Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on May 25, 2016, 08:01:58 PM
-
Apparently Katie Couric has made a "critically acclaimed" documentary on "gun violence". Somebody caught her heavy editing to make the prog gun side look stupid / bad / pwned.
The youtube snippet at the link is the edited and aired segment. Note the silence by the pro-gun side as if they are unable to provide a cogent answer. Then listen to the raw audio directly below the video, which shows that the question was answered immediately.
When called out, the producer said that she did it to "create a pause for the viewer to consider the importance of the question."
http://freebeacon.com/issues/audio-shows-katie-couric-gun-documentary-deceptively-edited-interview-pro-gun-activists/
-
As a former active VCDL member myself, I can tell you there is no way they wouldn't have a good, rational response right away to any logical question put to them!
Been there, done that at the VA capitol during lobby day.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fherohog.com%2Fimages%2Ficons%2FTVstar.jpg&hash=32f09164a57b047ab3a22b7a96cb0f417b559885)
-
The full, unedited interview: http://vcdl.org/resources/Media/katiecouricinterview06182015.mp3
-
Can I get a show of hands from all of those still surprised by Ms Couric's behavior?
[crickets]
Thought so.
-
Can I get a show of hands from all of those still surprised by Ms Couric's behavior?
[crickets]
Thought so.
I'm surprised she actually spoke with any actual pro-gun/pro-2A supporters. I would've thought she would have used anti's dressed as pro's.
-
She should be blacklisted from having access to anyone active on the pro 2nd amendment side.
Liberal snakes like her are never to be trusted and should be shunned.
-
She should be blacklisted from having access to anyone active on the pro 2nd amendment side.
Liberal snakes like her are never to be trusted and should be shunned.
Who would agree to anything but a live interview with her ever again? Anyone that considers the media potentially hostile shouldn't do edited interviews. It isn't the first hatchet job and won't be the last.
-
Nora Ryan, the chief of staff for EPIX, the cable channel that is airing the documentary, told the Free Beacon in an email, “Under the Gun is a critically-acclaimed documentary that looks at the polarizing and politicized issue of gun violence, a subject that elicits strong reactions from people on both sides. EPIX stands behind Katie Couric, director Stephanie Soechtig, and their creative and editorial judgment. We encourage people to watch the film and decide for themselves.”
Neat way to dodge the question. If people who watch the film aren't aware that the question WAS answered, immediately and competently, how can they possibly "decide for themselves"?
-
You lost me a Katie Couric and honest.
-
Isn't Katie Couric known as kinda an angrier Michael Moore that distorts anything and everything?
-
Fox News has picked up the story:
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/05/26/katie-couric-slammed-for-deceptive-documentary-about-gun-rights.html
So has CNN:
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/25/media/katie-couric-guns-stephanie-soechtig/index.html?section=money_latest
From the second link, it looks like the director is being thrown under the bus.
-
I guess she didn't like any of John Lott's answers either: http://crimeresearch.org/2016/05/katie-couric-spent-almost-4-hours-interviewing-john-lott-on-film-for-her-new-gun-control-movie-but-didnt-include-any-of-lotts-interview-in-the-movie/ (http://crimeresearch.org/2016/05/katie-couric-spent-almost-4-hours-interviewing-john-lott-on-film-for-her-new-gun-control-movie-but-didnt-include-any-of-lotts-interview-in-the-movie/)
-
Fox News has picked up the story:
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/05/26/katie-couric-slammed-for-deceptive-documentary-about-gun-rights.html
So has CNN:
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/25/media/katie-couric-guns-stephanie-soechtig/index.html?section=money_latest
From the second link, it looks like the director is being thrown under the bus.
I never intended to make anyone look bad and I apologize if anyone felt that way
Ah, yes. Allow me to translate.
"I'm not sorry about what I did; I'm sorry I got caught and now have to pretend that this was just an innocent mistake."
-
Even the uber-leftist Washington Post is coming down on Couric & Soechtig:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/05/25/audiotape-katie-couric-documentary-falsely-depicts-gun-supporters-as-idiots/
In the years we’ve covered and watched media organizations, we’ve scarcely seen a thinner, more weaselly excuse than the one in the block above. For starters, it appears to count as an admission that this segment of the documentary was edited. The artistic “pause” provides the viewer not a “moment to consider this important question”; it provides viewers a moment to lower their estimation of gun owners. That’s it.
