Should news organizations be required to tell the truth?

They can't libel someone, but beyond that it is difficult to protect the right of free speech while at the same time making someone determine whether they are telling the truth? Should we let the government determine when they are telling the truth? That would create an opportunity for abuse by the government.

That is why it is important for citizens to demand that a news organization tells the truth. If the news source you follow lies or misinforms you by omitting important information about a story then you should be outraged. Unfortunately, to use an old term, yellow journalism is rampant in the media today.

Truth is subjective to one's view. Truth will always have someone's personal biased weaved into it. Fact on the other hand is data that is collected empirically, tested, and challenged. Media organizations and politicians should tell us the facts. Let the individual citizen conjure up their form of the truth.

Example.

Fact: The USA unemployment is 10% or higher because it depends on how that number was calculated.

Truth according to opposition: The unemployment rate is so high Obama has done a terrible job of bringing in more jobs.

Truth according to supporters: The unemployment rate is high but Obama is doing his best to correct it and should be given time.

Media and politicians always weave their opinion into their form of the truth. Give Americans the cold hard facts that have not been manipulated to make one look good or bad. Stop with all the crap sensationalism.

That was the intent of the Fairness Doctrine - despite the right-wing claims that it involved a challenge to free speech. It just required that any person or entity that had an attack type news article be permitted to prepare and present a rebuttal on the air.

We need it back. We will probably never get it back, let alone have it expanded to all News media.

Perhaps more troubling is the reluctance of the News media to report and investigate, or to challenge elected officials. That, and the increasing number of fluff celebrity stories.

journalists should choose to be truthful

commentators are expressing opinions, which are neither true nor false in and of themselves.

Please do not confuse the two.

Why do you think that the top 3 national syndicated radioprograms are, in order of ratings:

1)The rush limbaugh show

2) The sean hannity show

3) The glenn beck show

All of these are commentators, not journalists.

Dan Rather got in trouble for mixing commentary and journalism. ( ' even though the document is false, the story is still true ' )

Politicians should be required to tell the truth.

You said "news" organizations, not opinions or editorials, so absolutely yes, without slant or bias. The news should be factual and truthful.

Freedom of the Press, otherwise, CBS would be shut down, remember the Dan Rather scandal. Knew it was untrue, manufactured evidence and put it out there anyway.

Newspapers should keep their opinions on the editorial pages. Unfortunately, many of them do not, these days. TV commentaries should be labeled as such, not stated as general fact.

No, that's not enforceable. They don't always know the truth. They merely present information.

i'd prefer if our elected officials told the truth for a change.

i can easily change the channel...not so much with career politicians.