A couple of months ago Fox News released both a video and written report of some allegations regarding a DOJ and Federal crime probe into Gibson Guitar Corporation. This piece is fairly typical of how Fox News creates political slander using a kind of “news impressionism”, so let's dissect it in more detail. It's actually 4 stories in one; or should I say 4 half-ass stories in one. It's a twisted mesh of bits and parts of what could have been 4 full stories in themselves which COULD HAVE provided sufficient details instead of vague notions and accusations. Real news could have been done, but instead we get a sampler plate of cherry-picked crumbs that fell off of the complete food items.
The first half-finished story is about importing illegal wood for guitar making. It's illegal to import wood from tree species that are deemed to be under the threat of extinction. But the Fox story barely touches that issue.
The second half-finished story is about the manufacturing stage of the enforcement. Fox alleges that if the product is at a later stage of manufacturing, then the restrictions wouldn't apply. The implication is that the existing laws are unfair or poorly written. It may make an interesting story to find out why it allegedly only applies to “raw” wood and not semi-manufactured wood. Is it bad law writing? Which party wrote the laws? Are multiple laws conflicting? Is it poor interpretation of the existing law(s) by the DOJ? How often does the DOJ enforce this law? Who else has been subject to such probes? But, we'll never find out here. The Road to Detail and Enlightenment was not taken by Fox in this case.
(An NPR bit on the wood issue claimed that even finished imported guitars are subject to the same rule, and that this has caused some professional musicians problems.)
The third half-finished story is on USA jobs. This comes out of the blue with no clear segue. What starts out as a story about a crime investigation turns into a story about USA jobs. If a meth lab is raided and the alleged drug makers are jailed, it would indeed cut down on USA jobs: the meth bakers' jobs. However, that's rarely mentioned in a crime news story because the alleged crime is the more important story, not the jobs of the accused.
The video version quotes a company lawyer as saying, “That whole idea flies in the face of the president's speech tomorrow about putting Americans back to work.” I'm not even sure what the point of including that quote is. It may be an allegation that “excessive” environmental regulation causes job loss. But Fox failed to explore that issue further, such as considering both the pro's and con's of protecting endangered trees.
The title of the written version of the news piece is: “Is Fed Raid on Gibson Guitar Company Enforcing Policy . . . or a Push to Target 'Made in the USA'?” If the article is about intentional “Fed” targeting of USA manufacturing just because they are manufacturing in the USA, no evidence has been given whatsoever.
The fourth half-finished story, and the most serious, is the allegation that Gibson Guitars is being targeted because the CEO is a Republican. This certainly raises some interesting questions, none of which are answered by this piece.
“Outside observers see a more sinister possibility in all of this. Henry Juszkiewicz, Gibson’s CEO, is a Republican, who has contributed to Republican candidates (as well as some Democratic candidates). Other guitar companies, which have not been targeted, are led by Democrats. Is there a political motivation to all of this?”
Fox could have asked DOJ if it's true that no other guitar companies were being investigated, or at least pointed out that the DOJ refused to comment when asked about it, if that was the case. The DOJ may have a statement or viewpoint about it, but we never get to hear it. Fox could have also interviewed some “Democrat” guitar companies for their perspective on the Gibson raid. Why should the viewer only get to hear one allegation, but not the DOJ's nor other guitar maker's view? That's not a fair and balanced report. Instead, we are left with allegations that have no evidence given for them other than personal speculation. At least, Fox presented no other evidence beyond allegations.
Regardless if any political slant that may be involved in the authorship of this story, it's clear it is POOR REPORTING in general. Several questions are raised with very little done to answer them with actual facts. Nor have sufficient attempts been made to present viewpoints of both sides about the allegations (3 sides, if we include the DOJ). Even if a reporter cannot find more facts, at least quote a diversity of opinions from relevant participants.
And this is a typical pattern in most of Fox-News: hit-and-run impressionism. It's unfair to call it “News” unless Fox actually tried to do real news. Call it, “Fox Impressions” if you want to continue the poor practices described above.