-
In all fairness to Katie, it was probably President
Obama Clark and the Ministry of Truth that made her do it.
-
In all fairness to Katie, it was probably President Obama Clark and the Ministry of Truth that made her do it.
It's a pity we don't have an open-airlock policy.
-
Even the uber-leftist Washington Post is coming down on Couric & Soechtig:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/05/25/audiotape-katie-couric-documentary-falsely-depicts-gun-supporters-as-idiots/
Yeah, I saw that and was surprised and impressed. I expected them to go with a gentle rebuke and end with some softy "let's all be nice because she didn't really mean it" crap.
Instead they came down pretty hard on it.
-
Ha ha ha. She's getting creamed on her Facebook page.
-
Holy smokes! Even Huffington slammed her! :O
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/katie-couric-under-the-gun_us_5747245de4b0dacf7ad42f59?section=politics
-
From the looks of the attacks I don't think Ms. Couric is too popular amongst the libtard crowd.
Of course the smarmy little Pollyanna voice is trying to tell me that either the usual suspects among the anti-gun crowd are either realizing we are not the threat they have tried to make us out to be or that we are that dangerous and they need to get their *expletive deleted*it together before the big purge.
[ar15]
-
Ha ha ha. She's getting creamed on her Facebook page.
phrasing!
Chris
-
This reminds me of "Bowling for Columbine", where Heston's tie changes color in the middle of a sentence... words from different speeches he gave were edited together into one sentance to make him look bad.
-
South Park got it right:
Randy is suffering from severe constipation and has been unable to defecate for more than three weeks. After taking a laxative, Randy produces an abnormally large piece of excrement during an extremely painful bowel movement. Believing he has passed the world's biggest stool, he reaches out to the "European Fecal Standards and Measurements" office, headquartered in Zürich, Switzerland. The institute concludes he has the world record, weighing in at 8.6 courics – a fictional measurement unit (approximately 2.5 pounds) named after journalist Katie Couric.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/More_Crap
-
Couric and Brian Williams should team up, given their fondness for fiction.
-
Couric and Brian Williams should team up, given their fondness for fiction.
Been done:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList
-
And the temperature continues to rise:
National Review: Dear Yahoo, Fire Katie Couric:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/435919/katie-couric-under-gun-documentary-lie-yahoo-fire-her
New York Post: Yahoo needs to fire Katie Couric
http://nypost.com/2016/05/26/katie-courics-fake-documentary-proves-new-media-is-a-farce/
(ETA: NPR weighs in)
http://www.npr.org/2016/05/26/479655743/manipulative-editing-reflects-poorly-on-couric-and-her-gun-documentary
And just for grins:
https://reason.com/reasontv/2016/05/26/katie-couric-responds-to-deceptive-editi
-
Just checked her FB page. Surprised it doesn't have little animated flames dancing on it. To say that folks are a little unhappy with her journalistics ethics would be akin to describing the Pacific ocean as "a little water".
Her PR staff is probably considering an en masse career change.
Brad
-
Katie's defense is that she didn't do the editing, that she doesn't know how to edit, and that she wishes she had studied journalism more rigorously. "I don't necessarily understand journalism. I'm in the process of trying to figure it out."
Yes, really. See Angel Eyes' last link.
-
Oh, and Wiki has "locked" her encyclopedia entry:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katie_Couric
This article is currently protected from editing until June 2, 2016.
See the protection policy and protection log for more details. Please discuss any changes on the talk page; you may submit an edit request to ask an administrator to make an edit if it is uncontroversial or supported by consensus. You may also request that this page be unprotected.
Interesting.
I wonder what they mean by "uncontroversial OR supported by consensus."
I can't wait 'til June 3rd.
Terry
-
supported by consensus."
Again with the consensus (not you Terry, "they"). I'm sick of stuff that is supposed to be supported by evidence and/or scientific rigor being given the hand-off to consensus. "97% of all scientists believe gravity makes apples fall up, so it's true". "A majority of input shows people like Katie Couric, so she didn't do anything wrong."
I realize calling Wiki an encyclopedia is really stretching things, but still, I'm sick of consensus and the idea that as long as you get enough people to agree on a thing, it becomes a fact. Physics, logic, and evidence to the contrary be damned.
And that's my Sunday morning rant. :)
-
^ I agree, and that's why I bolded and capped the "or."
The "consensus" of pro-2a folks is that she (and her director) are bald faced liars. You don't just stick 8 or 9 seconds of "dead air" into a report unless you want it to mean something.
