Basically, it looks like Bill O'Reilly took an interview in which Joe Biden had this to say about the Guantanamo detention camp:
quote:Back in January I introduced a bill saying we should have an independent commission go take a look at this, not only Guantanamo but Abu Ghraib, the rest of the prison system, make a recommendation to the United States Congress and let's deal with this openly, because this has become the greatest propaganda tool that exists for recruiting of terrorists around the world. And it is unnecessary to be that, in that position. We should have an independent US commission take a look at it, make recommendations to the Congress. That bill I introduced is going to get a hearing in the judiciary committee in the next couple of weeks.
...
(Off Camera) So we should shut it down?
SENATOR JOE BIDEN: I think that should, I want a commission to make a recommendation so everybody is saying that it's not just me or others just, you know, espousing a point of view but there's a rationale for it but the end result is I think we should end up shutting it down, moving those prisoners, those that we have reason to keep, keep and those we don't, let go.
In the hands of O'Reilly's editors, Biden's words became this:
quote:BIDEN: ...has become the greatest propaganda tool that exists for recruiting of terrorists around the world. And it is unnecessary to be in that position,
[CUT]
but the end result is I think we should end up shutting it down, moving those prisoners. Those that we have reason to keep, keep. And those we don't, let go.
Then O'Reilly "disagreed" with Biden by advancing the following position:
quote:O’REILLY: The Bush administration should set up an independent commission to investigate American detainee policy across the board. The president must take the offensive on this, or else the country's image will continue to suffer and the jihadists and their enablers will win another victory. And that's "The Memo."
If that isn't dishonest, I don't know what is. "No spin zone" my arse.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry, I wasn't clear... O'Reilly didn't interview Biden himself, he edited clips of a press conference or some such.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
That is far more underhanded, but then I don't expect any better from someone as inflammatory as O'Reilly.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think it's more underhanded. It's just more blatant. He must have known someone would call him on this.
Anyway, perhaps some of the people who consider O'Reilly to be an honest source of "straight talk" will learn of this and wise up.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
I don't watch 24-hour networks much anymore. If I want to see news, I'll watch Headline News (all news, no shows like O'Reilly or Crossfire), and in the evenings I'll watch BBC World on the local public station.
Don't get me wrong-- I still watch those types of shows, but I take everything I hear with a grain of salt and make sure I know the "unspun" version (and, as a note, I hope the O'Reilly clip turns up somewhere so I can see it).
That said, I think this is really bad journalism, but hey, what can you do?
posted
The only things from Franken that I posted were direct quotes from Biden and a transcript of the O'Reilly Factor. Seems unlikely Franken could've forged either of those.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's no such thing as a conservative or liberal news show. If a show can be characterized by appeal to a political viewpoint, it's not news, it's propaganda.
In any case, there are plenty of news shows and propaganda shows that get along perfectly well without selectively editing to take quotes out of context, then stealing ideas from the person they're reporting on. So no, I don't think all shows do this.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, I think most news do not deliberately edit people speaking so as to steal their ideas. Would you care to cite one instance of it on a news show not traditionally considered conservative?
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: Biden clearly wants it closed. While I wasn't able to find the video of the interview that Stephanopoulos did with Biden on ABC's web site, I did find an article regarding the interview. Here is the link to it. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=821293 You will find that they have entitled the article: "Biden: U.S. Needs to Close Cuba Prison Joseph Biden Says U.S. Needs to Move Toward Shutting Down Military Prison Camp at Guantanamo Bay" Did you expect him to show the entire interview on his talking points? Everything else Bill said was his point of view. You have a point of view and share it, and he has one as well. So I'm curious, why did you not write an article entitled, "ABC news misleads the public with their headlines"? You do have Bill O'Reilly on taking his quote except for the fact this wasn't the first night he "opined" the independent commission idea. Perhaps Biden really stole it from Bill?
posted
These certainly look unethical, but none of them goes as far as O'Reilly did. In none of the cases you cite did the "reporter" remove lines from a source's quote and then represent the ideas he removed as his own. That seems a bit worse, doesn't it? Not only did O'Reilly mis-quote, he basically plagiarized Biden.
