1137 users online (238 members and 899 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 123
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    4,721

    ABC News - Guilty of Checkbook Journalism?

    Updated March 19, 2010
    ABC Is Guilty of Checkbook Journalism
    By Dan Gainor
    - FOXNews.com

    The revelation that ABC News paid Casey Anthony $200,000 demonstrates how rapidly the media landscape is changing.

    The term checkbook journalism has always referred to sleazy outfits so desperate to put some scandal in front of the public that they paid to get the story. That accusation now lands squarely on the desk of ABC News and the network is denying it lamely.

    more at the link:
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/...-anthony-paid/



    From the link above:

    As ABCNews.com explained, "Intimate, never-before-seen pictures and home videos of the girl and her young mother offer a rare window into Caylee's life." And possibly a rare window into the news practices at ABC.

    ABC's undisclosed purchase of those images would appear to violate up to seven separate categories of the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics. Those violations include one to "Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity" and another to "avoid bidding for news." The network could be criticized especially for failing to disclose the financial relationship while its staff raised questions about people bailing out the defendant.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    4,721
    The Society of Professional Journalists and the Sigma Delta Chi Foundation believe it is critical to bring the public and the press together to discuss journalism ethics and why they matter, especially in today’s whirlwind media climate. To accomplish this, SPJ and the SDX Foundation are awarding chapter grants for a grass-roots series of interactive public forums in cities across the country that will bring news consumers and journalists together to engage in meaningful dialogue.

    much more at site:
    http://www.spj.org/ethics.asp

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL area
    Posts
    2,406

    Warning - trite sayings and cliches ahead

    "Which came first - the chicken or the egg?" Did we (that is a generic we referring to people in general) start demanding more and the media gave it to us or did the media start this practice of checkbook journalism (I much prefer the term 'vulture journalism') and we lapped it up, perpetuating the practice?

    'If you build it they will come' I watched every show that ABC did about the Anthonys, and there were rumors about paying $$ before they even aired - so I am part of the problem. this also applies to the big $$ professional athletes, movie stars, etc. get - we will pay to see them.

    "closing the barn door after the horse gets out" It is going to be very hard to go back to the way it used to be. With instant news via the internet, etc. media outlets have to scramble to get viewers - because viewers generate revenue. I can just see all the major networks paying for and particpating in these grass roots forums, and nothing, absolutely nothing will change. But they will say, we listened to you, we really did.

    "It is what it is" - Adveritisers buy air time on programs they think will give them the the best bang for their buck. Superbowls are the best example of this - the networks will continue to air shows that they think will bring in viewers and the advertisers will continue to buy air time for them.

    Very cynical of me I know. I am sure ABC is not happy about the adverse publicity and maybe, just maybe, it will make other medial outlets hesitate about doing the same thing in the future. But I don't need a crystal ball to tell me that the exact same thing is going to happen again, somewhere down the line - the people involved with just do a better job of hiding it!

    ETA: this is only my opinion, I most certainly am not criticizing anyone else's thoughts on this subject!
    Last edited by Macushla; 03-20-2010 at 11:43 AM.
    Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.
    Euripides

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    At the lake
    Posts
    1,622
    Quote Originally Posted by LiveLaughLuv View Post
    Updated March 19, 2010
    ABC Is Guilty of Checkbook Journalism
    By Dan Gainor
    - FOXNews.com

    The revelation that ABC News paid Casey Anthony $200,000 demonstrates how rapidly the media landscape is changing.

    The term checkbook journalism has always referred to sleazy outfits so desperate to put some scandal in front of the public that they paid to get the story. That accusation now lands squarely on the desk of ABC News and the network is denying it lamely.

    more at the link:
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/...-anthony-paid/



    From the link above:


    That being the case someone may want to grab that surveillance video which landed in the hands of LE which clearly shows Baez meeting with the producer for an extended period of time that evening. ABC may need to gather up all those receipts, phone logs and appointment books and make them magically disappear. But then there is Cindy. She did tell DC he had permission to talk with this specific producer. Drags, too late. DC and Hoover have already mentioned this incident in their depositions and interviews with LE.

