The only word for this latest tale of a journalist on the take from government is "sickening" -- and the question is how many more of these people will be exposed?
Interesting coincidence: The major cases of this unethical practice so far have involved the Bush brothers and their respective administrations in Washington and Florida.
Update: And here's the story of a "journalist" being paid to pitch the products he covers.
The TV stations claim not to know what's going on. Shame on them, too.
This really is appalling. Once again, the problem isn't just the fact that sponsored segments got into a news cast, the problem is that the biased source isn't noted. Attribution is everything. Well, not everything, but it is a key element to trustworthy news reporting.
If secret sponsorship and propaganda isn't brought under control, someday all news--from TV to bloggers and even blog commenters--could all be secretly sponsored by corporations or political interests. It is a good thing I have my 15" Apple Powerbook (available at Apple stores everywhere) to write this important message and completely impartial message...
Posted by: Scote | March 28, 2005 at 03:31 PM
I didn't hear you guys complaining all these years over the mainstream media's liberal slant!
This more applies to Fox than the government, but I thought I'd point out how selective the complaining is.
To the point of the post, I don't like some of these paid deals, but does this mean many public service ads that are paid for by executive branch departments should be banned too? Here's a list from the Ad Council, which by the way, has some of the top industrialists as board members: http://www.adcouncil.org/campaigns/
I like the part where the website says it "mirrors society."
You lefty's better watch it, the Ad Council might start showing the dreaded Ten Commandments!
Posted by: Al | March 28, 2005 at 11:49 PM
If something is not done this could get far worse.
http://technoflak.blogspot.com/2005/03/payola-news-media-logical-conclusion.html
Posted by: Alice Marshall | March 29, 2005 at 09:52 AM
Again, I don't care for this concept, but when you consider some of Dan's other recent main posts talking about what constitutes a "journalist", if anyone is a journalist, then what's the big deal?
Posted by: Al | April 01, 2005 at 10:37 PM