Tuesday, June 19, 2012

MSNBC BeClowns 
Itself Again:
Still Living In The Past

It wasn't THAT long ago MSNBC & NBC News got caught red-handed editing the audio of the Zimmerman 911 call.  You may remember several people getting fired from their jobs over that one - 3 publicly.  

Think MSNBC & NBC News learned their lesson from that debacle? 


Here's what aired yesterday on MSNBC, with Andrea Mitchell reporting: 

Heh. Yeah. That super-rich out of touch guy, Mitt Romney, what did you expect?  What an IDIOT this guy is, eh?  Why, as Andrea helpfully points out, this helps show that Mitt is as out of touch as George H.W. Bush was when he was 'amazed' by a simple grocery store scanner!  

Except of course, as anybody who's looked into that knows, the 'totally AMAZED!!!! by a simple grocery store scanner' story itself was totally bogus:  


Guess what happened? Somebody had actually watched Mitt's entire speech that day. AND IMMEDIATELY KNEW WHAT MSNBC had done.  So they put the raw video up on YouTube.  

Where.............SURPRISE!!!!.............a Conservative blogger saw it and compared it to the video MSNBC ran.  


Here's what Mitt actually said.  Compare the video below to how MSNBC presented it in the highly edited clip above: 

Within just several HOURS MSNBC's attempt at a 'Romney is way out of touch' narrative based on their deceptively edited video had been blown up all over the internet. 

Except at the Huffington Post, for some reason:


Now, caught redhanded doing this, what was MSNBC's response when even Politico and others had to admit they'd gotten caught? 





Here's what Andrea Mitchell & MSNBC had to say today about this: 


Hey, Obama's Palace Guards in the Media, little NEWSFLASH for you here: YOU ARE LIVING IN THE PAST.  You really really need to stop doing that. 

You've had it proven to you time and again you CAN'T get away with this BS any longer.  I realize since you're not very intelligent coming up with new tricks to deceive the public might be a real stretch for you, but you're simply going to have to apply yourself & come up with something.  

The internet is too vast, the information that can be obtained almost instantly now is too broad to continue trying this stupid "We'll just deceptively edit this video & spin it & our stupid viewers will never catch on" schtick.  

You'd think they'd have learned this lesson after they deceptively edited a Tea Party rally video to hide the race of the black guy that brought a legally carried rifle to the rally so they could talk about...................WHITE RACISTS.  

That particular attempt at deception didn't even last 1 full day thanks to Newsbusters & Noel Sheppard.  

The New Media is up and running now. It's found it footing, and it's figured out many of the Old Media's clever tricks.  It can now blow up the Old Media's narratives often on the SAME DAY they try to roll them out.  

This IS progress, but more remains to be done.  The next step is, instead of reacting to the Old Media and spending much of our time just exposing their latest lies, is to leave them behind in the dustbin of history.  

We're working on it.  

UPDATE:  Hat tip to Elizabeth Scalia, who blogs as The Anchoress [@TheAnchoress] for tweeting this epic rant by a long-time defender of the Mainstream Media who, as she puts it,  just had his last nerve fried by this latest duplicity.  



First, there was the Trayvon Martin boondoggle a few months ago.
Then yesterday, evidence of some creative editing regarding Mitt Romney’s visit to a Wawain Pennsylvania.
Today, we have Andrea Mitchell’s spectacularly lame followup to “criticism of the Romney clip edit” — which amounted to Ms. Mitchell saying, with a sigh and a frown, “Oh, bother.  Fine.  Here’s what we left out.”   She failed to acknowledge what the “criticism” entailed; she neglected to point out how the editing misrepresented the event being covered; and she offered nothing resembling an apology or an admission of responsibility for something that was, as a matter of fact, irresponsible.
I’m tired.  Truly.  I’ve grown weary of trying to defend the indefensible and explain the inexplicable.  For years, people have stomped their feet and pounded their fists and snorted “Liberal media bias!” and I’ve always tut-tutted and shooshed them and said, “No, no.  Calm down.  They meant well.  It was just a misunderstanding.  A mistake.  These things happen.”  I spent over 25 years working in the oft-reviled Mainstream Media and I saw up close and personal how the sausage was made.   I knew the people who wielded the knives and wore the aprons, and could vouch (most of the time, anyway) for their good intentions.
But now?
Forget it. I’m done.  You deserve what they’re saying about you.  It’s earned.  You have worked long and hard to merit the suspicion, acrimony, mistrust and revulsion that the media-buying public increasingly heaps upon you.   You have successfully eroded any confidence, dispelled any trust, and driven your audience into the arms of the Internet and the blogosphere, where biases are affirmed and like-minded people can tell each other what they hold to be true, since nobody believes in objective reality any more.  You have done a superlative job of diminishing what was once a great profession and undermining one of the vital underpinnings of democracy, a free press.
Good job.
I just have one question:


  1. So I guess you'll have to eventually have to make a tough decision on whether or not Fox News is part of your new media considering they've been busted several times selectively editing stuff. Hannity just did it again with an Obama speech from 2011. He just did it. Why isn't this outraging you, I wonder ever so sincerely. They do it constantly. It's weird how it doesn't seem to bother the amazing new media.

    And I love the "we" - as if you are anything but a bandwidth burglar. Now answer the question - you're amusing me with your double standards and hypocrisy. -JF

    1. What I love is the way you confuse a political commentator with a straight news reporter.

      That's really cute.

    2. Oh, so Hannity's show can deceptively edit anything they like because they're not a straight news show? Same goes for Bill O'Reilly, Beck, etc. I guess it's okay as well for O'Keefe and Breitbart because...? Because, uh...

      Being a pretend journalist, surely you could have found this yourself:


      Using Google, I found at least five other examples.


  2. I posted video examples of the original then the editing. I have done this numerous times on this blog.

    If you have links of the original Obama speech, then Hannity's edited version of it, give me some links & I'll take a look.

    Let's see what you have.