Page 161 - Mass Media, Mass Propoganda Examining American News in the War on Terror

Free Speech Fatalities 151

Similar skepticism for tough critiques of the "War on Terror" exists outside
of the White House press corps as well. Consider the story of John Leiberman,
who was fired by Sinclair Broadcastng for his criticisms of the anti-Keny film,
Stolen Honor: Wounds that Never Heal. Sinclair planned on running the docu-
mentary on all of its sixty-two television stations, which are affiliated with Fox,
WB, NBC, ABC, and CBS.'~ Sinclair owns more television stations than any
other media corporation in the U.S. Although its stations are outside the major
ten U.S. markets, they reach up to a quarter of a million households, which
translates into enormous potential to influence American public opinion.90
The company's power in influencing opinion is driven home clearly in
Robert McChesney and John Nichol's book, Tragedy & Farce: How the Ameri-
can Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections, and Destroy Democracy. McChesney and
Nichols cite a nationwide survey done by the Annenberg Center, which found
that the commercials for the Swift Boat documentary run on a number of sta-
tions in swing states had a significant effect on voters' perceptions of Keny.
According to the poll, "Independent voters [were] nearly evenly split over
whether they [found] the ad believable; 44 percent [found] the ad somewhat or
very believable, while 49 percent [found] the ad somewhat or very unbeliev-
able.'"'
Sinclair was known for its pro-Republican stance before the Stolen Honor
controversy. From 1996 to 2004, the Sinclair Corporation and its executives
gave millions in contributions to Republicans running for office; in 2004, 97
percent of the contributions went to Republicans or the Republican Sin-
clair owners' conservative political views were clearly expressed when the
company prohibited its ABC affiliates from running a Nightline program in
which Ted Koppel read the names of American soldiers who died in Iraq. Sin-
clair criticized ABC's choice as motivated by "a political agenda designed to
undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq. . . . We find it to be contrary
to the public interest."93 The station's anger with allegedly biased journalism
was lost, however, after it decided to push forward with its openly anti-Keny
Vietnam documentary. At this point, biased journalism no longer seemed to be a
problem for the network, as long as it favored the Bush administration.
It appears that former Sinclair reporter John Leiberman was punished for
his opposition to the film. Leiberman was fired after criticizing Sinclair for "in-
defensible" conduct?4 as he charged the station with playing "biased political
propaganda,"95 in what he considered an attempt to sway the 2004 Presidential
election. The official reason given for Leibeman's firing was that he disclosed
private company information to the media, although his charge that Sinclair was
guilty of reliance on political propaganda probably played a larger part.
Sinclair's choice to run the documentary, compounded with its firing of
Leiberman, left many convinced that the station was not committed to diversity
of opinion or dissent. In retaliation, eighteen Democratic senators filed federal
complaints condemning the planned broadcast of Stolen ono or.^^ Some Repub-
licans even attacked Sinclair. Senator John McCain denounced the station's ban
on the Nightline broadcast for attempting "to deny viewers an opportunity to be
reminded of war's terrible costs."97 McCain blasted the station for its "gross