SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Polite Political Discussion- is it Possible? An Experiment.
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Brumar89 who wrote (1439)9/11/2006 10:59:24 AM
From: Bread Upon The WaterRead Replies (2) of 1695
 
If you violate the broadcasting standards that goes with the license you're license is subject to being pulled. It is not censorship because the constitution says except in the most compelling situations (troop movements in wartime) you get to publish the information first. But if it is false, misleading, defamatory, or libelous you then have to suffer the consequences.

Whether this is a violation of the licensing standards is the question. Certainly all the individuals misportrayed in the film have their own legal remedies available to them---however for public figures they would have to show that ABC acted with "malice aforethought"--a very high standard to meet (given the facts stated here this might actually be achievable in this case).

However, the broader question is do you get to "make up" history by calling it fiction? Here ABC is presenting the actions of real people still living in a "factual context". To me calling these acts as "fictitious" doesn't overcome the perception that this is a reality and hence false. Where this falls legally I am not sure. It might be a grey area (legally).

This is not the same as taking the excerpts of the President's words and actions out of context (possibly) and stringing them together to portray him in an unfavorable light. He did after all actually say and do those things.

I would think as a matter of public policy you would want to hold the portrayers of historical events to high standards of accuracy---why would you not? It is one thing to interpret history, especially if historians disagree over the facts, but this is not the case here. The people involved are alive and do say the facts presented did not take place. ABC can remedy the inaccuracies. If it deliberately chooses not to do so why shouldn't they be subject to penalty?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News