NBC admits doctoring Zimmerman 911 call

[_bcspace]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/nbc-to-do-internal-investigation-on-zimmerman-segment/2012/03/31/gIQAc4HhnS_blog.html?hpid=z6

NBC told this blog today that it would investigate its handling of a piece on the “Today” show that ham-handedly abridged the conversation between George Zimmerman and a dispatcher in the moments before the death of Trayvon Martin. A statement from NBC:

“We have launched an internal investigation into the editorial process surrounding this particular story.”

Great news right there. As exposed by Fox News and media watchdog site NewsBusters, the “Today” segment took this approach to a key part of the dispatcher call:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.

Here’s how the actual conversation went down:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.

Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?

Zimmerman: He looks black.

The difference between what “Today” put on its air and the actual tape? Complete: In the “Today” version, Zimmerman volunteered that this person “looks black,” a sequence of events that would more readily paint Zimmerman as a racial profiler. In reality’s version, Zimmerman simply answered a question about the race of the person whom he was reporting to the police. Nothing prejudicial at all in responding to such an inquiry.

[_moksha]

Can you imagine Fox News having a story about doctoring the news? Hope this does not lead to some cosmic unraveling or one of the time portals exploding.

However, doctoring any tape does not sound good. Please keep us posted as to further developments

[_ldsfaqs]

I've watched all the media outlets on this event and others, and it fascinates me how much everyone other than FOX entirely lies and misrepresents the facts.

It's fascinated me how they have focused on the Video, saying "see see, no blood" but completely ignoring the fact that the Police Report from the beginning said he had the wounds, was treated by paramedics, etc. etc.

[_Morley]

NBC admits doctoring Zimmerman 911 call

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/nbc-to-do-internal-investigation-on-zimmerman-segment/2012/03/31/gIQAc4HhnS_blog.html?hpid=z6

NBC told this blog today that it would investigate its handling of a piece on the “Today” show that ham-handedly abridged the conversation between George Zimmerman and a dispatcher in the moments before the death of Trayvon Martin. A statement from NBC:

“We have launched an internal investigation into the editorial process surrounding this particular story.”

Great news right there. As exposed by Fox News and media watchdog site NewsBusters, the “Today” segment took this approach to a key part of the dispatcher call:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.

Here’s how the actual conversation went down:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.

Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?

Zimmerman: He looks black.

The difference between what “Today” put on its air and the actual tape? Complete: In the “Today” version, Zimmerman volunteered that this person “looks black,” a sequence of events that would more readily paint Zimmerman as a racial profiler. In reality’s version, Zimmerman simply answered a question about the race of the person whom he was reporting to the police. Nothing prejudicial at all in responding to such an inquiry.

You're as disingenuous as you're claiming NBC is. NBC telling a blogger "that it would investigate its handling of a piece on the 'Today' show" is hardly the same as NBC admitting to "doctoring [the] Zimmerman 911 call."

[_richardMdBorn]

The apology was issued today.

NBC has completed its investigation into the mishandling of the police dispatcher’s conversation with George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin case. And the process ends with a finding of error, plus an apology. Here is the statement just issued by the network:

During our investigation it became evident that there was an error made in the production process that we deeply regret. We will be taking the necessary steps to prevent this from happening in the future and apologize to our viewers.
That apology addresses the “Today” show’s failure to abridge accurately the conversation between Zimmerman and the dispatcher in this high-profile case. This is how the program portrayed a segment of that conversation:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.
And here is how it actually went down:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.

No matter how you feel about Zimmerman, that bit of tape editing was unfair to the truth and to Zimmerman’s reputation, such as it is. Reaction on Twitter and elsewhere to my previous post on this matter, was brutal toward NBC, with many comments suggesting the worst about the network’s motivations, reliability and so on.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/nbc-issues-apology-on-zimmerman-tape-screw-up/2012/04/03/gIQA8m5jtS_blog.html

[_Kevin Graham]

For FOX News to complain about bias or doctoring evidence is pretty damn heelarious:

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201203300001

Fox Hypes RNC's Doctored Audio Of Supreme Court Arguments
March 30, 2012 12:14 am ET by Todd Gregory

Bloomberg News is reporting that a Republican National Committee Web ad uses "altered audio from U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments to attack President Barack Obama's health-care law." The Bloomberg article details the problems with the ad:

In a spot circulated yesterday [March 28], the Republican National Committee excerpts the opening seconds of the March 27 presentation of Obama's top Supreme Court lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, in which he is heard struggling for words and twice stopping to drink water.

