DC Trawler

Media Not Sure If Katie Couric’s Deceptive Editing Is Really Deceptive Editing

Font Size:

Back in the old days (2008 and thereabouts), when the media wanted a story to go away, they just straight-up buried it. They simply didn’t report on it. They assumed that, being the gatekeepers they’d always been and always would be, they could keep the news from hopping the fence and getting out to the public. They did it with John Edwards’ illegitimate baby, Van Jones’ commie pinko past, ACORN committing voter fraud, etc. They just kept the news off their pages and broadcasts, hoping it would go away.

If you recognize the name Rielle Hunter, then you know how well that worked.

These days, the media is a bit more crafty about stories that make Democrats look bad. If a story pops up that they want to contain, they don’t embargo it. They just try to minimize it.

Here’s a prime example from Katie Rogers at the NYT:

A conservative news site posted what it said was audio proof that filmmakers behind a documentary about the gun control debate deliberately edited video to portray gun-rights activists as unable to answer questions about background checks.

The audio, posted by The Washington Free Beacon on Wednesday, seemed to differ from the video shown in the documentary, “Under the Gun,” in which a group of activists appear to fall silent during an interview with the news anchor Katie Couric.

Note how very carefully the truth is couched here. A conservative site broke the story. (You can dismiss it, because those teabaggers are just whining again.) The Free Beacon said the audio was proof. (Well, those people say a lot of things, don’t they?) The audio seemed to differ from the documentary. (Sure, the audio definitely does differ, but it also seems to differ. Stop nitpicking.)

All delicately tiptoeing around the plain hard fact that this:

Is not this:

And it didn’t happen by accident.

But that’s one of those inconvenient truths, to borrow a phrase. So the NYT softens it up as much as possible, gives a fellow traveller every possible benefit of the doubt, and shifts the onus to the people presenting the evidence. “It’s just these silly right-wingers. Sure, they say they have proof, but Katie Couric denies it. So don’t worry about it. Oh, and don’t claim we’re burying this dumb non-story, because see? We reported on it!”

If the NYT is a bit more surefooted these days about dealing with their ideological opponents, Katie Couric sure isn’t. It occurred to me, after writing about this yesterday, how utterly flat-footed her reaction is. She really had no idea one of her targets could do this to her. Back when she was still relevant, 15-20 years ago, people didn’t have smartphones that fit in a shirt pocket and could record hours of audio. So she could just do whatever she wanted with any footage she shot, she could make her targets look as bad as she wanted, and there was nothing anybody could do about it. Makes you wonder how many times she’s done this before.

I don’t know if this is the first time, but I’m pretty sure it’s the last. Who’s going to surrender their smartphone as a precondition of sitting down with Katie Couric? Who’s going to submit to a pat-down? “You wearin’ a wire? You wearin’ a wire?” Like something out of The Sopranos.

Speaking of the Italian-American community, Chris Cuomo is still bumbling around like… well, like Chris Cuomo:

Yeah, it’s not like this is a news story or anything, newsman. You threw a fit about the “deceptive editing” in those Planned Parenthood videos, which was not in fact deceptive editing. But now one of your pals gets caught red-handed doing it for real, and suddenly it’s omerta? Vaffanculo, Chris.

Here’s some good news, though. Kudos to Couric for making this mea culpa (courtesy ReasonTV):

It’s a start!

P.S. The great Mollie Hemingway has a lot more. Can you guess Couric’s reaction to the Planned Parenthood videos?