|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Davidadelong on 09:52 AM January 3rd, 2006 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
I e-mailed ms. whatever at pbs. I am curious as to the content of the response, if any. I only told the truth as to domestic abuse, both psychological, and physical. Which in the real world is dominated by the Females' either directly or through another. I can understand the worry of Women as to being outed, they would then lose the pedastal that they have put themselves on, and I am sure they are worried about the fall! "The Truth Shall Set You FREE!".
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
by Luek on 07:12 PM January 4th, 2006 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
There are 2 PBS affiliates in my area, and I fired off a tartly worded, borderline-tactful message to each of them.
-Fidelbogen-
Would you post the message you sent so as to give us some idea on what to say that is effective?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Fidelbogen on 09:45 PM January 4th, 2006 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Would you post the message you sent so as to give us some idea on what to say that is effective?
Okey-dokey; here it is:
"
This is in regard to the recent PBS documentary
"Breaking the Silence", (produced by Tatge and Lasseur)
which was widely aired by PBS affiliate stations
around the USA.
The PBS Ombudsman has described Breaking the Silence
as “a one-sided, advocacy program”, and has stated that the
producers are guilty of violating the fairness and balance
standards of PBS. Affiliates who wish to maintain the public's
trust in their commitment to PBS' own fairness and balance
standards should think twice about rebroadcasting
Breaking the Silence.
The heat of public opinion upon this issue is considerable,to judge by the volume of response in the recent campaign -- in which NOW (National Organization for Women)
was politically out-muscled by its opposition. A sign that
the times are changing. I am certain that PBS affiliate
stations will want to take this under consideration, since
they are supported by public funding, and what the
public giveth, the public taketh away
if it is not well pleased!
Sincerely...."
"Feminism has a rap sheet."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whilst Glenn Sachs states the producers have offered to make another programme, my concern is that the original work will nonetheless take on a life of its own (perhaps with a nudge and some finance), quite seperately from the sometime to be made new programme.
Question: Why is the original not being destroyed ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 09:56 PM January 3rd, 2006 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
I would encourage everyone interested in this ongoing and unresolved issue to visit PBS web site at the link below and review the network's recently revised Editorial Standards and Policies.
I believe you will find that the majority of these required professional practices and guidelines were knowingly violated by the producers of "Breaking the Silence," and arguably by PBS as well for failed oversight.
Here are a few examples from what PBS defines as required editorial compliance:
PUBLIC BROADCASTING SERVICE EDITORIAL STANDARDS AND POLICIES Adopted: June 14, 2005
II. Guiding Principles
A.Editorial Integrity --
PBS's reputation for quality reflects the public's trust in the editorial integrity of PBS content and the process by which it is produced and distributed. To maintain that trust, PBS and its member stations are responsible for shielding the creative and editorial processes from political pressure or improper influence from funders or other sources. PBS also must make every effort to ensure that the content it distributes satisfies those editorial standards designed to assure integrity.
B. Quality --
In selecting programs and other content for its services, PBS seeks the highest quality available. Selection decisions require professional judgments about many different aspects of content quality, including but not limited to excellence, creativity, artistry, accuracy, balance, fairness, timeliness, innovation, boldness, thoroughness, credibility, and technical virtuosity. Similar judgments must be made about the content's ability to stimulate, enlighten, educate, inform, challenge, entertain, and amuse.
C. Diversity --
To enhance each member station's ability to meet its local needs, PBS strives to offer a wide choice of quality content. Content diversity furthers the goals of a democratic society by enhancing public access to the full range of ideas, information, subject matter, and perspectives required to make informed judgments about the issues of our time. It also furthers public television's special mandate to serve many different and discrete audiences. The goal of diversity also requires continuing efforts to assure that PBS content fully reflects the pluralism of our society, including, for example, appropriate representation of women and minorities. The diversity of public television producers and funders helps to assure that content distributed by PBS is not dominated by any single point of view.
IV. Editorial Standards
PBS recognizes that the producer of informational content deals neither in absolute truth nor in absolute objectivity. Information is by nature fragmentary; the honesty of a program, Web site, or other content can never be measured by a precise, scientifically verifiable formula. Therefore, content quality must depend, at bottom, on the producer's professionalism, independence, honesty, integrity, sound judgment, common sense, open mindedness, and intention to inform, not to propagandize.
A.Fairness --
Fairness to the audience implies several responsibilities. Producers must neither oversimplify complex situations nor camouflage straightforward facts. PBS may reject a program or other content if PBS believes that it contains any unfair or misleading presentation of facts, including inaccurate statements of material fact, undocumented statements of fact that appear questionable on their face, misleading juxtapositions, misrepresentations, or distortions.
B. Accuracy --
The honesty and integrity of informational content depends heavily upon its factual accuracy. Every effort must be made to assure that content is presented accurately and in context.
C.Objectivity --
Along with fairness and accuracy, objectivity is the third basic standard to which journalists are held. While PBS holds all news and informational content to standards of objectivity, PBS recognizes that other types of content may not have the objective presentation of facts as their goal.
Objectivity, however, encompasses more than news and information presented in a neutral way. It also refers to the process by which a work was produced, including work that involves analysis or, as a result of reporting, arrives at conclusions. To begin with, journalists must enter into any inquiry with an open mind, not with the intent to present a predetermined point of view.
....
K. Unacceptable Production Practices --
It is impossible to anticipate every situation with which a producer of informational content must contend. Nevertheless, certain areas present such frequently encountered dangers that they merit explicit warning. In general, they would fall under two broad concepts:
• Never invent or add elements that were not originally there; and
• Never make choices that mislead or deceive the audience.
....
3. Distorted Editing --
All producers face the necessity of selection - which material is to be left in, which is to be edited out. Reducing and organizing this information is part of the producer's craft. It is the objective of the editing process to collect and order information in a manner that fairly portrays reality. Producers must assure that edited material remains faithful in tone and substance to that reality. When editing, producers of informational content must not sensationalize events or create a misleading or unfair version of what actually occurred.
Complete document link at --
http://www.pbs.org/aboutpbs/aboutpbs_standards.htm l
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Gregory on 11:13 PM January 3rd, 2006 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
"Whilst Glenn Sachs states the producers have offered to make another programme, my concern is that the original work will nonetheless take on a life of its own..."---Gang-banged
What worries me is that the new program might turn out to just be a forum for the producers of Breaking the Silence to answer and dismiss their critics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by MR on 02:44 PM January 6th, 2006 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
A few days before Christmas, PBS finally issued their statement on
Breaking the Silence: Children's Stories. (See