The BLAZE Editor: Further Analysis Finds Deceptive Editing In NPR Sting Tape

[TheSeeker]

Lying?

Naaaa...not me.

The LIE here is the thread title and what Huffington Post and NYT did when they selectively edited what The Blaze article actually said.

Again what The Blaze ACTUALLY says about their attempts to smear O'Keefe through their selective editing: Blaze Scrutiny of NPR Expose Videos Draws Extensive Media Reaction | The Blaze

that may be the best way to summarize our analysis and the reaction to it. The editing and emphasis in the expose deserve scrutiny. But there were also plenty of seemingly indefensible things said in the video. The Poynter Institute’s Steve Myers says, “The Blaze story identifies several important differences that color viewers’ perception of what happened.” But Myers — as with our post — does not see flaws in the O’Keefe video as reason to wipe the slate clean for the NPR executives involved.

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

Lying?

Naaaa...not me.

The LIE here is the thread title and what Huffington Post and NYT did when they selectively edited what The Blaze article actually said.

blah blah blah bibitty bobitty boop

This isn't about how the HuffPost or NYT edited their stories; it's about O'Qweef getting slammed by a conservative webrag for deceptively editing the video of his so-called 'sting' of NPR. Nice try.

Anyway, let's talk about those lies. I'll let you speak for yourself.

The Blaze doesn't ever say any of the things your NPR lackies try and say they do.

NPR also never disputes that they were caught red-handed attempting to tell the donors that they could hide the donations form the government.

Two lies. NPR does dispute the accusation that they were attempting to hide donations. The reason they dispute it - because it never happened. They repeatedly asked for IRS forms from the supposed Muslim group.

The BLAZE does say exactly what NPR attributed to them. I already owned you on that, but you keep insisting upon it. How did NPR misrepresent what Blaze said? Please, professor, share your thoughts. You'll just embarrass yourself some more.

I guess I shouldn't call you a liar. It's quite possible that you really believe your false accusations; that you're just really, really stupid. Either that, or you're a liar. You decide. I don't really care anymore. I've already owned you to the point of boredom.

 

[TheSeeker]

Lying?

Naaaa...not me.

The LIE here is the thread title and what Huffington Post and NYT did when they selectively edited what The Blaze article actually said.

blah blah blah bibitty bobitty boop

This isn't about how the HuffPost or NYT edited their stories; it's about O'Qweef getting slammed by a conservative webrag for deceptively editing the video of his so-called 'sting' of NPR. Nice try.

No rebuttal..typical.

Yes, this thread is all about how NPR and HuffPo are playing damage control by selectively editing only the parts of The Blaze story they think will cover NPR's ass.

They conveniently leave out the parts that still condemn NPR.

Anyway, let's talk about those lies. I'll let you speak for yourself.

The Blaze doesn't ever say any of the things your NPR lackies try and say they do.

NPR also never disputes that they were caught red-handed attempting to tell the donors that they could hide the donations form the government.

Two lies. NPR does dispute the accusation that they were attempting to hide donations. The reason they dispute it - because it never happened. They repeatedly asked for IRS forms from the supposed Muslim group.

LOL....the tape DISTINCTLY proves that Liley said they COULD hide it from the government.

Only LATER does NPR people say they wanted the IRS forms (more damage control).

Which brings-up the fact that they are attempting to cover their asses now by saying their own chief, the very head of their donations department didn't know what their policy was.

THAT is just too hard to believe is even POSSIBLE!

Please, professor, share your thoughts. You'll just embarrass yourself some more.

I've proven that over and over, yet it's still over your pay grade I guess?

I guess I shouldn't call you a liar. It's quite possible that you really believe your false accusations; that you're just really, really stupid. Either that, or you're a liar. You decide. I don't really care anymore. I've already owned you to the point of boredom.

