Changes

[http://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/execsummary FAKE TV NEWS: WIDESPREAD AND UNDISCLOSED] is the title of a report released April 6, 2006, by the [[Center for Media and Democracy]]. This multi-media report is the result of an intensive ten-month investigation by ==CMD's senior researcher Diane Farsetta and research consultant Daniel Price. It documents for the first time how commercial propaganda -- fake TV news created by PR experts -- is being extensively broadcast as TV "news".The Center for Media and Democracy and the media reform group Free Press simultaneously filed a formal complaint with the Federal Communications Commission requesting a crack-down on TV news fraud and calling for mandatory reports on-screen labeling of all phony news stories so that TV viewers know what is real reporting, and what is fake TV news.==

A search [https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/execsummary/ "Fake TV News: Widespread and Undisclosed"] is the title of a report released on April 6, 2006, by the [[NexisCenter for Media and Democracy]] . The multi-media database indicates report tracked television stations' use of selected VNRs over 10 months. The report summary states: "CMD identified 77 television stations, from those in the largest to the smallest markets, that the term was initially used more broadly. In May 1989 ''aired these VNRs or related [[Adweeksatellite media tours]]'' writer Barbara Lippert panned ads (SMTs) in which former newsreader Linda Ellerbee appeared in "in a fake news setting" hustling Maxwell House coffee98 separate instances, without disclosure to viewers. Collectively, these 77 stations reach more than half of the U.S. population. ... In August that year almost all cases, stations failed to balance the clients''Ad Day's'' Ed Buxton criticised messages with independently-gathered footage or basic journalistic research. More than one-third of the use of "time, stations aired the fake news bitepre-packaged VNR in its entirety." where reporters re-enacted news events as part of a news story[https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/execsummary]

However it was On November 14, 2006, CMD issued a cover article by follow-up report, [[David Lieberman]] titled https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews2/execsummary "Fake Still Not the News: Stations Overwhelmingly Fail to Disclose VNRs." ] Although the research period for this report was shorter -- only six months -- dozens more undisclosed VNR broadcasts were documented. The report summary states: "Of the 54 total VNR broadcasts described in a February 1992 edition this report, 48 provided no disclosure of the nature or source of ''[[TV Guide (magazine)|TV Guide]]'' that popularised the termsponsored video. In his article Lieberman took the media six other cases, disclosure was fleeting and PR industry to task over [often ambiguous." [video news releases]]https://www. He argued that if footage from VNR's was used in news it should be labelled so that viewers were aware of its originprwatch. If not, he argued, [[media outlets]org/fakenews2/execsummary] risked undermining their own credibility if they "pretend out of pride that what they broadcast is real news, instead of labeling it for what it is."

"There's a good chance that some Along with the release of each report, CMD and the news they media reform group [[Free Press]] filed a formal complaint with the public[[Federal Communications Commission] see will be fake. Not that it] (FCC) requesting enforcement of the Commission's necessarily inaccuratesponsorship identification requirements with regard to VNRs. Just that it was made In August 2006, the FCC sent letters of inquiry to plug something else. And itthe owners of the 77 television stations named in CMD's something the PR community has grown skillful at providing," he wrotefirst report. The original article generated a dismissive response from the [https://www.prwatch.org/node/5084] [PR industry]http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267048A1.pdf].(PDF)

However==Fake news fines==In September 2007, in June 1992 the U.S. [[Public Relations Service CouncilFederal Communications Commission]] saw the need issued two notices of apparent liability, announcing its intention to assemble a committee to develop standards governing the level fine [[Comcast Corporation]] $4000 for each of disclosure its regional cable channel [[CN8, (TV Station)|CN8]]'s five undisclosed VNR broadcasts that were documented in VNRthe Center for Media and Democracy's"Still Not the News" report [https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews2/execsummary], for a total of $20,000.[https://www.prwatch.org/node/6504]

In April 1993 TV Guide once more returned to the subject with an article titled Fake Newsfirst notice, for CN8's broadcast of the Nelson's Rescue Sleep VNR [https: All //www.prwatch.org/fakenews2/vnr54], the PR FCC said that News Can Usethe "extensive images and mentions of the product" triggered the need for VNR disclosure. [http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4005A1.pdf] The second notice was for CN8's broadcast of the General Mills (See the Wheaties) [https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews2/vnr56], Trend Micro [https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews2/vnr59], Allstate [Video news releaseshttps://www.prwatch.org/fakenews2/vnr60], and General Mills (Bisquick) [https://www.prwatch.org/fakenews2/vnr61] article VNRs. In it, the FCC broadened its explanation for a more detailed review of the responses need for VNR disclosure, saying that "the VNR itself was the 'valuable consideration' provided to LibermanCN8." The second notice also faults CN8's articles)broadcast of the four VNRs, saying their promotional content goes far beyond the acceptable "fleeting or transient references to products or brand names." [http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4075A1.pdf]

