Wall Street Journal: Fair & Balanced?

The Nedster — Ohio's Native Son and Electrical Wizard — sent along a tip about the Wall Street Journal's defense of Al Franken (?)! The Nedster reported a 4-hour loss of power. It sounds as if the local electric utility was managed by the Cleveland Browns management. (The guys who defended the fans near-riot with beer bottle throwing over a controversial refereeing call against the Browns.) It has not been a good month for Ohio: blackout source, Ohio State football hijinks, and Dennis Kucinich's Blog. The only thing worse would be if Dave Bliss was an Ohio native. Perhaps Dave Bliss can get a job in Bush administration? Homeland Security? Well, I'm back from a Colorado sojourn and I am more fair & balanced than ever. If this be treason, make the most of it.

[x Wall Street Journal/OpinionJournal]

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Out Foxed

A lawsuit against Al Franken isn't very fair and balanced.

It's not easy siding with Al Franken. After all, the "Saturday Night Live" comic turned political commentator has always accorded this newspaper a prominent spot in his pantheon of villains, and we fully expect that honor to continue in his soon-to-be-released book. So it will likely come as a surprise to Mr. Franken that we think Fox is doing itself no favors by suing him for trademark infringement and unfair competition.
That's right. In papers filed with the State Supreme Court in Manhattan, Fox News alleges that Mr. Franken's book--"Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right"--unlawfully appropriates the words "fair and balanced" (which Fox trademarked in 1997) as well as a photograph of "The O'Reilly Factor's" Bill O'Reilly on the cover, in a format similar to Mr. O'Reilly's own books. The stated worry behind Fox v. Franken is that the combination of the network's "signature slogan" plus Mr. O'Reilly's picture will confuse readers into believing that Fox has somehow associated itself with or endorsed the work.

It gets even better. The suit devotes considerable space to calling Mr. Franken names ("shrill," "unstable," "deranged") and making the case that his reputation as a political commentator "is not of the same caliber as the stellar reputations of FNC's on-air talent." Mr. Franken's efforts to bamboozle the unsuspecting apparently extend to appearing on the cover of his own book in a "conservative business suit" and a "patriotic red and blue striped tie."

Goodness knows that U.S. courts are capable of almost any mischief these days. Yet we have a hard time believing that this court is going to buy the argument that Mr. Franken's parody really will have people so confused they can't tell it from the Real McCoy. To the contrary, as countless blogs are now gleefully reporting, the Fox suit has given Mr. Franken the kind of publicity boost writers dream of, propelling his book to Amazon.com's No. 1 spot.

Now, it's true that Mr. Franken does seem to have a thing for Fox. He had a heated (and televised) confrontation with Mr. O'Reilly at a recent book fair in Los Angeles and before that an encounter with Alan Colmes of Fox News' "Hannity & Colmes" at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner in April. Sean Hannity once had to call security after Mr. Franken continued to pester him after a show. And if his books are any clue, the "vast right wing conspiracy" appears to have provided Mr. Franken with a lucrative new line of work.

Still, the First Amendment does not distinguish between the boorish and the brilliant, and even if Mr. Franken is all the things that the Fox suit accuses him of being, he remains as entitled as any other American to its protections. Fox may well insist on its day in court. But in so doing it risks leaving the public with a caricature of itself far more ridiculous than anything Mr. Franken ever could have come up with on his own.


Copyright © 2003 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

.