Journalism Series: The Fact Checking Politics on Late-Night TV

Around this time last year, many lamented the pending exit of Jon Stewart from the late-night TV, but NPR’s Dave Davies may have said it best on Fresh Air when he noted, “Tomorrow morning, a generation of 30-somethings will wake up and realize they’re going to have to vote in their first presidential election without the wit and insight of Jon Stewart.” During his tenure, The Daily Show consistently earned accolades—from fans and industry groups alike—for politically-inclined comedy that was backed by actual news research. Fortunately, it appears that the astonishing (for lack of a better word) primary season that brought us to the Republican National Convention taking place in Cleveland this week—as well as the upcoming Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia—has enticed Mr. Stewart out of retirement.  And his reappearance on the late-night roster reminded us of an interview that took place between Stewart and regular Fresh Air host Terry Gross.

 

Creative Team Relied on News Research to Make Political Points

 Gross spoke with Stewart about a wide range of topics. When we looked up the radio show transcript in Nexis®, we were especially interested in a segment of the show about fact checking. It begins when Gross references a staple on The Daily Show—the hypocrisy videos. Here’s a quick section of the transcript:
 

TERRY GROSS: Now, one of the things that "The Daily Show" is incredible for is what I've come to think of as the hypocrisy videos. Most recently, like, the Boehner versus Boehner one, where you have John Boehner presenting the new ideas of the Republican Party, and you juxtaposed him saying exactly the same thing in, I think, it was 1993 to what he'd said just a few days ago.

JON STEWART: That’s right.

TERRY GROSS: And you did that, like, with Glenn Beck, for example. You had him saying, you know, the government should never tell us what to do and then had videos of Glenn Beck telling us what to do. And you do that all the time with politicians.

JON STEWART: Right.

TERRY GROSS: And the videos go back a long way. How do the people on your staff find those old videos?

JON STEWART: Well, you can search on LexisNexis if you have an idea of what you want. And, you know, if the ideas— when you see the pledge, so you're obvious first thought is OK, the pledge is the same as the Contract for America. So let's go back and look at the Contract for America. It's all about just making connections and then looking into it and using search words. It's learning...

TERRY GROSS: It's journalism. It's called journalism.
 

Of course, Jon Stewart and his writing team aren’t the only ones that rely on monitoring the media and fact checking to inspire and support the stories they write. In fact, LexisNexis is on site at the RNC this week—right between Facebook® and Twitter® on media row—to lend research support to the host of TV, print and online journalists reporting on the event.  We’re also looking forward to providing similar news research support at the DNC next week.

 

But in the meantime, we’re looking forward to seeing Election 2016 from a new point of view as Stewart teams up with the host of The Late Show with Stephen Colbert to cover the conventions.  It will definitely be entertaining!

 

3 Ways to Apply This Information Now

1. Check out other BizBlog posts on news research and fact checking. 
2. See for yourself why Jon Stewart and his research team relied on Nexis® to uncover relevant videos and news archives.
3. Share this blog with colleagues to keep the conversation going.

Does Your Due Diligence Process Need a Check-Up?

Earlier this year, Teva, a drug-maker in Israel, disclosed to both the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice that an on-going internal probe has revealed possible violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and/or local laws. It’s not an admission that investors like to hear; yet in recent years, according to FiercePharma, “That’s something some of Teva’s pharma peers know all too well.”  More worrying, a spokesperson for Teva said, “There can be no assurance that the remedial measures we have taken and will take in the future will be effective.” A robust due-diligence process can, however, help mitigate the risk.

 Why is the Pharma Industry Vulnerable to Compliance Risk?

If you look back at other recent enforcement actions—probes that cost pharma and bio-tech companies more than
$140 million in settlements—the growth of business into emerging markets like China, Russia and South America has increased risk.  The SEC’s director of enforcement, Andrew Ceresney, indicated that pharmaceutical companies will continue to be susceptible because their operations are considered high risk. For example, in countries with state-owned healthcare facilities, administrators or physicians fall into the realm of government officials—and incentives to move new drugs onto approved programs may be considered bribes, even if the ‘incentives’ are the work of third-party agents. If someone is acting on your behalf, you’re vulnerable.

In his remarks at a pharmaceuticals industry event, Ceresney suggested eight necessities for an effective FCPA compliance program:

1. Hire enough compliance personnel
2. Put policies and procedures in place and test them periodically
3. Train employees to understand compliance risks
4. Conduct thorough vendor reviews
5. Establish a robust third-party due-diligence process
6. Put accounting and expense controls in place
7. Devise a procedure for identifying and escalating red flags
8. Perform regular internal audits 

 The prospect of criminal or civil penalties is not the only concern; pharma companies that violate compliance laws—on their own or through third parties—risk having limitations placed on future business ventures in those countries, along with the reputational damage that arises from the negative publicity. Now, more than ever, pharma companies need to establish comprehensive due diligence and monitoring as a preventative measure in these volatile—but potentially lucrative—emerging markets. Do you have confidence in your current due-diligence program?

 3 Ways to Apply This Information Now

1. Download How Due Diligence and On-Going Monitoring Alleviates Healthcare Supply Chain Risk to understand the pains in the Pharma supply chain and what you can do to mitigate risk.
2. Explore LexisNexis® solutions that support due diligence and on-going monitoring to reduce risk.
3. Share this blog on LinkedIn to keep the dialogue going with your colleagues and contacts. 

