Katie Couric Lied So You Could Feel Good about Your Opinion — Paradox
First of all, let’s get the denunciations out of the way. Couric lied, pure and simple. This manipulative editing is amateurish, absurd, cruel, dishonest and vicious. This is what a 15-year-old film student does when he wants to appear clever but is actually quite dull. There is no possible excuse for this kind of behavior in the realms of journalism or documentary filmmaking.
But let’s not lay the blame fully on Couric.
Don’t get me wrong. Couric is an adult and a serious professional and this kind of behavior should end her career. But this is also what we, in the era of Facebook and the “Daily Show,” have come to expect. This narrative is what we demand from our reality.
Let’s ask ourselves this question: Who is likely to watch this documentary? Who is the target audience? Almost certainly not pro-Second Amendment advocates. Most likely this is being marketed to a young liberal demographic, eager to see the pro-gun team DESTROYED or EVISCERATED or MOLECULARLY DISEMBOWELED or whatever gory term Salon decides to use to describe the three minutes of comic rambling mixed with heavily edited single-syllable response footage of the token conservative stupid enough to agree to a four-hour interview (from which 23 seconds can be extracted) with a “Daily Show” alum like Samantha Bee or John Oliver. Because, let’s be honest, no one watches the actual “Daily Show” anymore.
From: Katie Couric Lied So You Could Feel Good about Your Opinion — Paradox
This reminds me of something I saw earlier: Epic Correction of the Decade.
I’ll lift this shamelessly from the blog post:
So far, so good, right?
Well, when you get to the correction, you see this:
The interpretation of the coding of the political attitude items in the descriptive and preliminary analyses portion of the manuscript was exactly reversed. (Emphasis added.)
I have goosebumps.Report
Hit Coffee. Tuesday. Tune in.Report
I’m holding my breath already.Report
Whatever. Fake but accurate. We all know it’s what they really believe.Report
As one of our former commenters might say: “What Couric is expressing is more true than the truth!”Report
Apparently Couric plans to stand by her truthiness. Why edit it to be accurate when you want to start a discussion?
Katie Couric Says ‘Under the Gun’ Will Not Be Redone to Remove Deceptive Edit
http://www.thewrap.com/katie-couric-hopes-gun-doc-controversy-sparks-bigger-conversation/Report
But let’s not lay the blame fully on Couric.
No, let’s. The idea that professionals, which is what Couric purports to be, are helpless in the face of short-term incentives, is absolutely pernicious.Report
Don’t be so hard on her. Being a helpless victim is a liberal value.Report
Yeah, it’s not like she’s an investment banker.Report
Indeed. This demonstrates, again, the lie that journalist are “objective”. You’d think that 2nd Amend folks would learn to just decline to talk to folks that have a high probability of screwing them over.Report
It’s also highly likely that the production crew violated federal firearms regs in their purchase of the firearms.Report
They did violate the fed laws. As usual however they won’t be prosecuted. Instead of enforcing the laws, liberals just want to whine about things.Report
Well they certainly won’t be charged, because that would defeat the overall objectives. That anchor in DC who whipped out a higher capacity mag than the law allowed wasn’t charged either.Report
Yes, I was thinking that incident with the talk show host as well. Why enforce the laws when these distortions are really just meant to foster a discussion?Report
LOL.
There’s rules for them and rules for us. Never forget that, to paraphrase “Blade Runner”, “You know the score, pal. You’re not an elite, you’re little people!”Report
It gets better:
“Katie Couric Accused of Deceptive Editing in Second Documentary”
http://freebeacon.com/culture/katie-couric-accused-deceptive-editing-second-documentary/
Surprise surprise surprise.Report
Stuff like this is why the liberal faction carries such negative connotations.Report
It’s not like the right doesn’t have its fair share of hack journalists.Report
So Couric is now a “hack journalist”? That’s odd bc I thought she was well respected. Sounds like pathetic attempt to downplay her actions. Maybe you could give us an example of a right wing journalist that is as respected as Couric and has done the same thing. Let’s compare apples to apples.Report
Well we could, if you could find a right wing journalist who did not okeefe themselves out before they got the nightly news.Report
Nice try but insinuating that every right wring jurno has “okeefed themselves” is just just pathetic b/c you know it isn’t true.Report
Well call my depth shallow but I cant think of a right wing high profile star who also has not had an issue with truthness.Report
You won’t find one. They don’t exist. Why? Who do you “well respected” moniker comes from within the journo community, ergo, since they are all mainly liberal, they’ll never gift that label to anyone 1 degree right of them.Report