About Sinclair (p4)

The "Journalistic" Perspective

Cincinnati Post (14 Oct 2004)
The unprecedented move from Sinclair, whose corporate officials have a history of donating and supporting Republican causes, has created a new media-and-politics debate, albeit the opposite of conservatives criticizing Dan Rather and CBS for apparent reckless reporting on George Bush's National Guard record...

"Stolen Honor" has been out since early last month, available on DVD and for Internet downloading. The film was financed by a collaboration of two anti-Kerry veterans' groups -- POWs for Truth and Swift Vets, which funded the ads that accused Kerry of fudging the truth about his war record.

Salon (15 Oct 2004)
The move breaks with a long-standing tradition among broadcasters of covering presidential campaigns as part of their obligation to serve the public interest, and to do so with at least a patina of honesty.

Sinclair's unprecedented move once again raises questions about the effects of rampant media consolidation, the deregulation that allows a small number of large conglomerates to own so many outlets, let alone use them to advance an obvious political agenda....

Bob Zelnick, chairman of the Department of Journalism at Boston University, a self-described conservative who says he intends to vote for President Bush, calls Sinclair's decision "an unfortunate precedent" that runs counter to "good journalism" and "is not what network news ought to be about." A former Pentagon correspondent for ABC News, Zelnick says, "Whether you're liberal or conservative, if you have roots in the journalism profession, there are core values that transcend and need to survive election to election. You avoid airing, very close to election, highly charged, partisan material that takes the guise of a documentary."

"If I were a Sinclair news director I'd quit," says Dow Smith, professor of journalism at Syracuse University and a former NBC news director in Detroit. "I'm certainly not going to encourage any of my students to work for Sinclair."...

Sinclair's stock, which is already underperforming, dragged down by the weight of the company's enormous debt, a consequence of mismanagement at the top, drooped even more following the "Stolen Honor" announcement. And that comes on the heels of the stock hitting its 52-week low in late September. (Sinclair trades for roughly $7. In 1995 the stock traded for $45, and that was before the late '90s stock market surge.)

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (15 Oct 2004)
"I want his feet held to the fire," Sherwood, a former Marine veteran of Vietnam now living near Harrisburg, told The Associated Press of Kerry. "I want him to answer for his lies and for his smear on us 33 years ago."

The hullabaloo has raised questions that are bound to set off discussions in journalism ethics classes around the country: Is Sherwood's film, "Stolen Honor: Wounds that Never Heal," a news documentary simply because the producer and broadcaster say it is? Or, in this context, is it a political ad that could bolster President Bush's chances for another term?

If it is an ad, would broadcasting the film violate the Federal Communications Commission's "equal time" election laws, which say TV outlets must offer equal advertising time to two candidates for the same office?

Media Channel (13 Oct 2004)
In a March 12 story on Fox News Channel, Sherwood described Kerry as "principally responsible for cementing the image of Vietnam veteran as drugged-out psychopaths who were totally unrestrained and who were a murderous hoard. "...

Sherwood's "Stolen Honor" is a similar sleight of hand -- a publicity stunt masquerading as journalism. Mark Hyman, Sinclair's vice-president for corporate relations (who doubles as a conservative news commentator on its stations) said the company would broadcast "Stolen Honor" because it is newsworthy. Hyman told CNN's Aaron Brown last night that the Stolen Honor story "is news. I can't change the fact that these people [Vietnam veterans profiled in the documentary] decided to come forward today. The networks had this opportunity over a month ago to speak to these people. They chose to suppress them. They chose to ignore them. They are acting like Holocaust deniers and pretending these men don't exist."...

This is "political service" journalism at its worst. In the film, Kerry is described to viewers as "a willing accomplice" for "enemy propagandists." Sherwood's allegations in "Stolen Honor" echo those of the anti-Kerry veterans group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, and two of the former prisoners who appeared in that group's veracity-challenged television ads -- including one who was a Bush campaign volunteer -- were interviewed in Sherwood's film.