Amazing, isn't it, how the press think THEY ought to be immune from citizen journalists? The big money behind the networks and the newspapers...and to some degree even the local news operations...enables them to crank out liberal points of view...but when regular folks get the equipment and cajones to scrutinize THEM, then suddenly THEIR rights are being violated.
The funny thing is, I am betting the author of the web site is probably a liberal, too...but at least he is trying to hold someone accountable.
Not as good as James O'Keefe, though! :)
Tell him you’re undercover with 60 Minutes.
It is the same BS mentality that makes them think they can stay in areas told to evacuate (like hurricanes coming ashore or battle zones ) and run around like little girls while property owners are threatened with being arrested for trespassing/looting or what not for trying to guard their property.
The Mainstream Media wants to be able to be free to cut/edit as they please to be able to put their slant & spin on anything in anyway that best suits them. So they’d prefer not to have things such as video interviewed videotaped since that could be used to quickly expose them for what they are.
It’s the same reason that bad cops don’t like to be videotaped on duty - it limits the possibility of their commiting crimes or lying about their activities and findings.
1. What if you were? Short of disturbing the peace, is that a crime?
2. It is ironic to someone from a profession famous for interering the jobs of others (ambush journalism) to complain about the same from bystanders.
3. Back to item 1, what makes his job so much more important than anyone else's that he's so righteously indignant about it?
-PJ
I hope this starts a new trend, ala taping LEO’s on the job.
Hmmm, same thing those unionized policemen say.
It does interfere with their job, as it makes editing the interview into a hatchet job piece of agitprop much more difficult.
An unedited original can come in mighty handy!
It bears remembering that there is no such thing as THE PRESS in the sense that word is used today — some sort of elite group whose members are allowed preferential treatment under law. In the Constitutional sense, “the press” is a technological device for disseminating information.
One cannot be a “member” of the press. One can only have access to a press.
Any device which enables one to state and publicize one’s views is a “press,” whether it be moveable type, offset, TV, radio, or the Internet. We all have free access to “the press,” meaning we have the right to pay any provider who wishes to sell us access.
In this regard, no CBS anchor has anymore claim to special treatment for being part of “the press” than does any blogger.
Over 30 years ago, I had a job running a large hospital on weekends.
One day we had a severe snowstorm which was very unusual for that part of the country.
The emergency generator kicked on as the power went out, and the Head Nurse arranged four wheel drives to pick up and drop off the next shift.
All was going well.
Channel 13 called and asked for an interview. I obtained permission from the Chief Administrator and PR VP. Then I gave my interview.
Later, I tuned in the 6 O’Clock News to see myself.
All of the questions had been asked off-camera with only my answers on the video.
The bastards CHANGED THE AUDIO TRACK WITH DIFFERENT QUESTIONS!
Apparently, the good news that no one had been hurt by the storm was not exciting enough. By changing the questions, my answers appeared to paint a picture of incompetence by the hospital and near disaster.
My boss and the PR VP were FURIOUS.
“We will never trust the media again. We never provide an interview or talk to media without our OWN camera recording everything!”
Never trust the media. They are the enemy.