NBC News Again Caught Selectively Editing Video [ 6th time NBC caught lying]

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Apr 1, 2011
170,164
47,312
2,180
You can count on the fact that the turds in here will defend this latest offense to the hilt.



I had hoped this nonsense would end with the reign of Steve Capus, but once again we have NBC News forced to apologize for yet-another dishonest edit meant to push the left's agenda.

Thanks to NRO's Andrew Johnson, we learned that on Friday MSNBC anchor Thomas Roberts used selective clips from a speech by Vice President Joe Biden to make it look as though Biden was making a push for gun control. Biden's speech had nothing to do with guns.

Earlier this week, Howard Kurtz made a legitimate mistake and was pilloried for days by his media colleagues. But that was a mistake -- granted, a pretty bad one, but no one believes what Kurtz did was intentional.

What NBC News did -- AGAIN -- was willfully dishonest. But there is never any uproar from the same crowd.

You see, Kurtz's mistake wasn't his mistake, it is that he made the mistake at the expense of the media's Politically Correct Hero of the Week, Jason Collins. The media uproar against Kurtz had nothing to do with journalistic integrity and everything to do with sending a message to those who dare commit the apostasy of trying to ruin a good Narrative.

This is the sixth time in just a few years that NBC News has been caught red-handed manipulating audio or video to benefit whatever agenda the left happens to be pushing at the time. But as a result, we hear nary a peep from those currently running around with Kurtz's head on pike.

The message is clear: if you’re pushing Obama's agenda, there is no code of journalistic ethics.



Number Six: NBC News Again Caught Selectively Editing Video
 
Damn, how many times do they have to be caught? They should get their broadcast liscense taken away.......fucking libtard loons
 
NBCX has been doing this for a loooong time....way before Fox News......GM saddleside gas tanks ring a bell?
 
.

I don't think anyone is really expecting MSNBC to be an objective news organization at this point. They made themselves clear quite a while ago.

None of them are, for that matter. Comprehensive, objective journalism just isn't economically viable. Most folks just want to hear their side of a story.

.
 
Yeah! MSNBC and FOX are 100% equal ends of the same stick! They are both equally disingenuous and hire equally crazy hosts, The are both equally irresponsible and both are equally loose with facts. They both do exactly the same amount of damage to our public discourse. 100% equal.

Right?
 
Yeah! MSNBC and FOX are 100% equal ends of the same stick! They are both equally disingenuous and hire equally crazy hosts, The are both equally irresponsible and both are equally loose with facts. They both do exactly the same amount of damage to our public discourse. 100% equal.

Right?

Bullshit.
 
Yeah! MSNBC and FOX are 100% equal ends of the same stick! They are both equally disingenuous and hire equally crazy hosts, The are both equally irresponsible and both are equally loose with facts. They both do exactly the same amount of damage to our public discourse. 100% equal.

Right?

6th time for NBC, name one time for FOX.
 
.

I don't think anyone is really expecting MSNBC to be an objective news organization at this point. They made themselves clear quite a while ago.

None of them are, for that matter. Comprehensive, objective journalism just isn't economically viable. Most folks just want to hear their side of a story.

.

I agree. Both cable and network news has gone to hell in a hand basket. Good for headlines but no substance or real information.
 
The message is clear: if you’re pushing Obama's agenda, there is no code of journalistic ethics.[/I]

Number Six: NBC News Again Caught Selectively Editing Video

LOL!!! Beitbart's giving us a lecture on journalistic ethics! :tongue:

The MSM is extremely biased as these facts bear out..
Why would the media HELP GOP when 85% of them give to the Democrats?
Are you that totally ignorant to think these Democrat supporters would present stories that are POSITIVE for GOP and Negative for Democrats?
Then you are really stupid because NO one gives money and that works against the candidates they give money to!

"Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed
more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the
Center for Responsive Politics.

The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880.

By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863.
The average Republican contribution was $744.

Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters | The Daily Caller

Now If 1,160 (85%) of 1,353 employees of ABC,CBS & NBC gave $1.02 million (88%) to Democrats do you think these donors are stupid?
If you don't think they are stupid, then do you think they wanted the Democrats to win?
If they want them to win would they put news favorable or unfavorable to democrats i.e. Obama? Duh!!!
FACTS:
In 1964, 94% of media professionals voted for Democrat Lyndon Johnson over Republican Barry Goldwater.
In 1968, 86% voted for Democrat Hubert Humphrey over Republican Richard Nixon.
In 1972, 81% voted for Democrat George McGovern over the incumbent Nixon.
In 1976, 81% voted for Democrat Jimmy Carter over Republican Gerald Ford.
In 1980, twice as many cast their ballots for Carter rather than for Republican Ronald Reagan.
In 1984, 58% supported Democrat Walter Mondale, whom Reagan defeated in the biggest landslide in presidential election history.
In 1988, White House correspondents from various major newspapers, television networks, magazines, and news services supported Democrat Michael Dukakis over Republican George H.W. Bush by a ratio of 12-to-1.
In 1992, those same correspondents supported Democrat Bill Clinton over the incumbent Bush by a ratio of 9 to 2.
Among Washington bureau chiefs and congressional correspondents, the disparity was 89% vs. 7%, in Clinton’s favor.
In a 2004 poll of campaign journalists, those based outside of Washington, DC supported Democrat John Kerry over Republican George W. Bush by a ratio of 3-to-1. Those based inside the Beltway favored Kerry by a 12-to-1 ratio.
In a 2008 survey of 144 journalists nationwide, journalists were 8 times likelier to make campaign contributions to Democrats than to Republicans.
A 2008 Investors Business Daily study put the campaign donation ratio at 11.5-to-1, in favor of Democrats. In terms of total dollars given, the ratio was 15-to-1.
Research on Media Bias - Discover the Networks

So in light of the above common sense that those with the loudest bullhorns..i.e. MSM.. get the attention.
And if they have the attention they certainly don't want to piss away their contributions!
The easiest way to protect their donations is as follows:

Only 29 percent of the narrative on Governor Romney was positive while 71 percent was negative.
Study Finds Widespread Bias in Mainstream Media Coverage of Election | Women of Grace
This means 70% of the stories were negative which far out balances the 29% positive!
 

Forum List

Back
Top