Keep claiming victory if that's your way out of this, but when you read The Blaze's own coverage of how NPR, NYT, and HuffPo lamely tried to play damage control, then the proof is right there for all to see...right from the horse's mouth. Just because your monbattyness prevents you from seeing that clearly doesn't make you right.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The truth doesn't really matter with the anti-NPR people.

.....Specifically, The Blaze's Editor:

"....for some reason Fox News has suddenly become allergic to Glenn Beck's website, The Blaze."​

RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY!!!​

 

[TheSeeker]

Since you are such an advocate of telling the truth Mr Shaman, let me ask you.....

1) Does NPR deny anywhere that Mr Schiller said some horrible things?

2) Do you think NPR's head executive in charge of donations would not be aware of their rules about disclosure of where donations come from?

3) Do you think all the people at NPR who were forced to resign by their board of directors were forced to do so because they were innocent of the allegations against them?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Since you are such an advocate of telling the truth Mr Shaman, let me ask you.....

1) Does NPR deny anywhere that Mr Schiller said some horrible things?

2) Do you think NPR's head executive in charge of donations would not be aware of their rules about disclosure of where donations come from?

3) Do you think all the people at NPR who were forced to resign by their board of directors were forced to do so because they were innocent of the allegations against them?

....All, very good questions!

When do the 'Baggers become held to such standards?​

Tea Party Hierarchy​

 

[Wry Catcher]

He released the entire raw video.

How can it be deceptive? It is what it is.

He's given you all of the video. If you don't like his summary, take his video and make your own.

NPR felt it had enough credibility to can 3 people. Does that mean they are part of the right-wing fanatical fringe?

How can it be deceptive? Did you read the articles? He clearly did some deceptive editing. No honest person can read the analysis and say that no wrong was committed by O'Keefe.

Also, he released the raw video after the heavily and deceptively edited video was released. It's a neat little trick. First, you release the edited video that makes people look bad, generates publicity and gets people talking about it. Then a few days later, you release the raw video, which will naturally get less attention, because, at this point, it's old news. If he were a true journalist with ethical standards, he would have released the full video period. Nothing else. Then let people judge.

I understand why you want to ignore this. It makes all of the righties who sounded the conspiracy alarms look like the morons that they are.

Well, if it is true, both Schillers and Liley would be fools not to sue NPR. It would be a slam dunk, no-brainer, settled out of court.

Want to bet on who is the first to file?

I'll take "none of them" and you can have the field.

Cry all you want, but listen to Car Talk while you still can. You've got about 4 more months, then NPR is no more.

If it is true the suit filed will be one alleging defamation and the civil penalty might be quite large.

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

No rebuttal..typical.

No rebuttal? Having trouble with reading comprehension? Let's try this again. Try reading this time.

Yes, this thread is all about how NPR and HuffPo are playing damage control by selectively editing only the parts of The Blaze story they think will cover NPR's ass.

They conveniently leave out the parts that still condemn NPR.

You keep trying to act like you didn't lie, and that the real issue here is that NPR and NYT selectively edited their reporting on the original Blaze analysis.

You're either missing the point or you're intentionally lying. NPR and NYT didn't write the story on The Blaze. They simply reported on it. They are not required, or even expected, to quote the entire article. They reported on the conclusion that The Blaze came to - which is that O'Keefe's video was edited to the point of being deceptive. You can try and make this about NPR and NYT all you like, but the real issue here is O'Keefe's fabricated conspiracy.

LOL....the tape DISTINCTLY proves that Liley said they COULD hide it from the government.

Only LATER does NPR people say they wanted the IRS forms (more damage control).
Which brings-up the fact that they are attempting to cover their asses now by saying their own chief, the very head of their donations department didn't know what their policy was.

THAT is just too hard to believe is even POSSIBLE!

There you go lying again. It's too hard for you to believe because A) You're a partisan hack who continually lies and B) You're an idiot. Liley repeatedly asked for IRS forms from the fake Muslim group. Why would they ask for IRS forms if they were trying to hide the money?