I know from experience that university ethics hearings punish plagiarism far more harshly than mis-quoting.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
While that was quite bad, it was naught more than inadequate fact checking -- perhaps due to bias, but hardly the willful plagiarism that O'Reilly engaged in.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like that, they certainly look unethical but are not as bad as what O'Reilly did. How about the CBS memo fraud? Was that as bad? Not as bad?
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So if Bill had said the commission idea before this would it all be ok? I hardly see Bill leaving out some statements as bad as faking and making things up. Two totally different critters.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, and by the way, Bill is a commentary guy. Supposed to have an opinion. These others were news, where they’re supposed to be reporting things. There is a difference there too
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Look, this linking one-upmanship is retarded.
A) Dan Rather didn't plagiarize his source either, probably because Rather doesn't express opinions on his show.
B) Even if he had, the fact that there are five or ten instances of similar bad behavior over the last few years of TV reporting surely doesn't make it OK or forgiveable that Bill O'Reilly did it.
C) My point was never that all TV "journalists" except O'Reilly are honest, the point is that O'Reilly is demonstrably dishonest. Maybe that makes him a rogue among a throng of them, whatever, he's still not being ethical.
Only in the world of partisan politics can two or more wrongs appear to make a right.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bill O'Reilly is not a journalist, nor is Al Franken. They both are very explicit about their views, so either one of them engaging in unethical behavior is far more acceptable than Dan Rather posing as a reputable newsman providing unbiased journalism.
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I’m still confused on why not putting something in is so wrong. He didn’t lie about anything (unlike some news places). How is him not showing Biden’s commission making it seem that they disagree? Maybe Bill wants a commission to keep it open.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: I’m still confused on why not putting something in is so wrong.
Because he reversed the meaning of the man's quote, and used that as an opportunity to steal his position.
If you don't understand how removing words from a quote could be unethical, imagine this exchange:
quote: Reporter: President Bush, are you a child molester? Bush: How dare you?! I am not a child molester, have never been a child molester, and am appalled by your question. I should hit you, but you're just not worth a moment of my time. The nerve.
Reporter (later, on TV): Let's play it back. Clip: I am ... a child molester. Your question ... hit ... a ... nerve.
posted
But that is not what happened here at all. Bill used the quotes about closing down the prison in context to support the thought of a commission to help in the efforts of repairing the negative image these calls are making. He didn’t switch anything. He didn’t change any meaning. He wanted to talk about the commission in another way, in his own words. So…. Again. What he did is not like your example at all Tom. Let’s try and stick to same game.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Taking quotes out of context, or making them out of context is unethical? Posing as journalist and rushing to print stories specifically because they are going to be seen as damaging is far worse than this is
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Bill used the quotes about closing down the prison in context to support the thought of a commission to help in the efforts of repairing the negative image these calls are making.
So why not go ahead and include the senator's call for the same commission? If he and the senator are on the same side, why disguise the fact?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
He didn’t disguise anything! He just said the commission stuff differently. I think you all are really grasping at straws here.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"So why not go ahead and include the senator's call for the same commission? If he and the senator are on the same side, why disguise the fact? " They are not on the same side because Biden is already calling for the base to be closed and he is not waiting for an independant commission to find out anything... "But the end result is, I think we should end up shutting it down, moving those prisoners," he told ABC's "This Week."
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: They are not on the same side because Biden is already calling for the base to be closed and he is not waiting for an independant commission to find out anything... "But the end result is, I think we should end up shutting it down, moving those prisoners," he told ABC's "This Week."
So the complaint, then, is that Biden has already formed an opinion on the issue, whereas O'Reilly has not?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hummmm….. No. We don’t have a complaint. You all are grasping at straws trying to find a complaint that doesn’t exist. Good luck with that though.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
By "complaint," I mean "reason for deceptively editing Biden's statement to remove the part O'Reilly agreed with."
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've seen O'Reilly a few times...though I'm not a big fan. But in this case, I don't see the big deal. The "talking points" I have seen Bill do, are always just snipits of quotes that Bill then talks about. In this case, he took the main point out of Bidden's quote (that Bidden wanted the camp shut down) and talked about how he didn't agree with it. Bidden's quote made it clear that what he wanted was not simply an independent investigation not because he thought the findings could go either way...but he just wanted an investigation to agree with him, so he had more rationale for the closing.
quote:so everybody is saying that it's not just me or others just, you know, espousing a point of view but there's a rationale for it but the end result is I think we should end up shutting it down
Bidden did NOT say he wanted a comission to investigate whether or not it should be shut down...or to look at policies. He specifically said that he wanted a commission to support his views, but in the end it should be shut down. That is not an 'independent commission' to investigate policy, which is what Bill wants.
