D'ANNE MICA DUI Booking photo posted by right-wing FOX NEWS
Exactly where was the nexus to public policy in the press reporting that Congressman JOHN LUIGI MICA’s daughter has been charged with DUI? Some five months ago, I challenged the Associated Press, FOX NEWS and Roger Ailes, to please answer in this space.
The story five months ago in the St. Augustine Record (and 20 other places) was sensationalistic and a waste of ink. Celebrity DUIs (whether involving starlets or lobbyists) are dull unless there’s something more (like death, injury, a school bus or attempted case-fixing).
As I wrote in January, we’d rather learn more about D’ANNE LEIGH MICA’s lobbying than about her liver (and Blood Alcohol).
ABC News was up to the task, running an excellent article linking the airport and transportation lobbyist to her daddy the Congressman who considers himself a transportation expert.
D’ANNE MICA is an adult.
D’ANNE MICA is not an elected official.
D’ANNE MICA is a public relations person and a lobbyist, working with PAUL McCORMICK in MICA-McCORMICK STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS, lobbyists for controversial landraping, wetland-filling developers, who are ruining Northeast Florida.
Ever see a story about that (outside of this blog)? I don't reckon you have yet.
Or have you seen a story about the apparent material alterations of the docket sheet (see blog below)?
Why?
Our Florida news media has been craven, weak, poltroonish, fawningly obeisant and non compos mentes when it comes to covering Rep. JOHN LUIGI MICA and his greedy family of lobbyists (two brothers and two children are lobbyists).
In particular, D’ANNE MICA has received no-bid contracts for public relations from recipients of government largesse, including government contractors and grant recipients like the Sanford Airport Authority, to which she was introduced as “Congressman MICA’s daughter.”
That’s news. That’s what journalists aren’t reporting.
Lazy no-account “Chain Gang” journalists like easy targets. For a good time, read Tom Wicker’s book, On Press (1977) about how journalists fail to cover politicians and businesses worth a flip.
So lazy, uninformed journalists (some tipsy drivers themselves) would rather report on the alleged drunk driving by the Congressman’s daughter. That’s easy.
Forget the presumption of innocence. Forget the fact she's not even a Congressional staffer. Forget that she's an adult -- it was a cheap, sleazy headline for the St. Augustine Record on the back page of the first news section.
Then when the D'ANNE LEIGH MICA DUI case was fixed, the WRecKord covers it not at all.
Do you feel glad that you reported this "news," FOX, AP and Record? Really? Why?
Your organizations don’t have the tenacity, courage and perspicacity to report on the serial lobbying by the Congressman’s daughter, son and two brothers, basking in his influence and pocketing copious quantities of influence based upon the political influence of JOHN LUIGI MICA.
Real reporters dig deep for real stories. Real editors encourage them to dig. That would require going to the Sanford Airport Authority and other record keepers and obtaining information on who paid D’ANNE MICA how much and for what. That’s news.
But DUI by a private citizen – that’s gossp or “Lashon hora,” and painfully poor journalism. It was unChristian, unJewish, unMuslim, unBuddhist and unHindu for FOX NEWS and the Associated Press to be writing news stories about the private misfortunes of a public official’s ADULT offspring where there’s no nexus to public policy, no death, no injury and no school bus involved.
The articles in January didn’t even report that D’ANNE MICA is a lobbyist and PR person (or for whom).
The definition of Lashon hora is set forth below, from the Wikipedia article.
What do you reckon? Is it time for real reporting?
Lashon hara
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to:navigation, search
Lashon hara (or Loshon hora) (Hebrew לשון הרע; "evil language/tongue") is the prohibition in Jewish Law of telling gossip. Lashon hara differs from defamation in that its focus is on the use of true speech for a wrongful purpose, rather than falsehood and harm arising. By contrast, Motzi Shem Ra ("spreading a bad name") consists of untrue remarks, and is akin to slander or defamation.
Speech is considered to be lashon hara if it says something negative about a person or party, is not previously known to the public, is not seriously intended to correct or improve a negative situation, and most importantly, is true. Statements that fit this description are considered to be lashon hara, regardless of the method of communication that is used, whether it is through face-to-face conversation, a written letter, telephone, or email.
According to the majority of Torah scholars,[citation needed] lashon hara is considered to be a most serious sin. Therefore, they[who?] proclaim, how much more serious is such a statement that is false?
No comments:
Post a Comment