Read it and weep (again). From WSJ's analysis of the edited tapes:

NPR in Dispute Over Donation From Fake Islamic Group - WSJ.com

At one point, [in the phone conversation] Ms. Liley said NPR would like to have the organization's federal form 990, which are required by the Internal Revenue Service of nonprofit groups.[/B] Mr. Kasaam asked why, and Ms. Liley explained that it is standard practice. Later, she told Mr. Kasaam that what NPR's general counsel, Joyce Slocum, was putting together "was the simplest of things that we use, which would be a letter" of agreement.

The note continued, "The audits of our governmental grants are conducted by the same audit firm we hire to do our NPR financial audit." Ms. Liley added that she would send a draft of a gift agreement from NPR's legal counsel.

NPR also released email between the network and the group that it said demonstrated repeated refusals of the gift. In one dated March 3, Ms. Schiller recounted to colleagues a conversation in which she told a group member NPR needed to "sort out" issues regarding his group's tax status before it could move forward.

In one the following day, NPR General Counsel Joyce Slocum told a group member her organization was unable to find documentation verifying his group was in compliance with Internal Revenue Service rules for charitable organizations.

I've proven that over and over, yet it's still over your pay grade I guess?

Proven what over and over? That you're a liar and a fool?

Keep claiming victory if that's your way out of this, but when you read The Blaze's own coverage of how NPR, NYT, and HuffPo lamely tried to play damage control, then the proof is right there for all to see...right from the horse's mouth. Just because your monbattyness prevents you from seeing that clearly doesn't make you right.

Yes the proof is right there on The Blaze's website for all to see. And I've provided quotes from The Blaze's article that support my posts. You have repeatedly denied that The Blaze even said what is in their story. And I've repeatedly proved that you're a fucking liar.

From The Blaze:

Does Raw Video of NPR Expose Reveal Questionable Editing & Tactics? | The Blaze

Anyone looking at the edited version of the Project Veritas video would be concerned about the conduct and views expressed by the NPR representatives. But should we also be concerned about the deceptive nature of some of the video’s representations? Some will say no — the end justifies any means, even if unethical. Others may be bothered by these tactics and view similar projects with a greater degree of skepticism.

Have I embarrassed you enough, or would you like me to continue to own you? You've been shown to be a fraud and a liar. If I were you, I'd be so embarrassed at this point, that I wouldn't even show my face on this forum. Hell, I'm embarrassed for you.

 

[JBeukema]

Acorn must go down!!!

 

[rdean]

Fox & Friends Whitewashes Problems With O'Keefe's NPR Video

But The Video Was Deceptively Edited "To Intentionally Lie Or Mislead"

The Blaze: "Undercover Reporting" Can Be "Acceptable," But "It Is Another Thing To Approve Of Editing Tactics That Seemed Designed To Intentionally Lie Or Mislead." On March 10, Glenn Beck's website The Blaze published a report comparing segments of the edited video with the original raw footage. The analysis found that many of the segments presented Schiller's comments misleadingly or out of context.

But in the shorter tape, Schiller is also presented as saying the GOP has been "hijacked" by Tea Partiers and xenophobes.

In the longer tape, it's evident Schiller is not giving his own views but instead quoting two influential Republicans -- one an ambassador, another a senior Republican donor. Schiller notably does not take issue with their conclusions -- but they are not his own. [NPR, 3/14/11]

==============================

Something too dirty, even Glenn Beck couldn't stand by and watch right wingers do their dirty evil AGAIN.

Right wingers on this very board still talk about O'Keefe's other ACORN tapes as if they were true. Once you plant a seed in one of those tiny minds, it sprouts and that's all they know. They will repeat it endlessly.

Worse, Fox is still pushing these edited tapes as the "real deal".

What exactly is the foreign owned Fox agenda? Owned by Australians and Arabians and they print lies and doctor tapes and photos. What is their goal and why does the right cling to every lie? I don't get it.