ABC news also pointed out that while Bidden did call for a committee review, he believes the end result should be that the camps are closed down.
posted
He didn’t deceptively edit Biden’s statement! How can you say that? You saying that is deceptively editing what was said.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Biden, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, proposed that an independent commission take a look at Guantanamo and make recommendations.
Note: independent, and make recommendations. Sure sounds like he's asking for a committee to look at it impartially.
Biden thinks he knows what those recommendations will be, yes, and that he thinks he knows what the appropriate course of action will be. But that does not mean he doesn't really want an independent commission, especially as he has explicitly called for one
But you know what? I bet O'Reilly thinks he knows what the recommendations will be, too.
As for why this is worse than what was done with the Bush guard documents, it is worse because the Bush guard document incident was not malicious. It was negligent. This is malicious, where by malicious I mean intentionally discrediting in manner known to be contrary to fact (the notion that Biden would disagree with there being an independent commission).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"So the complaint, then, is that Biden has already formed an opinion on the issue, whereas O'Reilly has not?"
Now that you mention it, Yes. Biden has formed an opinion on the issue from an alleged FBI agent's report (has anyone else seen it?) and has made some pretty over the top statements. He has not been down there, he has no first hand information, just a report that no one else is commenting on. I would expect a responible politician to do an investigation first before making comparisions of what is alleged to have happened, and a deathcamp.
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would rather think that Biden may have been paying attention to the situation for a while, it having been in the news for quite some time on various issues, and furthermore to have access to numerous contacts who would know assorted details.
edit: where's your evidence that that's the only thing Biden is forming his opinion based on, given that plenty of us have been able to find lots of other news on which to form our opinions?
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Biden specifically mentions an alleged FBI agent's report. This is probably just like the FBI report about the US flushing a Koran down the toilet which was never proven. Most likely an FBI agent wrote a report just telling what a detainee has claimed happened to him. Nothing is proved, the agent just wrote down what the detainee had said. Al-Queda knows that any outrageous accusation against the US will immediately be thought of as true and whisked around the world by people like Biden
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Biden specifically mentions an alleged FBI agent's report. This is probably just like the FBI report about the US flushing a Koran down the toilet which was never proven.
So you admit that you're speculating?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Using a report to help form an opinion and using it as the sole basis for an opinion are two extremely different things.
Second, pardon me, but did you even look at the extreme leap of illogic you just made with regard to the report Biden talks about?
Especially as there have been several reports from the FBI, and that one doesn't at all evoke the scenarios Biden mentioned, whereas others do (such as the one from 2003 that talks about a prisoner being smeared with fake menstrual blood).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
He was not using the report to help form an opinion, his opinion was already formed and he is using unconfirmed parts of a report to justify a partisan attack on the President. You should read those reports for yourself to see what they actually contain. Are they an account of what happened, or are they an account of what detainees claimed to have happened? There is a huge difference. How did I make an extreme leap of illogic?
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You've asserted you know which report Biden was using, when there are plenty of reports he could have used, and which the evidence points to being more likely to use (simply due to being, well, worse). That's incredibly bad logic.
IIRC, the female soldier who did the fake menstrual thing was put up on charges. And I do read what parts of the reports I can get access to.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: He was not using the report to help form an opinion, his opinion was already formed and he is using unconfirmed parts of a report to justify a partisan attack on the President.
Says you. Seriously, prove it.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, she was only verbally reprimanded, according to the military. See this story: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6876549/ (it references the verbal reprimand by the military).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Your extreme leap of logic was that you didn’t immediately assume that the evil Bush administration and the right wing had some sort of plan to take over the world! I mean come on. It all makes sense when you put on your alphabet goggles (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN) and throw everything that makes sense out the window. Just assume the worst, and if you can’t get to the worst make it up (New York Times). Blame the other guy and remember that conservative bashing is cool (Michael Moore).
While in reality the leap of logic that it takes to say that Bill O'Reilly is some how the evil one on this is amazing.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