So is that "consensus" going to show up in the wiki article on June 3rd??
(Well, "encyclopedia" was a handy descriptive term, is all.)
Rant on, Ben! Good show !
Terry
ETA:
This kind of prevarication seems to be fairly prevalent, according to my searching around. Example/sample from the New York Times:
But Mr. Zimmerman’s comments had been taken grossly out of context by NBC.
Read more:
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/06/nbc-fires-producer-of-misleading-zimmerman-tape/
Too bad the producer involved was not named. I want names, dammit!
TAGS FOR SEARCH ENGINES TO FIND THIS THREAD:
Katie Couric
Epix
Stephanie Soechtig
Brian Williams
Journalism
Michael Moore
Yellow Journalism
New Journalism
(Edited to remove excessive line feeds.)
-
(Well, "encyclopedia" was a handy descriptive term, is all.)
And it IS what they call themselves, even though:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvZBg7qLzU8
=D
-
And it IS what they call themselves, even though:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvZBg7qLzU8
=D
I wonder how he got YouTube to come out and film that.
-
Of course the smarmy little Pollyanna voice is trying to tell me that either the usual suspects among the anti-gun crowd are either realizing we are not the threat they have tried to make us out to be or that we are that dangerous and they need to get their *expletive deleted*it together before the big purge.
[ar15]
=D
-
Apparently Couric is feeling the heat. A link to this story was on CNN's front page:
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/30/media/katie-couric-under-the-gun-doc/index.html
There's still a lot of "it's not my fault" in her statement, but she is at least admitting that the edit should not have been made.
-
Apparently Couric is feeling the heat. A link to this story was on CNN's front page:
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/30/media/katie-couric-under-the-gun-doc/index.html
There's still a lot of "it's not my fault" in her statement, but she is at least admitting that the edit should not have been made.
And from the URL, the famous "apology" method that I feel is one of the biggest problems with modern society:
Soechtig added, "I never intended to make anyone look bad and I apologize if anyone felt that way."
How about be a responsible adult, stick a period after the word 'apologize", and be done with it. Cowboy up and drive on for God's sake.
-
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/05/31/katie-couric-takes-blame-for-misleading-pause-in-gun-documentary.html?intcmp=hpbt3
She is now taking blame.
Love this quote.....Director Stephanie Soechtig told The Washington Post last week that the pause was so viewers could consider the question.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi304.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fnn181%2Ftbuilt4life%2F146769d1464555972-katic-couric-saga-vcdl-13330991_1047308328651377_998587573088242707_n_zpsmbw0fzkv.jpg&hash=4975d672b90ea24b1ceb3f8aaa0fb0b5ce6a6aa5)
-
Interesting.
I wonder what they mean by "uncontroversial OR supported by consensus."
I can't wait 'til June 3rd.
Okay, having gone through the edit logs, there was an 'edit war' taking place.
'Jbusch8899' seems to be the primary one putting the controversy in - complete with citations.
'Xenophrenic' seems to be using the rules to suppress the controversy - note, I haven't edited wikipedia articles in a long time, and he's using acronym cites, so I don't know how accurate his citations on the supposed rule violations are. The first time he removed it, it was "rmv assertion of fact pending citation to WP:RS; rmv unnecessary header" - which seems odd since the citations were there. The second was "rvt BLP violation; take your proposal to Talk, please"
BLP seems to be a reference to "Biography of living persons", which is quite the page. Still, at the top of the list: Neutral point of view, verifiable, and no 'original research'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources - he's saying they aren't reliable. CNN and such aren't?
While I'm going to say that the level of rule enforcement is going to vary on a huge site like wikipedia, especially when it's worked by volunteers, I will state that there's a lot less verifiable information left on various pages, with lousier citations. As such, it looks like Xeno is trying to suppress the information.
Perhaps the answer is to create a wiki page specifically for 'under the gun', where the controversy can be expanded upon.
Especially given wiki's policy on BLP: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous."
-
Okay, having gone through the edit logs, there was an 'edit war' taking place.
'Jbusch8899' seems to be the primary one putting the controversy in - complete with citations.
'Xenophrenic' seems to be using the rules to suppress the controversy - note, I haven't edited wikipedia articles in a long time, and he's using acronym cites, so I don't know how accurate his citations on the supposed rule violations are. The first time he removed it, it was "rmv assertion of fact pending citation to WP:RS; rmv unnecessary header" - which seems odd since the citations were there. The second was "rvt BLP violation; take your proposal to Talk, please"
BLP seems to be a reference to "Biography of living persons", which is quite the page. Still, at the top of the list: Neutral point of view, verifiable, and no 'original research'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources - he's saying they aren't reliable. CNN and such aren't?
