« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Media Contributions to McCain: Are they Legal?
In recent years, Fox news won a lawsuit allowing them to lie about what they "report.." Ok, so they're not a news channel (no news there).
A couple of months ago, Fox covered a McCain Town Hall meeting IN FULL, start to finish, on air. How is this NOT a contribution? So, here is my question:
If Fox, and others, are lying about what they are saying about Obama,
about parsing their reporting in an obvious attempt to benefit McCain,
at what point does this become a campaign contribution? Can the news
stations be sued for their blatant stumping for one candidate over
another? When might the FEC step in (yeah, I know), to say, "Hey,
you're giving $X.xx to McCain's campaign by delivering advertising for
him (an hour in total equals $200,000) and that has to count towards a
contribution which must be reported."
I called Lionel (on Air America) and asked him that. He said it was a very good question, that he would look into it and report the following week. Alas, I was out of the country that next week.
Did anyone hear what Lionel said? What about you attorneys out there? Thoughts? Anyone in the know about FEC rules?
TheZoo
Comments (5)
True, but think about all the free air time Obama got during the primaries when MSNBC and CNN played his really lengthy speeches in full time and time again. That was some great free advertising.
On the other hand, I hate that McCain's people have figured out how to get their ads played for free just by making them ridiculous...
August 3, 2008 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hi MsJoanne,
I'm no expert but I think Fox may be on firm legal ground. News shops have tremendous editorial latitude to stress those things they consider "newsworthy". The government can not step in and dictate content to them or second guess the editorial policy. Because of the ills of allowing the latter we have to put up with facially biased coverage.
Frankly I would love to have Magistrate Judge Facciola order discovery on the last 8 years of emails between Ailes and his top deputies and the news branch at Fox. We would then probably see a clear pattern emerge that might be actionable in some kind of "real harm" theory.
But consider where all this leads, (besides a media that is worth a s***), Suppose JayLo sues CNN for running too many Britney stories. Theory proposed is that the coverage is free publicity and acts as a restraint on Jaylo's commercial viability. Does she have a case? Well, no.
The newspapers (and by extension the broadcast media) carved out a pretty generous zone of freedom over the years and it would be pretty hard to bring them to brook I would guess.
August 3, 2008 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree and I wonder when the shows like Countdown and all the other outlets (I am a big fan of COUNTDOWN) show the ads, why don't they understand they are giving a huge free outlet to the campaign. I think it's fair game to talk about the ads, but not show them.
August 3, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't worry about McCain. The right wingers on radio hate him and the major media outlets are in full support of Obama.
It's Obama's to lose, McCain is barely relevant.
What could possibly go wrong?
August 3, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
The major media outlets are for Obama? You've got to be joking. Show me that one. I'm not seeing it.
August 3, 2008 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment