Reason: What about Nader's argument that it's hard attacking corporations, and now you're taking the easy way out by parroting the free market line?
Stossel: In the culture where I work -- in network TV, living on the Upper West Side of Manhattan -- it was much easier to go after the corporate bad guys. Then all my colleagues were on my side. To talk about abstractions such as how freedom and voluntary transactions can benefit people in ways that central planning can't even approach -- that is much more difficult to do on TV. So I think he is totally wrong about that.
Reason: How do you respond to the criticism that giving speeches to business or free market groups creates a conflict of interest?
Stossel: I think it's good it's being brought up. It's interesting that when I was speaking to consumer groups no one ever complained. It is true that I now speak for absurdly high honoraria. That raises eyebrows. All the money goes directly to charity. I did this before ABC's ban [on honoraria from businesses and trade associations] went into effect, but consumer activists still write articles implying that I am keeping the money, not mentioning that it at all goes to charity. I think what happens is that once you start saying on TV that markets work, that business is not evil, then more businesses want to invite you to speak, because people like to be told they are good guys.
Reason: How have your colleagues at ABC reacted to your political views? Would it be easier if you were, say, a Marxist or an animal rights activist?
Stossel: It hasn't been hostile here. People just give me blank stares. There has been very little criticism to my face.
Reason: ABC News officially urges its employees to avoid taking "a public position on any significant issue of controversy," but that rule does not seem to be enforced. Hugh Downs condemns the war on drugs, for example. What does the policy actually require?
Stossel: It's a mushy line that forbids us to participate in a political campaign, to be outspoken on topics that are hot current political debates.
Reason: Even if you're not covering them as a reporter?
Stossel: It depends on the debate. To speak forcefully about who should win the election, to take a clear, vocal position on abortion during an abortion debate, to take a position while something is being voted on in Congress -- that is forbidden. To discuss things in the context of programming we're doing is OK. And when I take a point of view on air, it's not kept secret from the audience. I declare it at the beginning of the program usually: "Here's what my point of view is. I'm laying this out for you to make your own judgment about it." I always put the other side on, and I always ask tough questions of the people who might agree with my point of view.
Reason: What is the rationale behind ABC's policy against taking sides on controversial issues?
Stossel: All we have in news is our reputation. People have a hundred choices for news now, and if we are perceived as closed-minded, people will not watch us or trust us. To me, that's a precious commodity, and to ABC News, too.
Reason: I already don't watch the network news because I perceive them as closed-minded. Is it just that you don't perceive biases when they are the same as yours? Is this notion of unbiased coverage a fiction?
Stossel: I think that's best commented on by people not working for a network. It is true that the hometown paper for most everyone in my business is The New York Times. People have grown up with The New York Times, and people here believe that it's a middle-of-the-road newspaper. Dan Rather says even the editorial page is middle-of-the-road. So talking about a liberal slant to my business is a little like talking to a fish about water. The fish says, "Water? What's water?" It's just what we swim in.
Reason: I notice that you use a lot of rhetorical questions in your TV reports and articles. Is that just a matter of style, or is it a way to avoid stating your opinions directly?
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.
Trackback| 11.2.09 @ 1:40PM
credit repair, on credit repair, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
nfl jerseys|11.16.10 @ 3:24AM|#
cryjhf