs come back from break twice an hour\*\* that says something like: " The views and opinions expressed in this program are intended as entertainment, and should not be assumed to be factual, accurate, or impartial. Listeners are encouraged to form their own opinions.\*\*" > > If Rush and his like on either side are entertainers, then they should have no problem with this. If they are journalists then they should be held to a higher standard. (bolding mine) The problem with this suggestion is that the problem isn’t anyone’s views or opinions. The problem is that the “facts” presented to back up that opinion or view aren’t, in reality, facts. ---
**Author:** ![Acid\_Lamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Acid\_Lamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acid_Lamp)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2011, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/37 "2011-03-07T00:58:27Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > (bolding mine) > > The problem with this suggestion is that the problem isn’t anyone’s views or opinions. The problem is that the “facts” presented to back up that opinion or view aren’t, in reality, facts. Just an example. Perhaps we could say “content” instead. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2011, 8:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/38 "2011-03-07T08:06:40Z")
I’m shocked-do yo mean that “60 Minutes” doesn’t tell the truth? And “netework news” and CNN don’t lie? Shocked, I am! ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2011, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427/39 "2011-03-07T14:33:34Z")
Sure they do. They just don’t lie about _political_ issues. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/regulators-reject-proposal-that-would-bring-fox-style-news-to-canada/573427.md?page=1)