AA: Analysis Of NPR Sting Video By Glenn Beck Website Raises Ethics Questions

[JMS]

Turns out that James O'keefe's NPR video was mostly fantasy. He heavily edited the video release to falsely protray what the NPR executive conversation was about. I don't know why people, including myself are supprised in retrospect. James O'keefe did the same thing to acorn video he shot.

Splicing together questions with different answers or substituting laughter from an introduction onto the answer to an answer all geared to create a false impression.

Even Glenn Beck is now being critical of Okeefe.

http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/archive/story/88573/analysis-of-npr-sting-video-by-glenn-beck-website-

Analysis Of NPR Sting Video By Glenn Beck Website Raises Ethics Questions

GLENN BECK's THE BLAZE website jumped into the NPR controversy last week, when it ran a story comparing Conservative video prankster JAMES O'KEEFE's edited version of the "sting" on former NPR fundraising executive RON SCHILLER with the unedited footage and called the editing "questionable."

The piece by SCOTT BAKER and video producer PAM KEY notes that the unedited video shows O'KEEFE's phony potential donors downplaying their connection to the Muslim brotherhood -- that SCHILLER's reaction in the edited version to the group's "acceptance of Sharia," was actually a reaction to something else -- made complimentary as well as uncomplimentary comments about Republicans (and his own Republican background), and that other points in the edited video are given different context by the unedited video.

"Anyone looking at the edited version of the PROJECT VERITAS video would be concerned about the conduct and views expressed by the NPR representatives," concluded BAKER. "But should we also be concerned about the deceptive nature of some of the video’s representations?.... Even if you are of the opinion, as I am, that undercover reporting is acceptable and ethical in very defined situations, it is another thing to approve of editing tactics that seem designed to intentionally lie or mislead about the material being presented."

Here is another article from News Max...

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/npr-the-blaze-videos/2011/03/11/id/389216

Beck's 'Blaze' Critiques NPR Sting Videos

Glenn Beck’s new website, The Blaze has analyzed the conservative sting video that led to the resignation of National Public Radio’s CEO this week and is raising questions about the editing of the tape that suggested an NPR fundraising executive said that tea party patriots were racists, among other comments.

“The clip in the edited video implies (NPR fundraising executive Ron) Schiller is giving simply his own analysis of the Tea Party,” The Blaze reports. “He does do that in part, but the raw video reveals that he is largely recounting the views expressed to him by two top Republicans, one a former ambassador, who admitted to him that they voted for Obama.

“At the end, he signals his agreement. The larger context does not excuse his comments, or his judgment in sharing the account, but would a full context edit have been more fair?”

While the analysis of the full-length, unedited recording doesn’t exonerate the NPR officials, it does raise questions about whether the conservative undercover journalists were offering a fully honest account of the conversation in the edited video.

Specifically, The Blaze’s review of the tape suggests that the NPR executives were not as harsh as it originally seemed in their critique of conservatives.

“The impression of the original video, that the execs were only hostile toward Republicans and conservatives, is incorrect,” The Blaze reports.

Moreover, at one point, executive Betsy Liley actually defends the intellect of Fox News viewers. Their analysis also suggests, while the two executives should have been more curious about the nature of the Islamic charity they were dealing with, they were more discerning on the positions regarding Sharia, or Islamic, law.

“The raw video shows a section where Schiller is hesitant to criticize the education of conservatives and the other executive, Betsy Liley, is outspoken in her defense of the intellects of Fox News viewers,” the Blaze concludes.

Read more on Newsmax.com: Beck's 'Blaze' Critiques NPR Sting Videos

Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

[AsburySkinsFan]

Surprise surprise. I am surprised that Beck is calling the video "questionable", I'm not surprised that he hasn't refuted it all together. I also will not be surprised when many on the Right never pay any attention to anything other than the edited version of the video and ignore what was really said.

American Exceptionalism my arse, we're just like everyone else in the world.

[Henry]

Turns out that James O'keefe's NPR video was mostly fantasy. He heavily edited the video release to falsely protray what the NPR executive conversation was about. I don't know why people, including myself are supprised in retrospect. James O'keefe did the same thing to acorn video he shot.

Splicing together questions with different answers or substituting laughter from an introduction onto the answer to an answer all geared to create a false impression.

Even Glenn Beck is now being critical of Okeefe.

http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/archive/story/88573/analysis-of-npr-sting-video-by-glenn-beck-website-

Here is another article from News Max...

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/npr-the-blaze-videos/2011/03/11/id/389216

Why anyone gives this O'Keefe clown the time of day at this point is beyond me.

[TimmySmith]

Last time I checked, NPR was an electronic news organization with the ability to verify the veracity of the tape, and defend their employee if they so chose. Beck is grandstanding. Again. It's what he does.

[DRSmith]

People who want to will believe any lie told to them if it reinforces what they want to believe

This guy Okeefe has lied so much I am beginning to believe he does not know how to tell the truth.

[jnhay]

What credibility can you have if you get outraged after watching a video from a proven fraud? Just last week I heard a radio personality cite the acorn video like it wasn't fake.

[HBnotBlades]

Is this grounds for Ron Schiller to sue James O'Keefe for slander of defamation? O'Keefe heavily edited a footage in order to give a false impression of Schiller's conduct and views, resulting Schiller losing his job.

[DRSmith]

Is this grounds for Ron Schiller to sue James O'Keefe for slander of defamation? O'Keefe heavily edited a footage in order to give a false impression of Schiller's conduct and views, resulting Schiller losing his job.

