User:Audience awareness/This Morning

__NOINDEX__ '''MSM out of control. ITV Cover Up "This Morning" controversy!!!'''

On the 9th of November 2010, British Television company ITV caused up roar when UK breakfast programme "This Morning" recorded an episode with guests, Kelvin Mackenzie, former editor of The Sun and Lesley Joseph, actress in which they discussed a clip with hosts Phillip Schofield and Holly Willoughby from the Oprah Winfrey show, interviewing Michael Jackson's children.

In this segment of the show, Kelvin Mackenzie said the following.

"I have a substantial question as to how and why some of [Jackson's] children were born" and added, "the death of Michael Jackson may well have saved some children… from a lifetime of being mentally corrupted."

He further commented,

"He's faced a number of charges, a number of allegations, and I in some ways feel that the children will have a better life for their father not being around".

http://www.sawfnews.com/Gossip/65728.aspx</ www.sawfnews.com/Gossip/65728.aspx</

MacKenzie's comments were morally and ethically reprehensible. He demonstrated a complete lack of respect for the American justice system and also for the ethics of his profession. Jackson was acquitted of any wrongdoing and nobody has any right to insinuate that he was anything other than innocent or else we can all go around claiming what we like about anyone. To verbally attack 3 innocent MINOR CHILDREN on national television questioning their right to live is unacceptable to say the least by any persons standards.

ITV was bombarded with emails and phone calls from angry viewers finding the comments extremely offensive. US Ambassador Paul Jones and wife Catherine, friends of Jackson said that they were 'disgusted' and 'angry' over MacKenzie's 'sickening' comments and that an on-air apology is 'the very least [ITV] can do'.

Michael Jackson's nephew Taj Jackson said after urging his 20,000 followers to complain to ITV he issued the television station with an ultimatum.

"If we don't get an on air apology from ITV soon, my next step is legal. The time for bad mouthing & spreading lies about my uncle are OVER." www.sawfnews.com/Gossip/65728.aspx</

Ofcom, the UK's regulatory body for television and radio programming were also contacted by 115 angry viewers. ITV had broken 5 Ofcom codes: Section 2.2 Section 2.3 Section 7.1 Section 7.9 Section 7.11 http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/

With the above codes broken, an on-air apology from ITV would seem almost guaranteed. However, Ofcom sent an email back to viewers stating "Whilst we understand that some viewers may have been offended; it does not break any of our rules. The complaints have not been upheld."

Section 7.11 clearly states "If a programme alleges wrongdoing or incompetence or makes other significant allegations, those concerned should normally be given an appropriate and timely opportunity to respond". http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/

Kelvin MacKenzie undeniably used 'This Morning' as an outlet to accuse Jackson of significant wrongdoing, raising the singer's 2005 trial and saying that his death could have 'saved some children from a lifetime of mental corruption'. http://www.sawfnews.com/Gossip/65728.aspx It's also undeniable that 'This Morning' did not give the star's family or estate an appropriate and timely opportunity to respond.

Despite over a hundred of angry viewers Ofcom did not see any reason to start an investigation confirmed by their own audience complaints data release, November 16th. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/enforcement/audience-complaints/

On the very same day, Ofcom said they would take no action against ITV's "This Morning"; ITV removed the clip from their Iplayer series catch up on their official website. If there was nothing wrong with it why was it removed?

At the same time Ofcom said ITV did nothing wrong; ITV were destroying the evidence! (ITV have now completely removed the programme from their Iplayer series to suggest it never even took place, in order to stop more viewers complaining about the outrageous statements.)

The episode date was the 9th of November and is nowhere to be seen. Which unless Wikipedia allows me to use an unverified transcript (which I know is 100% true) I cannot report on what the other hosts and guest said. Which is exactly why ITV did it!. http://www.itv.com/itvplayer/video/?Filter=190987

A general email from both Mark Sunderland, Head of Legal Compliance at ITV, and Viewer Services regarding ITV's 'This Morning' programme sent an email to all viewer complaints on the 16th of November saying "they understood that some people may be offended, but ITV had nothing to apologise for as the host immediately "challenged and contextualised" the comments. Yes, as I said I cannot comment due to the Wiki rules and I'm in handcuffs. Although, I can encourage you to find out for yourself about what was or wasn't said.

Then to further insult viewers, Kelvin Mackenzie was BACK ON THE SHOW hours after sending the "respectful" email to viewers. http://www.itv.com/itvplayer/video/?Filter=190317 Why would ITV do that to THEIR audience?

In 1999, Kelvin Mackenzie did an interview for the Independent broadsheet newspaper called "The Hilary Clarke interview: Kelvin MacKenzie - Kelvin's steaming mad". This is a exert from the article the day after the interview.

“Postscript - MacKenzie calls me at the office the next day. He fears I might misinterpret his anger with the BBC. He also wanted to make sure he had been positive about Campbell and Blair. He asks me write a nice article and says he might be able to return the favour one day. When I try to point out that as a journalist I will try to be objective he lets rip.”