==History of the term "fake news"==A search of the [[Nexis]] media database indicates that the term was initially used more broadly. In May 1989 ''[[Adweek]]'' writer Barbara Lippert panned ads in which former newsreader Linda Ellerbee appeared "in a fake news setting" hustling Maxwell House coffee. In August that year ''Ad Day's'' Ed Buxton criticized the use of "the fake news bite" where reporters re-enacted news events as part of a news story. However, it was a cover article by [[David Lieberman]] titled "Fake News" in the February 1992 edition of ''[[TV Guide (magazine)|TV Guide]]'' that popularized the term. In his article Lieberman took the media and PR industry to task over [[video news releases]]. He argued that if footage from VNR's were used in news it should be labelled so that viewers were aware of its origin. If not, he argued, [[media outlets]] risked undermining their own credibility if they "pretend out of pride that what they broadcast is real news, instead of labeling it for what it is." "There's a good chance that some of the news they [the public] see will be fake. Not that it's necessarily inaccurate. Just that it was made to plug something else. And it's something the PR community has grown skillful at providing," he wrote. The original article generated a dismissive response from the [[PR industry]]. However, in June 1992 the [[Public Relations Service Council]] saw the need to assemble a committee to develop standards governing the level of disclosure in VNR's. In April 1993 TV Guide once more returned to the subject with an article titled Fake News: All the PR that News Can Use". (See the [[Video news releases]] article for a more detailed review of the responses to Lieberman's articles.) While controversy over VNR's diminished in the 1990's , when it resurfaced in 2004 following a [[Government Accountability Office]] investigation into government funded VNR's , the fake news description was well established.

==What to do if you encounter Fake News on your local TV station==What should you do if you see or hear what you believe to be a Video News Release? First, try to confirm that the segment was, in fact, a VNR: Record all identifying information about the segment: Who was the reporter? What was the subject matter? What date and time was it broadcast? Was there any mention of the origin of the segment or disclosure that it was a paid piece? What made you think it was a VNR? Call the station that broadcast the suspected VNR and ask to speak to the Managing Editor of the news department.  If he or she doesn’t respond, then call back and ask to speak with the station manager. When you get someone in charge, identify the segment clearly and ask if the segment was a video news release. How did news segment originate? How did the reporter get the idea to cover that subject? Why was it covered the particular way it was (e.g., promoting one product, or one side of an issue only?) If they admit it was a commercially-produced VNR and that it was broadcast without being identified as such, ask them to broadcast a notice or correction on TV letting their audience know the segment was paid fake news. If they refuse, notify them that that is a reportable offense to the FCC. (Then report it -- see below for information on how to do this). If they say they got the segment pre-packaged from an affiliate, get the name of the affiliate and the name of the person who sent it, and pursue it there, moving up the news department chain until you get someone who is accountable. (Then ask them the same questions to try and nail down the origin of the segment).If they refuse to give you any information, notify them that broadcasting a fake news segment without identifying it as such, or in return for compensation or other valuable consideration from a political or corporate entity, is a reportable offense to the FCC. (Then report it - see below). ==Other steps you can take to discourage the broadcast of VNRs in your area == Assuming the segment in question is, in fact, an unattributed VNR, you could also write a letter to the editor of the local paper alerting the public to the fake news being broadcast on that station.  Include information about what helped you identify it as fake, so others know how to spot them also. You could also contact a competing station to tell them about the story (although they might not pursue it if their own house is not clean). You could contact the local media reporter or a reporter at a local paper to initiate a story.  You could also send a a letter to your congressional rep and senators complaining about the station’s action and asking them to refer the matter to the FCC.  ==How to Report VNRs to the FCC==Go to [http://www.fcc.gov/ FCC.gov]. On the right side of the home page, under the column titled "Bureaus and Offices," click on "Enforcement." This takes you to the Enforcement Page. On the right side of the page, under "What We Do," click on "Broadcast Issues." On the next page, under "Information You Can Use," click on the fifth line down that says, "Payola and Sponsorship Identification." There you will find the sections of the Communications Act that require broadcasters to disclose whether broadcasted matter has been aired in exchange for money, services or other valuable consideration. The page contains a table listing enforcement actions that have been taken, with links to descriptions of those actions. Below the table are instructions about [http://www.fcc.gov/eb/broadcast/sponsid.html How to File a Complaint].You can also access information on how to file a complaint with the FCC by clicking [http://www.fcc.gov/eb/bccomplaints/compsponsid.html here].  ==FCC's published notice to broadcasters about VNRs== Also, on April 15, 2005, the FCC published a reminder to broadcast licensees, cable operators and other of requirements applicable to video news releases. A PDF copy of that reminder is [http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-84A1.pdf here] (pdf). This document contains the sponsorship identification rules broadcasters must follow, and a statement by FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps on the matter of VNRs, saying people in this country have a right to know where their news is coming from, and reminding broadcasters that they have to disclose government or corporate-generated "news" sources.  ==SourceWatch resources==*[[Alexis Debat]]

*[[General Mills#Pushing Pancakes with Fake Television News Promos]]*[[Lincoln Group]]

*[[Pundit payola]]*[[Lincoln Group]] ==Center for Media and Democracy campaign page on Wal-Mart Embraces Fake News==*[http://www.prwatch.org/nofakenews No Fake News!]]

===Government reports into on Williams /Ketchum PR contracts===*Anthony H. Gamboa (General Counsel), "[http://lautenbergwww.senategao.gov/assetsdecisions/GAO%20reportsappro/armstrong_williams305368.pdf Letter to Frank R. Lautenberg and Edward M. Kennedy Subject: Department o Education—Contract to Obtain Services of Armstrong Williams]", Government Accounting Office, September 30, 2005.*Anthony H. Gamboa (General Counsel), "[http://lautenbergwww.senategao.gov/assetsdecisions/GAO%20reportsappro/fakenews304228.pdf Subject: Department o Education—No Child Left Behind Act Video News Release and Media Analysis]", Government Accounting Office, September 30, 2005.*Gary L. Kepplinger, "[http://lautenbergwww.senategao.gov/assetsdecisions/GAO%20reportsappro/dept_edu306349.pdf Letter to Mr. Kent Talbert , Deputy General Counsel Department of Education Subject: Department o Education—No Child Left Behind Newspaper Article]", Government Accounting Office, September 30, 2005.

===General articlesArticles===