Three Steps to Ensure Your Competitive Intelligence Works for You

Fictional detective Sherlock Holmes is frequently quoted in forums and blogs related to competitive intelligence (CI). After all, he was obsessed with data. In The Boscombe Valley Mystery, for example, Holmes says, “You know my method. It is founded upon the observation of trifles.” He isn’t demeaning the value of these bits of information; he is, in fact, emphasizing that the accumulation of meaningful data—which on its own might appear innocuous—is what enables him to make his brilliant deductions and solve ‘unsolvable’ mysteries. No wonder CI professionals find inspiration in his words. Yet, as valuable as competitive intelligence is, a recent article in the Harvard Business Review cites a study of CI managers and analysts that found that rather than fueling better decisions, competitive intelligence is often used to “ratify” pre-determined courses of action for nearly 33 percent of those surveyed. That’s the equivalent of Holmes deciding who is guilty and then only paying attention to clues that support this foregone conclusion. So, what can you do to ensure the competitive intelligence you compile doesn’t fall on deaf ears or get applied selectively to simply greenlight plans that executives already want to implement?

Leaders Use CI to Fuel Decisions, not Justify Them

According to the Harvard Business Review article, three factors significantly influence—by 40 percent—whether competitive intelligence is used as justification for pre-made decision or positively influences decision making. And the best news—these are not expensive fixes.

1. Analyst engagement for major decisions—CI professionals who participate in the decision making process, rather than simply presenting findings, help to ensure that the intelligence is being used. They become part of the discussion, providing deeper insights into their findings and reducing the likelihood that the data can be misinterpreted or ignored. Active participation in decision making is the “one area where ‘intelligent organizations’ differ most from others,” says the article.
2. Management needs to keep an open mind—The study also found that when “management was open to perspectives that were different from the internal consensus,” companies were more likely to pursue a more holistic view of issues and make more informed decisions. You might be wondering how you can influence the decision-makers to be more open-minded. Be consistent and start small. By repeatedly proving how your CI insights can fuel smarter, faster decisions—even small ones—you can earn the trust and respect of executives.
3. Create reports with clear calls to action. If you identify an emerging trend or a competitive risk, explain the proactive steps that can be taken to leverage this intelligence. Too often, companies get into a rut of reacting to CI. But companies don’t get ahead by following.  By highlighting the proactive steps indicated by CI, you empower the decision makers to get out in front rather than chase the competition.

Sherlock Holmes frequently expresses frustration when ‘officials’ make suppositions and then only pay attention to the clues that fit their preconceived notions. But if you approach CI much like Holmes, you can not only uncover valuable insights, but ensure that the information is put to good use.

 3 Ways to Apply This Information Now

1. Check out other posts about competitive intelligence on our blog.
2. See how CI pros use Nexis to uncover market insights, relevant news and more.
3. Share this blog on LinkedIn to keep the dialogue going with your colleagues and contacts.

PR Pros vs The Spread of Disinformation

"Fake news" - those are the words on the lips of everyone from the president of the United States to other global leaders and citizens around the world. There is confusion about what exactly people mean when they talk about fake news, but it's indisputable that incorrect information is becoming common online.

Transparency International’s 2016 Corruption Perceptions Index released

Transparency International has released its 2016 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). The CPI ranks 176 countries and territories on how corrupt their public sector is perceived to be. The index aggregates a number of different sources, including the views of business people and country experts.

 Global corruption increasing

 Transparency International says the results show “the urgent need for committed action to thwart corruption." The scoring system ranges from 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean) and, in the index, over two thirds of countries and territories scored below 50 with a global average of 43. More countries received worse scores than better scores compared to their performance in the previous CPI.

 The United States came 18^th with a score of 74, which is a fall from 76 last year. The top performing countries were Denmark (90), New Zealand (90), Finland (89), Sweden (88) and Switzerland (86). Somalia (10), South Sudan (11), North Korea (12), Syria (13), Libya (14), Sudan (14) and Yemen (14) came bottom of the table.

 Corruption affects a country’s economy

 In analysis accompanying the 2016 results, Transparency International warns of the link between corruption and inequality. José Ugaz, Chair of Transparency International, says: "In too many countries, people are deprived of their most basic needs and go to bed hungry every night because of corruption, while the powerful and corrupt enjoy lavish lifestyles with impunity." This echoes the UN’s comments, on Anti-Corruption Day in December 2016, that corruption “can undermine social and economic development in all societies."

The 2016 CPI is further evidence that there are economic benefits for a country if they make serious efforts to tackle bribery and corruption. The countries which perform best on the ranking tend to have the world’s strongest economies. Singapore is a good example of this. It is the only country or territory in Asia to make the top ten of this year’s CPI, coming seventh with a score of 84. A report last year by ethiXbase found that Singapore’s tough stance on corruption in the private and public sector has given the country “a significant competitive advantage over its neighbors."

 Index warns of corruption at all levels

Transparency International says the lower-ranked countries in their index tend to have “untrustworthy and badly functioning public institutions like the police and judiciary” and that even where anti-corruption laws are in place, they are often ignored. By contrast, higher-ranked countries tend to have stronger press freedom, access to information about public expenditure, stronger standards of integrity for public officials, and independent judicial systems. But the report notes that “the higher-ranked countries are not immune to closed-door deals, conflicts of interest, illicit finance, and patchy law enforcement that can distort public policy and exacerbate corruption at home and abroad." Their message is clear: even in countries with the strongest records on corruption, there is no room for complacency in the fight against bribery and corruption.

 A recognized tool for measuring corruption

The CPI is globally recognized as a useful tool for measuring corruption. It is used by many companies to understand the strategic risks of entering into a given market. When a firm is considering doing business in a country which scored poorly on the CPI, it should carry out a higher level of scrutiny as part of a risk-based due diligence approach. 

 3 Ways to Apply This Information Now

1. Get a copy of our 9 step guide to effective  third-party due diligence to help you identify gaps in your due diligence process. 
2. See how LexisNexis solutions complement your  risk-based due diligence approach.
3.  Share this blog on LinkedIn to keep the dialogue going with your colleagues and contacts.