James O'Keefe lies again, costs jobs

Post Reply New Topic

Last week, Media Matters documented problems with James O'Keefe's video of NPR fundraising executives and pointed out that the "sting" does nothing to undermine NPR's actual news reporting, which even conservatives acknowledge is fair.

Now, we have uncovered new evidence raising questions about whether quotes O'Keefe attributed to an NPR employee are accurate.

First, some context. Glenn Beck's Blaze website and Dave Weigel are pointing to a glaring problem with the story -- key portions of the video are ripped out of context.

O'Keefe's video (and much of the subsequent news reporting) portrayed former NPR employee Ron Schiller as blasting the Tea Parties as xenophobic. Here's how O'Keefe presents Schiller's statement:

And here's how The Daily Caller reported it when they broke the story: "The Republican Party, Schiller says, has been 'hijacked by this group.' The man posing as Malik finishes the sentence by adding, 'the radical, racist, Islamaphobic, Tea Party people.' Schiller agrees and intensifies the criticism, saying that the Tea Party people aren't 'just Islamaphobic, but really xenophobic, I mean basically they are, they believe in sort of white, middle-America gun-toting. I mean, it's scary. They're seriously racist, racist people.' "

In reality, the unedited video shows Schiller was attributing that sentiment to two Republicans who he spoke with (the portion O'Keefe omitted is bolded):


That's pretty damning. You can watch The Blaze's juxtaposition of the two versions of the video here:

http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2 ... 2F20874109

O'Keefe's colleague has defended this dishonest editing by suggesting that Schiller was "clearly agreeing with" the Republicans he cited. The Blaze similarly argues that "[a]t the end, [Schiller] signals his agreement."

The argument that Schiller agreed that the Tea Parties are racist seems to be based on O'Keefe's transcription of what Schiller said next. Here's the text O'Keefe included in the edited video:

But much of that audio is extremely hard to understand, and it's not at all clear that O'Keefe's transcription is accurate.

Take this portion, for example: "believe in sort of white, middle-America, gun-toting." The way O'Keefe (and much of the media) transcribed it, it sounds like Schiller may be agreeing that Tea Partiers are pro-gun, middle-American, white supremacists.

But listen to the audio again. Can you really hear Schiller use the phrase "in sort of"? I can't. It sounds like Schiller is might actually be saying, "They believe THAT THEY'RE white, middle-America, gun-toting." Alternately, he might be saying, "They believe IT'S sort of white, middle-America, gun-toting." If either of those is correct, it seems highly possible that the "they" Schiller is referring to is the two Republicans Schiller spoke with. In that case, Schiller would simply be saying that these two Republicans view the Tea Partiers as "white, middle-America, gun-toting."

What about Schiller's statement that "They're seriously racist, racist people"? Isn't he calling the Tea Partiers "racist" there?

First of all, it's still not clear that Schiller was saying that in his own voice, rather than attributing it to his Republican sources.

And again, listen to the actual audio without looking at the text O'Keefe added. Schiller's words are barely audible, and it's not at all clear that Schiller even said, "They're seriously racist, racist people." It's possible that he said that -- but it's nowhere near definitive enough for a journalist to assert that as fact.

What did Schiller really say there? I don't know. And unless journalists who took O'Keefe's word for it are 100 percent sure he is correct, it's time for them to start issuing corrections.


http://mediamatters.org/blog/201103140018

@ skafather84

O'Keefe isn't the person lieing in this story, you sources are the ones lieing.

Which is why they have the full, unedited video?


Figures a teabagger wouldn't listen to reason and facts.

I've listened to the video before, and really at this point I actually wouldn't put it past media matters to do some "creative editting."

Ironically enough, one of Ska's sources here is Glenn Beck. Is Beck lying when he says O'Keefe is using dishonest editing?

I would have to watch what Glenn Beck said in context before I take mediamatters at their word on this subject. They've taken Glenn Beck out of context so many times it is ridiculous to believe them on anything they say that Beck says.

Beck's website posted a critique of the released video, denouncing it for being dishonest and misleading.

If he had actually bothered to read the article, he would have seen that.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/does-ra ... g-tactics/

Looks more like a critique of the editting than actually saying O'Keefe was lieing. Was O'Keefe the one that released the raw video?

Why do you resign if you feel you've been misrepresented? That's what I don't get.

NPR and PBS should be defunded regardless. They don't need it, we don't have the money, and our government should have no hand in the media. I think they probably would be much happier as a completely independent entity. Seems like a no brainer.

Maybe it is cause there wasn't a misrepresentation. Glenn Beck's site (and it wasn't Beck that wrote the piece btw) is going off what they have been able to get ahold of. Further, Glenn Beck's site is trying to be objective and fair, I disagree with their conclusions, but I appreciate them being honest.



Why is that one woman that wished some guy's grandchild got AIDS still there?

Because they want to avoid any sort of political controversy, and it's safer just to get rid of the guy who's being attacked than to try and defend him.

From what I understand, the individual in question was already on his way out before any of this happened anyways, and the only difference was that he made his resignation effective immediately instead of in a few months.

Then why is that one woman I mentioned still there, I'm not talking about the one that fired Juan Williams.



I wouldn't believe that unless I saw a date-stamped letter that is dated well before this video came out.

UPDATE:
http://patterico.com/2011/03/14/on-the- ... by-okeefe/

Looks like the Blaze might not have had the full tape.

So the thread title should be amended to read "...lies, fast tracks already impending resignation" then?

Well from what I've read, O'Keefe actually could be telling the truth when you break down body language and what all is said.