While I'm going to say that the level of rule enforcement is going to vary on a huge site like wikipedia, especially when it's worked by volunteers, I will state that there's a lot less verifiable information left on various pages, with lousier citations. As such, it looks like Xeno is trying to suppress the information.
Perhaps the answer is to create a wiki page specifically for 'under the gun', where the controversy can be expanded upon.
Especially given wiki's policy on BLP: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous."
Sounds like they need to just have a link at the bottom and call it "unverified or controversial information".
-
Those apologies [citation needed] seem similar to a cat [citation needed] scratching [citation needed] in a litter box [citation needed] to cover its poop. [citation needed]
Terry [citation needed], 230RN [citation needed]
-
Those apologies [citation needed] seem similar to a cat [citation needed] scratching [citation needed] in a litter box [citation needed] to cover its poop. [citation needed]
Terry [citation needed], 230RN [citation needed]
If it was my cat, it would have been lectured and yelled at for failing to cover his poop to begin with and stinking up the house.
-
Your cat speaks English? Mine pretends not to, but he is perfectly fluent in Jerkwad.
-
Your cat speaks English? Mine pretends not to, but he is perfectly fluent in Jerkwad.
My cats are all multilingual. Their understanding of English only gets "spotty" when I'm not saying nice things to them.
-
http://www.ammoland.com/2016/05/katie-couric-apologizes-with-second-misleading-edit-doubling-down/#axzz4AHu9H3P3
I swear this woman is just asking for it at this point.
-
http://www.ammoland.com/2016/05/katie-couric-apologizes-with-second-misleading-edit-doubling-down/#axzz4AHu9H3P3
I swear this woman is just asking for it at this point.
Does she really believe we're that stupid? Yes, apparently she does.
(ETA: an online petition to fire Couric: https://www.thunderclap.it/projects/42714-fire-katie-couric)
-
Reply on the Ammoland link which rang my bell:
• 2nd Amender says:
June 1, 2016 at 7:27 AM
Aren’t we all tired of the attacks on our Constitutionally Guaranteed Rights And Freedoms by these highly paid “mouths” with well known faces attached!
There are no “so called liberals”! These actors and politicians who have infiltrated our main stream culture by any means possible are Communists. Prior to the 60’s, when this anti-American Movement took hold on college campuses, these traitorous scum would be hiding in dark unnamed places.
Time to take the gloves off and call “a spade a spade”. These creeps hide under their own mandated political correctness. They have warped the minds of too many of our kids with cartoons and subliminal messages of false hope in being a minion instead of a free thinking individual.
Read more: http://www.ammoland.com/2016/05/katie-couric-apologizes-with-second-misleading-edit-doubling-down/#ixzz4ALLQrMMm
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook
There are a few of us who have been brave enough to point this out here and there over the decades, myself included. Yet we are often likened to McCarthy, who saw Commies under every leaf and rock.
Well, guess what?
They are out from under their leaves and rocks nowadays, coming out under the protection of the "Hey, that smacks of McCarthyism" accusation. Well, while that term implies unjustified accusations, it's time to maybe re-think just how "unjustified" it really was in every case.
Yes, McCarthy went too far in a lot of ways, which is too bad, because it made "Commie hunting" itself look shameful. This played right into the hands of the Communists.
Maybe it's time we took another look at who's a communist and who isn't.
There. I said it and I ain't takin' it back.
Terry, 230RN
-
25 years ago nothing would have come of this. A lot fewer people trust the media these days.
-
25 years ago nothing would have come of this. A lot fewer people trust the media these days.
25 years ago the networks had a virtual monopoly on the dissemination of information.
-
25 years ago the networks had a virtual monopoly on the dissemination of DISinformation.
FTFY
-
I love the quote purportedly from Mark Twain:
"If you don't read the news, you are uninformed. If you do read the news, you are misinformed."
Partisan press is not a new development.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk
-
Yep, the recent development is the idiotic idea that journalists are noble and truthful or something.
-
Yep, the recent development is the idiotic idea that journalists are noble and truthful or something.
