Patriotism or Penalties **Updated**

[Retro2001]

First, I attend the University of Missouri at Columbia, but this news item has relevance to all.
In the days following the terrorist attacks on 9/11/01, the local NBC affiliate which is run by the Journalism department issued a statement to its on-air reporters telling them to leave pins of flags and other patriotic paraphernalia off camera, the intent being to maintain journalistic neutrality. This memo became public and was subject to heated criticism around the area. Now, as the next year's budget appropriations are being passed, this has happened.
http://www.themaneater.com/story.cgi?id=13192. Be patriotic or we will slap you with a fine. Absolutely Insane.

As part of Representative "Bubs" campaign to appear like an upstanding citzen, I present this http://www.themaneater.com/story.cgi?id=13285 for your consideration.


Peace,
Will

 

[BigJohnKC]

Linkified.

 

[pyonir]

<< ?This was not about sound budgeting policies, it was all about politics,? >>


way to go Captain Obvious.

 

[BigJohnKC]

It's crap like this that makes me embarrassed to live in Missouri. Legislatively mandated patriotism, what a crock. I agree with what the news station did, and to slap them with a fine like this is just petty. I hope I get the chance to vote these assholes out of office sometime soon.

 

[Lucky]

I heard about this on CNN. Absolutely ridiculous. Its my hope that someone will step in and privately fund the shortfall.

 

[Linflas]

<< It's crap like this that makes me embarrassed to live in Missouri. Legislatively mandated patriotism, what a crock. I agree with what the news station did, and to slap them with a fine like this is just petty. I hope I get the chance to vote these assholes out of office sometime soon. >>


The real question in my mind is why is the state providing any funding for an NBC affiliate? Network affiliates are for profit entities charging cash for advertising. It does not state in the link you provided that this is an NBC affiliate station so I am just asking the question. As for the so called "fine" how is a reduction in the amount of money provided by the taxpayers of Missouri a fine? Anyone that is dependent on taxpayers money should realize that if they do something unpopular with the majority of taxpayers as represented by their elected officials said funding may be lowered or eliminated.

 

[Retro2001]

The Journalism School at Mizzou runs a local daily newspaper and a the local NBC affilate as part of the education progress. Students do almost all of the work at the paper, and at least a lot of the work at the TV station (I was a print Journalism major for a while). The method makes a lot of sense. When you come out of UM with a journalism degree you've already had a lot of hands experance. Its kind of like a med school student spending time in a hospital shadowing a doctor.
Also, the 500,000 cut DOES NOT come out of the J-school's budget. It is a general cut levied at the school and will effect all departments
Peace,
Will

 

[Lucky]

Yeah, the UM style of training kids is very unique. Their journalism school consistently ranks high in the country. Their photojournalism school ranks in the top three-along with my alma matter, Ohio University and another school, western kentucky. The reason missouri stays so competetive is because of the way they completely run the paper/TV station. I visited UM and almost decided to go there, I was very impressed by the hands on and relevant expereience you get while going to school.

 

[Ameesh]

<<

<< ?This was not about sound budgeting policies, it was all about politics,? >>


way to go Captain Obvious.

>>

 

[Miramonti]

journalistic neutrality

speaking of oxymorons...

 

[Linflas]

One other thought regarding this issue. How is opposing a rule forbidding the display of an American flag lapel pin "mandated patriotism"? In fact I am curious why the display of the flag of the country in which the news organization operates funded in part by taxes taken from the citizens of that country implies bias? Frankly the whole issue of flag lapel pins was nothing more than more PC nonsense since the reality is that the American flag represents all Americans irregardless of political views.

 

[BigJohnKC]

<< One other thought regarding this issue. How is opposing a rule forbidding the display of an American flag lapel pin "mandated patriotism"? In fact I am curious why the display of the flag of the country in which the news organization operates funded in part by taxes taken from the citizens of that country implies bias? Frankly the whole issue of flag lapel pins was nothing more than more PC nonsense since the reality is that the American flag represents all Americans irregardless of political views. >>


It's an issue of "you told people not to show patriotism, so we're taking your money away." They aren't legislating the idea that the news media should be patriotic by showing their flag pins and whatnot, but they are setting a precedent that tells the station and the school if they choose to tell people to try and stay journalistically neutral (which should be the only way to report something, IMO) they will be penalized by having their state funds taken away. The politicians are making an issue out of something that shouldn't be an issue, but has become so because of the outpouring of lemming-like patriotism in this country since the 11th of September last year.

 

[Corn]

<< It's an issue of "you told people not to show patriotism, so we're taking your money away." They aren't legislating the idea that the news media should be patriotic by showing their flag pins and whatnot, but they are setting a precedent that tells the station and the school if they choose to tell people to try and stay journalistically neutral (which should be the only way to report something, IMO) they will be penalized by having their state funds taken away. The politicians are making an issue out of something that shouldn't be an issue, but has become so because of the outpouring of lemming-like patriotism in this country since the 11th of September last year. >>



I find it rather ironic that an institution that relies so heavily on the first ammendment denies these very freedoms to their employees. "Journalistic integrity" my ass, since when does a flag pin affect the neutrality of the weather report or the piece on the convienence store robbery victim...............

 

[BigJohnKC]

<< I find it rather ironic that an institution that relies so heavily on the first ammendment denies these very freedoms to their employees. "Journalistic integrity" my ass, since when does a flag pin affect the neutrality of the weather report or the piece on the convienence store robbery victim............... >>



Now wait a minute, the station told their employees what to do, and they are suddenly denying them the right to freedom of speech? The reporters still had freedom of speech, but if they chose to go against the wishes of their employers, they may have lost their jobs. That's the same as any other institution, any other company, especially a company that is responsible for their employees expressing the opinions of the station on air for anyone with a TV to see. Secondly, the idea was that the news should be reported from a neutral point of view, not from an American point of view. The station was trying to say that they are journalists, simply there to fulfill their responsibility to report the news, not to tell people how to feel about the news. An American flag pin can show bias towards one side of the story, which is what the station was trying to avoid, it seems. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that there is journalistic integrity or journalistic neutrality in this country, just that this station was attempting to express their neutrality to the situation. And they are now being punished for it. That's what I disagree with.

 

[Corn]

<< Now wait a minute, the station told their employees what to do, and they are suddenly denying them the right to freedom of speech? >>



That's exactly what I'm saying. They denied their employee's freedom of speech under penalty of dismissal.

Of course the station has the right to dictate reasonable expectations of behavior for their employees--I myself have to be very careful about what I say to people that I deal with as information I am privy to could damage my company, but that's not the point. I said I found it IRONIC that this "employer" whom relies heavily upon the first ammendment for their very livelyhood, denies their employees this same right. An excellent display of "integrity" is it not?

To me, every time I hear a journalist scream "freedom of speech", "the people have the right....", or "freedom of the press", I'll just have this little reminder that will add a little thought bubble over their talking head that says "only when I say so".

 

[Retro2001]

Sorry I was not able to follow this thread as closely as I had hoped. Now there is a second link uptop to showcase the insanity of this situation.

Peace,
Will