    So now does checkbook journalism broaden its definition from NE and gossip magazines to include all forms of journalism that is willing to pay some bucks for a story? Way to go ABC, finally you're being called out for your dirty dealing.


    Novice Seeker
    Disclaimer: Any and All comments by me are my thoughts and opinions

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    At the lake
    Posts
    1,622
    Quote Originally Posted by Macushla View Post
    "Which came first - the chicken or the egg?" Did we (that is a generic we referring to people in general) start demanding more and the media gave it to us or did the media start this practice of checkbook journalism (I much prefer the term 'vulture journalism') and we lapped it up, perpetuating the practice?

    'If you build it they will come' I watched every show that ABC did about the Anthonys, and there were rumors about paying $$ before they even aired - so I am part of the problem. this also applies to the big $$ professional athletes, movie stars, etc. get - we will pay to see them.

    "closing the barn door after the horse gets out" It is going to be very hard to go back to the way it used to be. With instant news via the internet, etc. media outlets have to scramble to get viewers - because viewers generate revenue. I can just see all the major networks paying for and particpating in these grass roots forums, and nothing, absolutely nothing will change. But they will say, we listened to you, we really did.

    "It is what it is" - Adveritisers buy air time on programs they think will give them the the best bang for their buck. Superbowls are the best example of this - the networks will continue to air shows that they think will bring in viewers and the advertisers will continue to buy air time for them.

    Very cynical of me I know. I am sure ABC is not happy about the adverse publicity and maybe, just maybe, it will make other medial outlets hesitate about doing the same thing in the future. But I don't need a crystal ball to tell me that the exact same thing is going to happen again, somewhere down the line - the people involved with just do a better job of hiding it!


    touche'. But wasn't there a time when respectable news agency's reported on crimes along with any included information from a professional and ethical standard that provided us with just as much information?

    I'm so tired of people making money off of the victim who is commonly dead. There's something wrong with our morals when we take someone, who has been killed and mostly likely suffered shortly before their death, and use them to generate income.

    Novice Seeker
    Disclaimer: Any and All comments by me are my thoughts and opinions

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL area
    Posts
    2,406
    Quote Originally Posted by Novice Seeker View Post
    touche'. But wasn't there a time when respectable news agency's reported on crimes along with any included information from a professional and ethical standard that provided us with just as much information?

    I'm so tired of people making money off of the victim who is commonly dead. There's something wrong with our morals when we take someone, who has been killed and mostly likely suffered shortly before their death, and use them to generate income.

    Novice Seeker
    I agree with you 100% NS. There was a time when news and reports were respected, respectable and ethical. Sadly, that is, for the most part, no longer true. I was just giving my opinions on how it all came to this. I think I had best go back and add in my opinion to my original post. I don't want anyone to think I was talking about them, I was justing 'opining' in general.
    Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.
    Euripides

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    4,721
    I can't find anything on licensing fees or money paid out...but this sparked my curiosity..




    Minimize Harm
    Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.

    Journalists should:

    Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
    Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
    — Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
    — Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.
    Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
    — Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects or victims of sex crimes.
    — Be judicious about naming criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.
    Balance a criminal suspect’s fair trial rights with the public’s right to be informed.

  8. #8
    You know, I am pondering all of this, and recalling the LUXURIOUS surroundings in which the Anthony clan spent their time when Caylee's skeleton was found, and I am thinking we have the answer to who the OTHER persons were who were paid for the licensing rights to the video and photo library...NOW I understand completely! I think the end deal that is rumored for $700,000.00 after the trial is going to George and Cindy and NOT Casey at all...they could not set it up to go to Jose-total ethics violation-they could not set it up to go to Casey-she MAY be found guilty. George and Cindy are up to their necks in this deal, and the Ritz Carlton and the little tag along in court from ABC is evidence enough for me!

    ABC provided $200,000.00 to
    Casey Anthonys defense!
    The MURDERED should not be USED to pay for the MURDERERS DEFENSE!

    American Tragedy: The defense of Casey Anthony.