I think those who run his stuff as fact should also be subject to any suits also

[Burgold]

I wonder if they did reversals of that nature if that takes us into the world of slander.

[Bang]

How is this legal?

~Bang

[Burgold]

It's probably not, but as you know from a lot of recent gotchas these things are rarely pursued. The bigger problem is that in a few weeks or months people will still remember the scandal, but forget that it was manufactured.

[Destino]

When Glenn Beck (and his affiliates) think you're stretching the truth too far... you've really accomplished something.

[twa]

It's probably not, but as you know from a lot of recent gotchas these things are rarely pursued. The bigger problem is that in a few weeks or months people will still remember the scandal, but forget that it was manufactured.

You mean like the accusations against Palin?

[Burgold]

You mean like the accusations against Palin?

Examples of people manipulating the tape to make Palin say something she didn't and reordering the conversation?

[twa]

Remember the supposed support for violence at the rallies?

[JimboDaMan]

Last time I checked, NPR was an electronic news organization with the ability to verify the veracity of the tape, and defend their employee if they so chose. Beck is grandstanding. Again. It's what he does.

Oh, I suspect they were aware of the overall dishonest nature of the tape. Anyone who believes an O'Keefe production needs to seriously examine their gullibility factor.

But I see at least three reasons why resignations were necessary:

1) Even unedited, some of the things said were inappropriate. Nowhere near what the slanderers published, but still inappropriate for people in their position.

2) Arguing about what was and was not misleading is a lost cause for the accused.

3) At this sensitive point in time any protracted debate involving potential inappropriate conduct could be devestating to NPR.

So dishonest conservatives and their dishonestly edited material have cost more jobs, and your response is to excuse the liars. Nice.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

You mean like the accusations against Palin?

Your schtick is getting old.

[JimboDaMan]

Remember the supposed support for violence at the rallies?

No, I don't recall manipulated recordings to give a false impression of that. I do recall reports that there were supposedly racist and/or potentially violent things yelled out at two Palin rallies. And I heard subsequent reports that nobody was able to document these accusations. But I never heard or saw doctored tapes supporting them.

[TimmySmith]

Oh, I suspect they were aware of the overall dishonest nature of the tape. Anyone who believes an O'Keefe production needs to seriously examine their gullibility factor.

But I see at least three reasons why resignations were necessary:

1) Even unedited, some of the things said were inappropriate. Nowhere near what the slanderers published, but still inappropriate for people in their position.

2) Arguing about what was and was not misleading is a lost cause for the accused.

3) At this sensitive point in time any protracted debate involving potential inappropriate conduct could be devestating to NPR.

So dishonest conservatives and their dishonestly edited material have cost more jobs, and your response is to excuse the liars. Nice.

Your post uses logic, then concludes with non-logic. If NPR, which we agree has the technology to sniff all of this out, does not wish to do so. (Again, we are talking in hypotheticals because none of us truly know what is on this "edited" tape) Then conservatives have cost nothing. Here is a tip to live by, place responsibility where it belongs.

[Burgold]

Your post uses logic, then concludes with non-logic. If NPR, which we agree has the technology to sniff all of this out, does not wish to do so. (Again, we are talking in hypotheticals because none of us truly know what is on this "edited" tape) Then conservatives have cost nothing. Here is a tip to live by, place responsibility where it belongs.

You mean the guys who created the distorted and manipulative tape, right? In several of the original articles, they mentioned that the tape was "heavily edited" NPR calculated that in this climate it would be more damaged by weathering the PR storm than by fighting the good fight. Sadly, this happens. Lots of innocents settle out of court for the same reason.

[JimboDaMan]

Your post uses logic, then concludes with non-logic. If NPR, which we agree has the technology to sniff all of this out, does not wish to do so. (Again, we are talking in hypotheticals because none of us truly know what is on this "edited" tape) Then conservatives have cost nothing. Here is a tip to live by, place responsibility where it belongs.

Perhaps I should type more slowly, or use smaller words.

NPR most likely knows the true nature of the tapes. I attempted to explain why that doesn't matter once the false accusation is made. Here's a tip for you to use: try to keep up.

[Predicto]

Why anyone gives this O'Keefe clown the time of day at this point is beyond me.

Because he singlehandedly took down ACORN on false pretenses. That's a powerful resume point.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Oh, I suspect they were aware of the overall dishonest nature of the tape. Anyone who believes an O'Keefe production needs to seriously examine their gullibility factor.

But I see at least three reasons why resignations were necessary:

1) Even unedited, some of the things said were inappropriate. Nowhere near what the slanderers published, but still inappropriate for people in their position.

2) Arguing about what was and was not misleading is a lost cause for the accused.

3) At this sensitive point in time any protracted debate involving potential inappropriate conduct could be devestating to NPR.

So dishonest conservatives and their dishonestly edited material have cost more jobs, and your response is to excuse the liars. Nice.

It's a bit like knowing your enemy is holding an empty gun, then handing him some bullets...and then getting pissed off at the manner in which he decides to shoot you lol...

[twa]

Your schtick is getting old.

Hey that's my wife's line

[TimmySmith]

Perhaps I should type more slowly, or use smaller words.

NPR most likely knows the true nature of the tapes. I attempted to explain why that doesn't matter once the false accusation is made. Here's a tip for you to use: try to keep up.

False accusation? Using Glen Beck as your sole source? Really?