By Mike Mulvihill
Transparency is certainly top of mind in the SM world as a result of the FTC ruling on endorsements and testimonials (i.e., pay-to-blog). The ruling has drawn commentary from far ranging sources such as the Council of PR Firms to Chris Brogan. Like Chris, I don’t know what’s so hard to get on this topic – if you are given product or paid to blog, you better divulge it or your voice won’t have any cred (because sooner or later you’ll be found out.)
I’m more interested in how transparency is making the news in a spat between the Obama administration and FOX News. OK, so back in the early 2000s, FOX pretended it was “fair and balanced” when it was anything but. Now, FOX is stoking up its ratings to unprecedented levels as what White House Communications Director Anita Dunn calls “a wing of the Republican Party.” The White House, which is essentially a wing of the Democratic Party, has said it is done talking to FOX News.
While I find this more than a bit disheartening from a societal viewpoint, as a communications consultant I say right on. From the White House viewpoint, FOX is a troll (photo courtesy of Doug Wildman), which Wikipedia defines as “…someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community…with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.” One of the first bits of advice I received about blogging was don’t feed the trolls. And that is true in traditional communications as well.
Where do I get off calling FOX News a troll (at least to those who do not share its ultra-conservative agenda)? Let’s review a few pieces of history:
- FOX was founded in 1996 and is still headed by Roger Ailes, who was for years a Republican political operative, including a stint as the elder Bush’s media strategist during which he helped create the famous “Willie Horton” attack ad.
- FOX is home to the conservative viewpoints of Bill O’Reilly, Glenn Beck and others. They recently added John Stossel and are rumored to be recruiting Lou Dobbs. Granted Beck and O’Reilly have “shows” (i.e. editorial) while much of the FOX News programming is “news.” However, that line is a bit too gray for the White House.
- Before Obama even announced his candidacy, FOX started the false claim that Obama had attended an Islamic school (which was retracted).
There are more but you get it – FOX is decidedly “conservative.” But, to their credit, at least they admit it these days. And the NY Times, NPR and others are “liberal.” So do you watch/read/hear news to broaden your horizons or to reinforce what you already believe? As a society, these days we seem more interested in the latter.
Most successful issues management situations recognize that the secret to success is to mobilize supporters to help woo the large middle of the bell curve to your side of the issue. The two tails of the bell curve are either staunch supporters or staunch adversaries. Supporters you must avoid alienating. The adversaries are trolls – you won’t change their mind regardless of what happens. There is no need to include them, just make sure you know what they’re up to and don’t get baited into a fight. Because as FOX’s pugnacious Mr. Ailes has reportedly said, “Don’t pick a fight with people who like to fight.”
The next few months will tell whether the White House has silenced a troll or picked a fight. If nothing else, it will pump up FOX’s ratings.
Read several mainstream newspapers, and include both liberal and conservative papers.
Newspapers editors can be biased too, but newspapers list more facts than television news stories. Television is about the advertising that runs between shows, and thus about short sound-bytes designed to keep you from changing the channel.
Newspapers don’t have formal ratings as part of their programming decisions – they generally aim for the who, what, where, when, and how. Any bias that creeps in is generally less-pronounced.
I could make a strong case the ABC new is very liberally biased, but it would miss the point. Sadly, your post is probably relevant because apparently many people do form their opinions by watching televised news.