 

[Political Junky]

Oh my, has Glenn forgotten what he was hired to do?

 

[Stephanie]

Still making excuses for NPR.

Yet you didn't have a problem when there was NO TAPE EVER produced to show the Tea Party spit on and said RACIST remarks to a Black Rep. who walking through a protest.

call your Reps folks and ask they DEFUND NPR.

 

[The T]

Oh my, has Glenn forgotten what he was hired to do?

Be himself?

 

[The T]

Still making excuses for NPR.

Yet you didn't have a problem when there was NO TAPE EVER produced to show the Tea Party spit on and said RACIST remarks to a Black Rep. who walking through a protest.

call your Reps folks and ask they DEFUND NPR.

Yeah they still have yet to prove that LIE don't they?

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

The GOP is at it again. Americans want jobs. The GOP promised jobs. But what is the GOP wasting time on? Defunding NPR. It's so important to them, that they called an emergency meeting on the issue. All of this despite the fact that O'Keefe's fake sting video has been debunked and called deceptive by Glenn Beck's The Blaze website editors.

Where are the jobs, Mr. Boehner?

GOP: EMERGENCY, EMERGENCY, NPR Is Funded by the GOVERNMENT -- Daily Intel

Today, House Republicans will call an emergency meeting of the Rules Committee to take on an issue of near-catastrophic importance: the $90 million in funding that annually goes toward supporting National Public Radio. The meeting will center upon Republican congressman Doug Lamborn's bill, rushed to the floor without traditional hearings due to its importance, that would bar the government from funding NPR and its affiliates. (The House already tried to de-fund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which also supports PBS, but the Senate blocked this.) The White House and Senate have already agreed to eliminate $50 million in planned increased funding for the CPB, but Lamborn wants to focus directly on NPR in the light of conservative activist James O'Keefe's doctored "sting" video and permanently ban funding for the radio network. It's not likely his efforts will meet with success in the Senate and White House, who in this matter seem to have a different definition of the term emergency.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

The video and audio have not been "debunked." No matter how many times you repeat it.

 

[The T]

The GOP is at it again. Americans want jobs. The GOP promised jobs. But what is the GOP wasting time on? Defunding NPR. It's so important to them, that they called an emergency meeting on the issue. All of this despite the fact that O'Keefe's fake sting video has been debunked and called deceptive by Glenn Beck's The Blaze website editors.

Where are the jobs, Mr. Boehner?

GOP: EMERGENCY, EMERGENCY, NPR Is Funded by the GOVERNMENT -- Daily Intel

Today, House Republicans will call an emergency meeting of the Rules Committee to take on an issue of near-catastrophic importance: the $90 million in funding that annually goes toward supporting National Public Radio. The meeting will center upon Republican congressman Doug Lamborn's bill, rushed to the floor without traditional hearings due to its importance, that would bar the government from funding NPR and its affiliates. (The House already tried to de-fund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which also supports PBS, but the Senate blocked this.) The White House and Senate have already agreed to eliminate $50 million in planned increased funding for the CPB, but Lamborn wants to focus directly on NPR in the light of conservative activist James O'Keefe's doctored "sting" video and permanently ban funding for the radio network. It's not likely his efforts will meet with success in the Senate and White House, who in this matter seem to have a different definition of the term emergency.

Companies don't exist to give people JOBS...first and formost. And why should the TAXPAYERS fund a heavily Partisan media outlet?

That's right...they shouldn't.

 

[Political Junky]

Daily Kos: OMG: James O'Keefe's NPR Sting Debunked By Glenn Beck Site

 

[Late2TheParty]

Wow, a savings of $258M.

Will the GOP swing for the fences and take out a whopping 100 billion out of our $1.5 Trillion deficit?

 

[The T]

Daily Kos: OMG: James O'Keefe's NPR Sting Debunked By Glenn Beck Site

Doesn't Matter. Wave Bye-Bye to NPR, and PBS soon to follow with a tear in your eye.