Paragon of virtue NyTimes editor exposed undercover-video

No one on the left complained about context or editing when they released the Billy Bush tape. It was open season on Drumph, and people still reference it in some form of pathetic defense whenever a Democrat rapist gets exposed.

These Veritas videos are more credible than that recording and actually show video footage of the interview. You can see their facial expressions, body language, and see for yourself whether they are being serious or joking. It's a lot easier to analyze their behavior than off audio alone.

Yet all they wanna do is deflect to editing. Like I said before, they are being beaten at their own game right now and are crying about editing because they suck.


Spends whole time deflecting.... claims other side deflects.

I put as much stock in a Veritas video as I do a Michael Moore video... because I'm an adult with reasoning skills who doesn't rely on "good ole common sense" aka "whatever narrative I agree with allows me to jump premise steps to a conclusion I find appealing".
 
Spends whole time deflecting.... claims other side deflects.

I put as much stock in a Veritas video as I do a Michael Moore video... because I'm an adult with reasoning skills who doesn't rely on "good ole common sense" aka "whatever narrative I agree with allows me to jump premise steps to a conclusion I find appealing".

You sound like a wise man. Can you point out specifically what is wrong with the video?
 
Voter fraud ring a bell?


Nice last sentence, "is nice"



1lot.jpg

That's not even a proper Borat quote.

Why are you so bad at everything?!
 
WOW devastating argument

You are the mind of the academy
its ok i really feel for you alt righters.you came out of the sewers and rinsed off the slime when trump won but didn't realize the rest of us have functioning brains and can see you for what you are .
 
You sound like a wise man. Can you point out specifically what is wrong with the video?

Conflation of a minor player to denote a widespread conspiracy. "In his role at The Times, he was responsible for posting already published video on other platforms and was never involved in the creation or editing of Times videos."

As I stated: Just as a Michael Moore video, I look at this as only a gotcha piece that is not worthwhile beyond the fact that it shows yet again that shitty people consistently exist on both sides of this pathetic political structure.

Nothing is gained from this outside of bunkering right-wing and avoidance by the left. Just like the opposite but equal reaction when the aforementioned Moore does the same.
 
Conflation of a minor player to denote a widespread conspiracy. "In his role at The Times, he was responsible for posting already published video on other platforms and was never involved in the creation or editing of Times videos."

As I stated: Just as a Michael Moore video, I look at this as only a gotcha piece that is not worthwhile beyond the fact that it shows yet again that shitty people consistently exist on both sides of this pathetic political structure.

Nothing is gained from this outside of bunkering right-wing and avoidance by the left. Just like the opposite but equal reaction when the aforementioned Moore does the same.

If you watch the videos, Dudich explains how he uses his video placement role to bury certain stories and gives examples.

Even without writing or editing, he is still showing favortism and bias towards people he ia politically connected to.

 
its ok i really feel for you alt righters.you came out of the sewers and rinsed off the slime when trump won but didn't realize the rest of us have functioning brains and can see you for what you are .

Save your homo riddles for someone who cares

You don't have a functioning brain and likely live off of me
 
Save your homo riddles for someone who cares

You don't have a functioning brain and likely live off of me
Seeems like well rehearsed trolling to me.I feel bad for your parents who you obviously still sponge off of. I bet you tell your friends you take care of them lol.
 
Seeems like well rehearsed trolling to me.I feel bad for your parents who you obviously still sponge off of. I bet you tell your friends you take care of them lol.

You are a low IQ person who accuses anyone with remotely conservative political views of being a Nazi without even knowing what race they are. Low intelligence is the source of all of the world's evils. Put some effort into your existence. We have to live on the same planet as slobs like you and deal with all of the collateral damage.
 
No one on the left complained about context or editing when they released the Billy Bush tape. It was open season on Drumph, and people still reference it in some form of pathetic defense whenever a Democrat rapist gets exposed.

These Veritas videos are more credible than that recording and actually show video footage of the interview. You can see their facial expressions, body language, and see for yourself whether they are being serious or joking. It's a lot easier to analyze their behavior than off audio alone.

Yet all they wanna do is deflect to editing. Like I said before, they are being beaten at their own game right now and are crying about editing because they suck.

Good point like the double standards


A small video clip showing a faction of what take place between a cop and suspect where the suspect dies " look there is solid evidence the cop is guilty"

A unnamed source in a MSNBC/CNN report something about Trump said or did "journalist never lie they have vetting processes so we know that's the truth"

Yea those are passable and people believe it but these videos " it's edited how could we possibly know this is the truth"
 
Can someone actually argue against the words that are coming out of his mouth? How does video editing change them?

I mean, there was another video of a CNN employee calling voters "stupid as shit". Those were his words, and there really isn't any different context, or editing trickery that would change them.

So, while PV practices are certainly questionable, a lot of the content in their videos are straight from the horse's mouth legit, and I don't see how pointing out that PV has been caught fucking around, magically changes the expressed opinions of a lot of their subjects.

That's not to say editing can't be used to set up a false narrative, but it should not be used to excuse people legitimately caught putting their foot in their mouth. Can somebody give me a scenario in this specific case, where his words could've been taken out of context, or edited to make it seem worse than it was?
 
You are a low IQ person who accuses anyone with remotely conservative political views of being a Nazi without even knowing what race they are. Low intelligence is the source of all of the world's evils. Put some effort into your existence. We have to live on the same planet as slobs like you and deal with all of the collateral damage.
you sound autistic
 
I will keep you poor forever no matter what

I live to keep the dumb poor

You can't feel pain so I hit you in the wallet
not even sure what stupid babble you are on about moron.I make more than you most likely i own a home,2 cars,and still have 3 incomes coming in but keep on babbling
(pats head)
pretty sure im paying for your therapist,psychiatrist ,prescriptions and in home healthworker. But im ok with helping the mentally retarded get help so its all good chiefy..nice pissbelt btw
 



James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas has released the latest video in his “American Pravda” series — this time, featuring a New York Times online editor trashing President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence.


In the video, which seems to have been filmed in a pub, the Times‘ London-based homepage editor, Desiree Shoe, is seen describing Trump as an “oblivious idiot.” She does not care for Trump’s potential replacement, either, describing Pence as “f**king horrible … possibly worse than Trump” because, she says, he is “extremely religious.”

Shoe, who is seen describing her job as curating the Times‘ front pages, also describes the approach of American journalists towards covering Trump during the 2016 election: “I think that one of the things that maybe journalists were thinking about is, like, “Oh, if we write about him, about how, like, insanely crazy he is and how ludicrous his policies are, then maybe people will read about it and be, like, ‘Oh, wow, like, we shouldn’t vote for him.'” In her description, the Times‘ front page is used to set the media narrative against Trump.

She also is shown describing President Trump as “apologetic toward white supremacists” due to his response to the violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, earlier this year, and says that Trump makes it difficult for journalists to be objective and unbiased.

In addition, Shoe is shown talking about the Times attracting liberal readers due to its coverage of Trump, and suggests that the Times feeds the demands of its audience through the tone of its coverage.

In his narration of the video, O’Keefe cites the Times‘ ethics handbook, which states: “Journalists have no place on the playing fields of politics. Staff members are entitled to vote, but they must do nothing that might raise questions about their professional neutrality or that of the Times.”
 
Back
Top