'''"A f***ing journalist. You do me a favour and I'll do you one. That's the way it works." He pauses for breath, and then: "I already did you a favour I gave you an f***ing interview. Look after yerself petal." And he hangs up.''' http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/the-hilary-clarke-interview-kelvin-mackenzie--kelvins-steaming-mad-1069413.html

Is this the way journalism is supposed to be? Has medialoid (tabloid yellow journalism infected main stream media) taken over? We'll ignore the truth and we will return the favour? It may explain ITV's decision to bring him back onto "This Morning".

Complaints continue to be made, however, ITV are in a position where they don't have to apologise due to Ofcom's incredible ruling and will not unless they must. They could do it because it is the right thing to do, morally and ethically, but choose not to, which again shows us some insight as to how "Big Media" is run.

How Kelvin Mackenzie is a loud back I don't know. This isn't the first time he has offended people, in fact it seems to be his trademark. Telling outright lies while head of "The Sun" newspaper about "The Hillsborough Disaster" where 96 fans died due to a gate left open that allowed 1000's of fans in where they shouldn't have been and ended up crushing the 96 to death. Kelvin Mackenzie's put the following on his paper. "The Sun, alleged under the front-page headline "The Truth", that other Liverpool fans had urinated on police and robbed victims. It lost 200,000 sales in a week, and its reputation on Merseyside." http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2006/dec/01/sun.pressandpublishing

This is just one example of this vile mans unproven opinion's and nasty remarks Elton John, the BBC and Scottish people have all been on the end of this man’s rants and ravings, so why has nothing been done?

Conclusion

According to CCJ in 1997, which at the time was administered by the Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ), released a Statement of Shared Purpose identifying nine core journalism principles.13 The Statement of Shared Purpose defines the central purpose of journalism as providing citizens with accurate and reliable information they need to function in a free society.14 It identifies nine “Core Principles”: Here are the 2 at the top of the list. (1) Journalism’s first obligation is to the truth; (2) Its first loyalty is to citizens; http://www.luc.edu/law/activities/publications/lljdocs/vol40_no4/vol40_issue4/Karcher.pdf

ITV have broken the two most fundamental principles and ignored Ofcom codes (which blame must be shared by Ofcom). "This Morning" is considered as a factual programme to inform its audience of national and international news stories. "This Morning" however, showed no proof to back up Mr Mackenzie's statements. In fact, if research had been done on the subject ITV would realise that Michael Jackson was innocent in 93 and 05 and unsurprisingly everything that Kelvin Mackenzie said was completely wrong.

These articles provide full in depth analysis of both allegations. British Writer, Deborah Ffrench's Michael Jackson: Making of the Myth Part 1 http://www.stereoboard.com/pdfs/Michael-Jackson-The-Making-Of-A-Myth-Part-I

British Journalist, Charles Thomson's Huffington post article. One of the Most Shameful Episodes in Journalistic History http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charles-thomson/one-of-the-most-shameful_b_610258.html

We, the viewing audience must ask ourselves questions. Are we happy that not only ITV, but MSM (Main Stream Media) are telling us stories that are biased and untrue? Are we happy that our feelings and complaints get ignored and covered up by the very organisations that are supposed to upheld society's morals and ethics? Is it time for us the viewers whose ratings/money they seek so much to say "NO MORE LIES AND HALF TRUTHS? If someone said to you "how and why some of your children were born" would you tolerate it? Would it be acceptable to you? If you were falsely accused of something you didn't do and harassed and mocked for the rest of your life because of a lie and then continued after your death; how would that make you feel? Are we wrong to demand an apology from ITV and never have Kelvin Mackenzie on their show again?

My opinion is that it is time to demand honest, well researched and factual journalism from the MSM and none of this 24 hour, get the news and put it out before it's even been confirmed as true or false.

Whether you are a fan of Michael Jackson or not society doesn't seem to acknowledge the impact his destruction could have on all of us and what WE can learn from it. If Michael Jackson can have his human rights ripped away from him and his children, what hope is there for the rest of us? http://education.ezinemark.com/does-american-dream-have-to-die-with-michael-jackson-16b169402f1.html

We tried to stand up for ourselves, against ITV we said "no more" and they said "you have no choice". Apparently our voices are meaningless. Media was put in place to inform us of the events of the world and it was their responsibility to tell the truth. When in human history did responsibilities turn into privileges? "Whatever happened to the truth? Did it go out of style?" - Michael Jackson.

Signed Audience awareness.

Reference list 1)http://www.sawfnews.com/Gossip/65728.aspx</ www.sawfnews.com/Gossip/65728.aspx</

2)www.sawfnews.com/Gossip/65728.aspx</

3)http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/

4)http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/

5)http://www.sawfnews.com/Gossip/65728.aspx

6)http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/enforcement/audience-complaints/

7)http://www.itv.com/itvplayer/video/?Filter=190987

8)http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/the-hilary-clarke-interview-kelvin-mackenzie--kelvins-steaming-mad-1069413.html

9)http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2006/dec/01/sun.pressandpublishing

10)http://www.luc.edu/law/activities/publications/lljdocs/vol40_no4/vol40_issue4/Karcher.pdf

11)http://www.stereoboard.com/pdfs/Michael-Jackson-The-Making-Of-A-Myth-Part-I

12)http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charles-thomson/one-of-the-most-shameful_b_610258.html

13)http://education.ezinemark.com/does-american-dream-have-to-die-with-michael-jackson-16b169402f1.html