"Obamacare," the ad concludes, in words shown against a photograph of the high court. "It's a tough sell."

A review of a transcript and recordings of those moments shows that Verrilli took a sip of water just once, paused for a much briefer period, and completed his thought, rather than stuttering and trailing off as heard in the doctored version.

On his March 28 Fox News show, Sean Hannity aired an audio clip of Justice Antonin Scalia speaking during the arguments, and another of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Hannity then aired the RNC ad:

This left the impression that the RNC ad simply uses a clip of Verrilli to show that he had fared poorly during the arguments. In reality, as Bloomberg noted, Verrilli's speech was doctored to exaggerate the effect.

The time of publication on Bloomberg's article is 5:05 p.m. Eastern on March 29.

Hannity's show airs at 9 p.m. Eastern, and graphics throughout his March 29 show indicated it was airing live. But Hannity didn't apologize for airing the misleading ad. He didn't even mention it.

Even worse, during the show that follows Hannity, On the Record, host Greta Van Susteren aired the RNC ad and discussed it with The Washington Examiner's Byron York -- without ever mentioning that it was doctored.

As Supreme Court expert Tom Goldstein noted on SCOTUSblog, distortions such as these likely hurt efforts to make the court more transparent:

[T]he Justices now have before them a perfect illustration of the gross distortion that can instantly be made of recordings of their proceedings. What is to stop the same misleading stunt being pulled with the Justices' own oral argument questions and comments? Nothing at all. The Court made a special exception in releasing the oral argument tape for the health care arguments so promptly, and it probably will hesitate before doing so again. If there were any chance that the Justices would permit cameras in the Court, I do not see happening now.

There are tons of examples of FOX News flat out lying or doctoring. My personal favorite was the doctored photograph of the Beck rally in Washington, making it look like there were 2 million people in attendance when in reality they were using a doctored photo that was taken during an Obama rally! Hannity was forced to admit it and apologize on the air, but only after he was busted.

This is standard fare for FOX News, which isn't news at all. It is a well crafted and well funded propaganda machine.

[_Morley]

The apology was issued today. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/eri ... _blog.html

As they should have. Thanks for the update.

[_Morley]

There are tons of examples of FOX News flat out lying or doctoring. My personal favorite was the doctored photograph of the Beck rally in Washington, making it look like there were 2 million people in attendance when in reality they were using a doctored photo that was taken during an Obama rally! Hannity was forced to admit it and apologize on the air, but only after he was busted.

My own Fox favorite was 'footage' of an out-of-control Madison, Wisconsin, labor rally--complete with palm trees.

[_EAllusion]

For the more libertarian-inclined, my favorite is when Fox deceptively edited in boos to the announcement that Ron Paul won the 2011 CPAC straw and then confronted Paul about the reaction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwo0Iyrh1Zk

[_EAllusion]

My own Fox favorite was 'footage' of an out-of-control Madison, Wisconsin, labor rally--complete with palm trees.

That was occurring at a time when the conservative propaganda machine was attempting to portray the rallies as packed with thugs on the cusp of turning violent at any moment. In reality, the were remarkably friendly, peaceful affairs given the scope of them. It was the sort of thing local families took their kids to instead of a park or the zoo, not Chicago '68. And that's with the Walker administration taking incremental steps to spark the protestors. (You might recall that he was caught on tape admitting to contemplating having plants in the groups spark riots, but decided against it lest it backfire.) The leaders of the rallies made it a point to encourage politeness and nonviolence as an act of passive-aggression. And the crowds were made up of people just not interested in that sort of thing.