Free speech is essential condition of a free society. But when does a major media corporation cross the line?

A useful case study is ABC’s interview of Marianne Gingrich, the embittered, angry, vengeful second wife of former Speaker of the House and Republican candidate for President  Newt Gingrich.

Consider the facts:

• The interview was aired January 19, 2012 two days before the South Carolina Republican Primary on January 21.
• The interview did not contain new information. Marianne Gingrich has hung out her version of Newt’s dirty laundry from their nasty divorce in the 1990s before - notable to Esquire magazine in 2010. It is clear the marriage ended badly. Most of us know that the narratives of couple who have split up are heavily coloured by emotion rather than fact. And to a person it is a self-serving narrative.
• No facts were presented beyond the fact that Marianne Gingrich is a living testament to the truth that hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

Was the public interest served? Only in the sense that it revealed ABC inserting itself into the political process. It is now a participant, not an independent observer, not an honest reporter. It was attempted character assassination by the woman, aided and abetted by ABC. While her motives are obvious, ABC’s are not.

Is there a need for the public interest to be served by all media? Arguably not. The public interest is served in allowing free speech.

Is there a need for the public to be advised of the political interests of the network and program and/or moderator/participants? Arguably yes. Just as financial advisors are required to declare their connections with companies they promote, media participants should be required to declare their political connections.

Was ABC’s interest served? Probably not. Whatever the motivation for the segment, it clearly backfired.

Was democracy served? Not at all. ABC’s move reinforced a growing cynicism that the political system is not transparent and unknown players with power and/or money are manipulating it.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, January 24th, 2012 at 12:50 am and is filed under provocations. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.