    Juror No. 11 somehow made the journey from Casey is the one on trial to George may be a murderer, based on how George acted on the stand? 3 years of evidence against Casey and he throws George under the bus. Makes sense?
    What evidence indicated that George might be a murderer? Anyone?
    Weren't they to ONLY consider EVIDENCE?
    This NOT GUILTY verdict throws Caylee right back into the swamp she decomposed in. Thanks to this "impartial" jury.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    166
    I have to say ....i would have never seen all the pictures of Caylee Marie ...if ABC had not paid for all of them . Whatever kind its called its what has kept me on the edge of my chair for ....??? how many years now ?
    Justice for Caylee (anyway little girls wants to get the truth to us is fine with me) !
    ACTIONS SPEAKS LOUDER THAN WORDS.......... JMO
    ya can't fix stupid JMO

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    At the lake
    Posts
    1,622
    Quote Originally Posted by Macushla View Post
    I agree with you 100% NS. There was a time when news and reports were respected, respectable and ethical. Sadly, that is, for the most part, no longer true. I was just giving my opinions on how it all came to this. I think I had best go back and add in my opinion to my original post. I don't want anyone to think I was talking about them, I was justing 'opining' in general.


    I owe you an apology. My post was 100% in supporting your thoughts and if it came across as something otherwise then please accept my apology.


    Novice Seeker
    Disclaimer: Any and All comments by me are my thoughts and opinions


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    At the lake
    Posts
    1,622
    During that hearing I specifically looked for the gentleman from ABC who attends all of the court hearings with the Anthonys. He was right there. Wonder why he wasn't called before the judge and questioned? But, he does make Cindy smile.

    Novice Seeker
    Disclaimer: Any and All comments by me are my thoughts and opinions

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    STEELER COUNTRY!
    Posts
    27,332
    DISNEY should be for kids not the momster that murdered her child!
    Kyron, HALEIGH, ADJI & Gabriel NEEDS PRAYERS NOW TO FIND THEM!. Zahra & Jonathan in heaven
    Justice for Hailey!!!!
    No Justice for Caylee Marie..........

  13. #13
    Think about it. There was more than one person who they bought the rights from. The $200,000.00 could have gone to George and Cindy, with Jose acting as the attorney, and then George and Cindy signed it right over to the defense. THAT would be on the edge of ethics violation, but not quite, right? So there probably IS truth to the rumor about the seven hundred thou, it just is not slotted to go directly TO Jose...I would bet good money he has a contract for payment that is set to come AFTER trial, FROM good ole George and Cindy. Remember he NEVER said he was doing this pro-bono...never did say it.

    ABC provided $200,000.00 to
    Casey Anthonys defense!
    The MURDERED should not be USED to pay for the MURDERERS DEFENSE!

    American Tragedy: The defense of Casey Anthony.

    Juror No. 11 somehow made the journey from Casey is the one on trial to George may be a murderer, based on how George acted on the stand? 3 years of evidence against Casey and he throws George under the bus. Makes sense?
    What evidence indicated that George might be a murderer? Anyone?
    Weren't they to ONLY consider EVIDENCE?
    This NOT GUILTY verdict throws Caylee right back into the swamp she decomposed in. Thanks to this "impartial" jury.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    pa
    Posts
    1,999
    Just for the record, when ABC bought the pictures, video's etc, KC was not charged with murder yet.
    I also wonder if other broadcasting entities could have paid ABC for the use of some of the now ABC owned material.
    I do agree that the deal makes your stomach turn. And I do find the characters offering the stuff for sale to ABC ( and probably other stations, trying to secure top dollar), much more disgusting than ABC.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    2,102
    I still can' t help but think that Geraldo is somehow involved in all this....

Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Worst journalism 2014: cringeworthy news blunders
    By wfgodot in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-26-2015, 10:20 AM
  2. Replies: 508
    Last Post: 09-15-2011, 07:35 AM
  3. Investigative journalism
    By s_finch in forum Missing Archives
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-22-2007, 10:44 PM

Tags for this Thread