said to have participated in, directed, or at least acquiesced in

a pattern of news distortion. The Commission stated its

policy about 30 years ago as follows:

[W]e do not intend to defer action on license renewals

because of the pendency of complaints of [news distor

tion]--unless the extrinsic evidence of possible deliberate

distortion or staging of the news which is brought to our

attention, involves the licensee, including its principals,

top management, or news management.... [I]f the

allegations of staging ... simply involve news employees

of the station, we will, in appropriate cases ... inquire

into the matter, but unless our investigation reveals

involvement of the licensee or its management there will

be no hazard to the station's licensed status....

.... Rather, the matter should be referred to the

licensee for its own investigation and appropriate han

dling.

.... Rigging or slanting the news is a most heinous

act against the public interest .... [b]ut in this democra

cy, no Government agency can authenticate the news, or

should try to do so.

Hunger in America, 20 FCC 2d 143, 150, 151 (1969). In a

footnote the Commission added:

[W]e stress that the licensee must have a policy of

requiring honesty of its news staff and must take reason

able precautions to see that news is fairly handled.

An allegation of distortion is "substantial" when it meets

two conditions, as we summarized in an earlier case.

[F]irst, ... the distortion ... [must] be deliberately

intended to slant or mislead. It is not enough to dispute

the accuracy of a news report ... or to question the

legitimate editorial decisions of the broadcaster....

The allegation of deliberate distortion must be supported

by "extrinsic evidence," that is, evidence other than the

broadcast itself, such as written or oral instructions from

station management, outtakes, or evidence of bribery.

Second, the distortion must involve a significant event

and not merely a minor or incidental aspect of the news

report.... [T]he Commission tolerates ... practices

[such as staging and distortion] unless they "affect[ ] the

basic accuracy of the events reported."

Galloway v. FCC, 778 F.2d 16, 20 (D.C. Cir. 1985) (affirming

Commission's holding that CBS's "60 Minutes" had not dis

torted news by staging insurance investigator's interrogation

of fraudulent claimant; because she "actually did participate

in the fraud and did confess, even if not in precisely the

manner portrayed, the 'basic accuracy of the events reported'

... has not been distorted").

As we noted in Galloway, the Commission's policy makes

its investigation of an allegation of news distortion "extremely

limited [in] scope. But within the constraints of the Constitu

tion, Congress and the Commission may set the scope of

broadcast regulation; it is not the role of this court to

question the wisdom of their policy choices." Id. at 21.

In 1994 CBS produced and broadcast a controversial seg

ment of "60 Minutes" entitled "The Ugly Face of Freedom,"

about modern Ukraine. The broadcast angered some viewers

who believed that many elements of the program had been

designed to give the impression that all Ukrainians harbor a

strongly negative attitude toward Jews. For example, inter

viewer Morley Safer suggested that Ukrainians were "genet

ically anti-Semitic" and "uneducated peasants, deeply super

stitious." Also, soundbites from an interview with the Chief

Rabbi of Lviv, Yaakov Bleich, gave viewers the impression

that he believes all Ukrainians are anti-Semites who want all

Jews to leave Ukraine. In addition, CBS overlaid the sound

of marching boots on a film clip of Ukrainian Boy Scouts

walking to church and introduced it in such a way as to give

viewers the impression that they were seeing "a neo-Nazi,

Hitler Youth-like movement." The narrator also stated that

the Ukrainian Galicia Division had helped in the roundup and

execution of Jews from Lviv in 1941, though this Division was

not in fact even formed until 1943 and therefore could not

possibly have participated in the deed. Perhaps most egre

giously, when Ukrainian speakers used the term "zhyd,"

which means simply "Jew," they were translated as having

said "kike," which is a derogatory term.

After the broadcast interviewees and members of the

Ukrainian-American community deluged CBS with letters.

In his letter Rabbi Bleich stated "unequivocally" that his

"words were quoted out of the context that they were said"

and that "the CBS broadcast was unbalanced" and "did not

convey the true state of affairs in Ukraine." Cardinal Luba

chivsky, the head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church,

who had also been interviewed, both sent a letter to CBS and

released a statement to the press. In the latter he stated,

"[M]y office was misled as to the actual thrust of the report.

Mr. Fager [the producer] presented the piece as one about

'post-communist Ukraine.' ... I can only deduce that the

goal of the report was to present all Western Ukrainians as

rabid anti-semites." Many other viewers pointed out histori

Перейти на страницу:

Похожие книги