Even 10 years ago people had that sussed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcExaLjAReQ
-
Did the mockumentarians videotape themselves confessing to gun-related crimes? (Not that anything will come of it.)
http://www.ammoland.com/2016/06/under-the-gun-director-soechtig-confesses-to-federal-crimes/#axzz4AUFlbGca
Ms. Soechtig incredulously states in her interview how such a private party transfer was legal, but, in fact, under existing federal law, it was illegal.
I don't know a lot about the law in question, and forgive me if this was already brought to light.
-
Couric admits she would prefer armed protection for herself:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPvuX6wM64w&feature=youtu.be&t=4910
-
Even 10 years ago people had that sussed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcExaLjAReQ
Journalists tend to be blind to their own biases....
-
JournalistsHumans tend to be blind to their own biases....
-
Relatedey:
https://www.americas1stfreedom.org/articles/2016/6/2/six-lies-bryant-gumbel-aired-about-the-ar-15/
-
Relatedey:
https://www.americas1stfreedom.org/articles/2016/6/2/six-lies-bryant-gumbel-aired-about-the-ar-15/
Page is not available.
-
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:nFNMA8N96XMJ:https://www.americas1stfreedom.org/articles/2016/6/2/six-lies-bryant-gumbel-aired-about-the-ar-15/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Cached version
Short list:
1. Semi-Automatic Firearms Only Recently Became Popular?
2. Citizens Didn’t Have Access To The AR-15 For Years?
3. The AR-15 Has Been Falsely Marketed As A “Sporter”?
4. The AR-15 Is A Tool For Murderers?
5. “Billions” In AR-15 Sales?
6. The .223 Cartridge Is Especially Lethal?
-
It was amended to Five Lies. Like the burger chain.
https://www.americas1stfreedom.org/articles/2016/6/2/five-lies-bryant-gumbel-aired-about-the-ar-15/
They redacted the bit about how lucrative the AR market may or may not be. Wonder why.
-
They redacted the bit about how lucrative the AR market may or may not be. Wonder why.
Not a lie, per se, but an unsubstantiated claim.
The other five claims are demonstrably false.
(ETA: just for grins)
(https://i.imgflip.com/14ttru.jpg)
-
Thread necro: VCDL sues Couric for defamation:
http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/09/13/breaking-katie-couric-sued-12-million-defamation-anti-gun-documentary/
Tough to prove in court, but I wish them success.
-
Perhaps not that hard. It seems the VCDL have their own tape, so they can document that the 9 seconds of silence that were presented as their inability to respond to a question actually came about because the producers instructed them to sit silent for ten seconds so they could "calibrate the equipment." Then,, by massive feats of legerdemain, those ten seconds of "calibration" somehow got edited into the sequence following a key question.
Curiously, their immediate responses to the question (which they also have on tape) did NOT make it into the finished piece.
-
Thread necro: VCDL sues Couric for defamation:
http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/09/13/breaking-katie-couric-sued-12-million-defamation-anti-gun-documentary/
Tough to prove in court, but I wish them success.
Oh hells to the yeah.
-
You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of jourmalists into what I call the 'basket of deplorables.'
Terry
-
Full reference for my above paraquote (images and ads redacted):
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/13/irredeemable-clinton-deplorable/
Hillary Clinton’s elitist sneer at roughly a quarter of the American populace went much further than her instantly memorable “basket of deplorables” line. The full quote ran as follows:
"You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic – you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people, now have 11 million. He tweets and retweets offensive, hateful, mean-spirited rhetoric. Now some of those folks, they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America."
Just in case someone didn't get it.
-
Well, now I'm confused. I must be suffering from some form of identity disorder. I'm 72 years old, and for my entire life I thought I was an American. The United States government apparently thought I was, too, when my friends and neighbors at local board number 9 invited me to take an all-expenses-paid tour of southeast Asia.
And now HRC informs me that I'm NOT American! Now I'll have to head over to the VA hospital and see if they have a clinic for PESD (Pre-Election Stress Disorder).
[Does this mean my American passport has been revoked?]
-
And now HRC informs me that I'm NOT American! Now I'll have to head over to the VA hospital and see if they have a clinic for PESD (Pre-Election Stress Disorder).
More importantly, now that we're some sort of undocumented non-immigrant non-citizens does that mean we can now commit crimes with relative impunity and apply for all sorts of welfare benefits?
-
No, because you speak English.
-
Mi havas neniun ideon kion vi ĵus diris.
-
Well, then learn English. Like my grandparents did.