Last updated: February 21, 2008 - 1:57am
VNRs: TELEVISION STATIONS RESPOND... AND IT'S WORSE THAN YOU THINK
[SOURCE: Center for Media and Democracy, AUTHOR: Diane Farsetta]
[Comentary] Hours after the Center for Media and Democracy released our study on television stations' widespread and undisclosed use of corporate video news releases (VNRs), a major organization of broadcast news executives issued its response. "The Radio-Television News Directors Association strongly urges station management to review and strengthen their policies requiring complete disclosure of any outside material used in news programming," read the statement. RTNDA went on to caution that decisions involving "when and how to identify sources ... must remain far removed from government involvement or supervision." Unfortunately, RTNDA's statement conflates "sources" with broadcast material funded by and produced for outside parties. It also conveniently ignores that the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, under its authority to regulate broadcasters' use of the public airwaves, already has disclosure requirements on the books. But RTNDA's stance does point to an important, underlying issue: how to ensure both news audiences' right to know "who seeks to influence them," and the editorial freedom of newsrooms. The Society of Professional Journalists also responded to our study, strongly condemning TV stations' "irresponsible" and "misleading" use of VNRs. Their statement, similar to RTNDA's, "urges broadcast companies to set their own house in order by using extreme caution and full disclosure when airing VNRs." However, such admonitions fail to take into consideration the continuing confusion over video feeds' origins, the history of TV stations' failure to disclose VNRs, the harsh realities of resource-strapped TV newsrooms, and the embarrassment factor that likely makes newsrooms reluctant to identify VNRs as such. Is it reasonable, within the context of the current system, to expect TV stations to meet the disclosure standards that we all agree on -- and that the FCC is charged to uphold? After hearing the explanations and delving into the records of many of the TV stations that we documented airing fake news, I would say no.
http://www.prwatch.org/node/4762
Links to Sources
Related
- RTNDA Calls For Halt to VNR Investigation
- Television 'News' to Warm a PR agent's Heart
- Little Progress Cited In Identifying VNRs
- Broadcasters of Fake News Make False Claims about VNR study
- Let's Label “Canned†News Video
- Fake News Lobby Group Gears Up
- A Fake End to Fake News
- The FCC and Armstrong Williams' Continuing Legacy
- RTNDA: Current Sponsorship Rules OK
- Groups Claim More Unidentified VNRs
- NBC Owned Stations Launch Diversity Programs in Newsrooms
- Adelstein seeks Probe of Video News Releases
- In Risky Move, Newscasts adopt Product Placements
- RTNDA: Stations 'Have a Long Way to Go' on Web
- TV Stations Still Can't Resist Pre-Packaged Video News
Ratings
Login to rate this headline.

