|
|
|
Ralph
Nader, Walter Cronkite On Witness Whistleblower Case Is First Of Its Kind. While an increasing number of Americans suspect mainstream news organizations sometimes twist the news, two veteran investigative journalists say they are ready to prove in court how Fox television managers and lawyers at WTVT Fox 13 in Tampa ordered them to deliberately distort news reports and then fired them for resisting those directives. The landmark whistleblower lawsuit is believed to be the first time any journalist has ever filed a claim against his own news organization and offered evidence of behind-the-scenes manipulation of the news. When the trial begins next Monday, reporters Jane Akre (pronounced A'-cree) and Steve Wilson say they will show exactly how Fox hired them and advertised their reputations for hard-hitting investigations but then folded and pressured them to slant a story in favor of an advertiser who threatened "dire consequences" if their reports were broadcast. CBS journalist Walter Cronkite and public interest advocate Ralph Nader are both on the plaintiffs' witness list, despite efforts by Fox attorneys who desperately sought to block their testimony. The trial will pit the two fired journalists-with Wilson representing himself for more than two years in an effort to save money on legal fees, and Akre represented by a small Tampa firm-against the powerful Washington law firm of Williams & Connolly, the same lawyers who represent President Bill Clinton personally. To get their day in court, the plaintiffs have sold their home, spent their life savings battling the media giant, and say they have been branded as media traitors never likely to get another good job in the business again. To the amazement of most legal observers, the reporters paved their way to court by defeating three Fox motions to summarily dismiss the case without a trial. Those victories were engineered by Akre's legal team led by John Chamblee and Tom Johnson. At the heart of the dispute is a series of reports produced by Akre and Wilson revealing the widespread and virtually secret use of a synthetic hormone being injected into dairy cows throughout Florida and much of the U.S. The hormone causes cows to produce more milk. The investigative reports that Fox abruptly pulled from its schedule in early 1997 would have revealed that without the consent or approval of milk drinkers and those who serve it daily to their children, use of the synthetic hormone has altered what used to be called "nature's most nearly perfect food." The stories would have also disclosed for the first time that leading grocers now admit they quietly broke their 1994 promises not to buy milk from hormone-injected cows until the practice achieved widespread acceptance. Surveys have shown that the vast majority of consumers do not want artificial hormones in their milk and would avoid such milk if it were labeled. No dairy anywhere is known to label its milk as coming from cows injected with artificial hormones. Although legal in America, the artificial bovine growth hormone (rBGH) has been banned in Canada, throughout Europe, and elsewhere due in large part to concern about health risks for milk drinkers. One of the chief concerns is that while the growth hormones do cause the cows to produce more milk, the milk is changed in a way that could promote breast, colon and prostate cancer. "In wake of the two written threats1,2 from Monsanto to Fox News chief Roger Ailes, we were asked to put Fox's interest in its own bottom line ahead of the public interest," said plaintiff Steve Wilson. Monsanto is the multi-national chemical company that makes the genetically engineered hormone. "When the president of Fox Television Stations saw those threats, that executive who controls more television stations than anyone in America simply ordered his lawyers to 'take no risks' with the story," Wilson said. The executive's directive has been confirmed in sworn testimony from two Fox attorneys3,4 in the written notes of one them. Note 5. "And we have also discovered, in another handwritten note6 of one of the broadcaster's attorneys, that if they tried to kill the story and word leaked out, it would be 'a major p-r problem for Fox'," said co-plaintiff Akre. "So they decided to eliminate their risk by pressuring us to placate Monsanto and essentially lie to the public. No decent journalist can ever do that." The reporters will testify that Fox managers first threatened to fire them for insubordination, then offered them a six-figure deal to entice them to go along. When the pair refused, they say they were strung along for months re-writing the story 83 times in an effort to get it on the air before being suspended, locked out, and ultimately fired by Fox for what the broadcasting company claimed was "no cause." The reporters will not be able to tell the jury about a second deal Fox offered to pay each reporter a whole year's salary for no-show jobs as "news consultants" in exchange for their leaving quietly and never disclosing to anyone what they learned regarding the milk or the quality of Fox journalism. The trial court ruled that the second six-figure deal was actually made to try and avoid a lawsuit. To encourage out-of-court settlements, such offers cannot be admitted into evidence when disputes cannot be settled without a trial. The issue has drawn world-wide attention as a result of a website the journalists posted the day their lawsuit was filed. The reporters, who happen to be married to each other, have also traveled far and wide to accept invitations to speak about genetically engineered milk and their experiences with Fox. They have vowed not to personally benefit from their efforts to publicize the story Fox refused to tell. Many of the documents from the suit are posted on the World Wide Web at www.foxBGHsuit.com. on flyers and posters with messages that demand jobs and an end to poverty. These foot-soldiers are mobilisi
|
