ABC TV is currently boradcasting a reality-style show geared towards testing the pulse of Americans around the country in respect to a myriad of social, political and cultural issues.
In a nutshell, the producers hire a cast of actors to "play out" a scripted scenario on the street (or in a busy restaurant, let's say) while their cameras are positioned in the wings filming unwitting individuals without their knowledge.
For example, in one segment that aired recently, a veiled woman applied for a rental unit and was summarily discriminated against because of her garb (and religious faith).
The premise of the spot?
Would a stranger observing the outrageous conduct take action - and denounce the obvious racism - or simply shrug it off and not get involved?
Unfortunately, on occasion, the network tends to misrepresents the facts (and distort the truth) in order to engender the "message" they are politically-motivated to transmit to viewers in the comfort of their cozy homes.
For instance, in one episode last week a drama surrounding a security guard was acted out, to drive home the thought that a recent controversial immigration law in Arizona might lead to "racial profiling" and a violation of citizen rights.
In the tense scene, a security guard was spied quizzing a patron in a restaurant about their legal status in the United States, because they appeared to be Mexican.
The other patrons in the crowded eatery became "enraged" - understandably so - because of the obvious misstep of the security guard.
But, to infer that the drama that unfolded "proved" that Arizona's Immigration Law would lead to the same kind of incidents and racial profiling - was not only a "leap" - but, a wild preposterous notion at best.
In a nutshell, ABC was out to hoodwink Americans at any cost, in order to persuade them to their point of view.
Talk about unethical journalism!
Notwithstanding, because the whole segment was skewered, it was nothing but a sham report in the final analysis (not to be believed).
For starters - the security guard was not only "off-duty" - but not even in the employ of the restaurant in question.
Of course, the other guests would cry foul in that twisted scenario.
I would, too.
In retrospect?
Clearly, the producers were comparing oranges with apples, for starters.
For instance, the Arizona Immigration Law pertains to Law Enforcement Officers on duty, and not lowly-paid security guards in monkey suits who stroll into a restaurant by chance.
Pursuant to the provisions of the law, a Police Officer is only legally entitled to check for legal status during the course of a legitimate stop (i.e., a traffic stop for a moving violaton, etc.).
Notwithstanding, the "framers" of the Arizona Law have stressed for the record - in no uncertain terms - that Police Officers have also been specially-trained to ensure there is no intentional "racial profiling".
In view of the aforementioned facts, it's obvious that ABC and its producers were trying to manipulate the television viewer by way of smoke-and-mirrors.
For a journalist to cross the line like that - is not only unethical - but downright outrageous.
Was the segment a fair unbiased report?
No, in my estimation.
Shame on ABC - and for host John Quinones - for engaging in these kinds of deceitful (and dishonest) tactics to stir up controversy and trigger the ratings.
http://www.thetattler.biz
No comments:
Post a Comment