Was the NPR video "journalism?"

[TheBigA]

There's a pretty fair discussion of the ethics behind James O'Keefe's NPR video in today's New York Times.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/masters-of-deception/?hp

As the article points out, what's the difference between this video and WikiLeaks?  Is there anything wrong with WikiLeaks?  Is there anything left to private conversation any more, or is everything on the record and for public use?  All good questions to ask.  There are no absolutes or answers here either.  In the world of free press, there are no real rules except for libel and slander, stealing and copyright.  Michael Moore has made a career doing similar things to GM, George Bush and other conservatives.  But he doesn't really see himself as a journalist.  I'm sure Moore is thinking right now about making a film about O'Keefe or the Tea Party.  The sad part to me is all this does is harden opinions on both sides, and furthers the devide between the reds and the blues.  No minds are really changed here.  Just a few people lose their jobs, and the flames of one side are fanned a little more.

[w00t]

If all the undercover/hidden camera investigations that Dateline has done over the years is journalism, this certainly is as well...

[TheBigA]

In the case of MSNBC, they were investigating crimes.  Nothing in this video was criminal.   Embarrassing yes, but not criminal.

[The Voice of Reason]

There's a pretty fair discussion of the ethics behind James O'Keefe's NPR video in today's New York Times.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/masters-of-deception/?hp

As the article points out, what's the difference between this video and WikiLeaks?  Is there anything wrong with WikiLeaks?  Is there anything left to private conversation any more, or is everything on the record and for public use?  All good questions to ask.  There are no absolutes or answers here either.  In the world of free press, there are no real rules except for libel and slander, stealing and copyright.  Michael Moore has made a career doing similar things to GM, George Bush and other conservatives.  But he doesn't really see himself as a journalist.  I'm sure Moore is thinking right now about making a film about O'Keefe or the Tea Party.  The sad part to me is all this does is harden opinions on both sides, and furthers the devide between the reds and the blues.  No minds are really changed here.  Just a few people lose their jobs, and the flames of one side are fanned a little more.

First off the New York Times and Public Broadcasting are like kissing cousins. So any editorial they post supporting PBS comes as no surprise.

Shiller (not Vivian) was caught on tape expressing his views on numerous subjects. We learned directly from the 'horses mouth' that NPR shouldn't rely on government funding; that Republicans are redneck shotgun-toting illiterates; anyone belong to the Tea Party is a bigot. Shall I go on?

In my line of work I've come across a number of public broadcasting executives and supporters who share Mr. Shiller's opinions. On the other hand I've also come in contact with many commercial broadcasters who feel that pub-broadcasters are snobs draining taxpayer dollars from the public till while having the finest state-of-the-art equipment possible and paying exorbitant salaries to top management.

There is no straddling the fence when it comes to this topic.

  

[TheBigA]

First off the New York Times and Public Broadcasting are like kissing cousins. So any editorial they post supporting PBS comes as no surprise.

You obviously didn't read the article.  First of all, it's not an editorial, second of all, it doesn't support PBS.

[TheBigA]

Glenn Beck's site The Blaze apparently questions the editing of the video, and discovers the comments were taken out of context.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/does-raw-video-of-npr-expose-reveal-questionable-editing-tactics/


In it we learn that Ron Schiller is a Republican, and his quote about the Tea Party is actually quoting other Republicans.

Are we surprised that the video was edited in such a way to make the NPR folks look bad?  No. Are we surprised it took a blog run by conservative Glenn Beck to actually do the investigative work uncovering it?  Yes.  Where are the real journalists and why did no one from the Washington Post or any other reputable place even question the editing of the video?  Why was everyone so quick to assume the quotes in the video were as they appeared to be, and then extrapolated that they in fact represented the opinions of NPR News?  Who is the joke really on here?

[radiorob2.0]

Glenn Beck's site The Blaze apparently questions the editing of the video, and discovers the comments were taken out of context.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/does-raw-video-of-npr-expose-reveal-questionable-editing-tactics/


In it we learn that Ron Schiller is a Republican, and his quote about the Tea Party is actually quoting other Republicans.

Are we surprised that the video was edited in such a way to make the NPR folks look bad?  No. Are we surprised it took a blog run by conservative Glenn Beck to actually do the investigative work uncovering it?  Yes.  Where are the real journalists and why did no one from the Washington Post or any other reputable place even question the editing of the video?  Why was everyone so quick to assume the quotes in the video were as they appeared to be, and then extrapolated that they in fact represented the opinions of NPR News?  Who is the joke really on here?

I'd like to think of it as Lucy once again pulling away the football Charlie Brown.  James O'Keef is Lucy and these idiots keep falling for his heavily edited videos.  Before it was broadcast, printed or posted on line someone should have demanded to see the unedited video.

Then there are those who repeatedly played the edited presentation claiming its evidence on why (NPR, ACORN or whatever O'Keef decided to target next) should no longer receive government funding.  "Do you want your tax dollars paying for that?  For shame!"  Their goal doesn't require the unedited video. 

It makes you wonder who will be next at the hands of James O'Keef and Windows Movie Maker? 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

There is no straddling the fence when it comes to this topic.
  

Why not?  Is that stated in the Bible or something?

If I want to straddle the fence when it comes to understanding this "Animal House" style childish prank, who is going to stop me?

I DO straddle the fence on the funding issue.  I am all for reviewing the amount of money that goes into CPB and if appropriate,  reducing the funding to a reasonable level.  But I have what to me is a compelling justification for at least some Federal money flowing into NPR, PBS and the other stations and program producers.  As long as there is ANY Federal money going in there,  the private small donors along with the big, big, BIG corporations and foundations know that the Feds are to public broadcasting what the Health Department inspectors are to the restaurant business.  When I walk in to buy food and I see that certificate on the wall with the score for their last inspection,  I can eat with confidence.

When I know the Congress is looking over the shoulders of public broadcasting and asking what they are doing with the public money,  I can give my meager contribution with confidence that I am not giving to the mafia.

[musichead1029]

When I know the Congress is looking over the shoulders of public broadcasting and asking what they are doing with the public money,  I can give my meager contribution with confidence that I am not giving to the mafia.

I've always believed that one of the primary prerequisites to requiring taxpayers to fund non-essential services like public media, is trust in the appropriators. I'd also heard stubborn rumors that in the face of all evidence, there are still those who actually trust the appropriators.

I feel like I've seen a leprechaun, and two days early yet!

[TheBigA]

I'd also heard stubborn rumors that in the face of all evidence, there are still those who actually trust the appropriators.

My point in this discussion has been that the appropriations process is pretty complete.  They look carefully at the nuts & bolts of where the peoples' money is spent.  Which is a big difference from what was done during the budget chopping process last month.  That's why I say if the goal is to defund public broadcasting, there should be hearings on the subject, so the Congress knows what it's cutting.