How to slant a news article

By now everyone has heard that James O’Keefe, one of the dynamic duo who revealed ACORN as the criminal enterprise it is, was arrested in Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu’s office in New Orleans for allegedly trying to bug her phones, a pretty major bust.

He said he was trying to check out Landrieu’s claim that her phones were not receiving all the calls from constituents mad about her having whored for the “Louisiana purchase” that bought her support for Obama’s plans to socialize medicine.

There, that’s one way you slant a news report. Pretty blatantly.

Now look at a more subtle way MSNBC does it.

O’Keefe was the brains behind a series of undercover videos that have caused major problems for ACORN – the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now.

He managed to do what Republicans have been trying to for years – hurt the political affiliates of ACORN, which have registered hundreds of thousands of voters in urban and other poor areas of the country.

By producing undercover videos shot in ACORN offices, O’Keefe brought a firestorm of criticism that the group was helping its low-income clients break the law.

Using a hidden camera, O’Keefe, posing as a pimp and accompanied by a young woman posing as a prostitute, shot videos in ACORN offices where staffers appeared to offer illegal tax advice and to support the misuse of public funds and illegal trafficking in children.

Edited videos of those visits to ACORN offices were first posted on biggovernment.com, a site run by conservative Andrew Breitbart. In the past, Breitbart has said O’Keefe – now a paid contributor to biggovernment.com – is an independent filmmaker, not an employee

First bold: anybody doubt who they think are the good guys?

Second bold: ditto. They’re not just “clients,” they’re “low-income clients.” Not “poor and oppressed,” that would be a bit over the top don’t you think?

Third bold: “appeared to” Heavy sigh. This might be the journalistic equivalent of the “allegedly” we use to avoid being sued for saying somebody did something he/she is accused of doing. On the other hand, there was nothing “appeared to” about it. They did offer advice on how to break laws, and no amount of editing could explain away what was on those videos.

Fourth bold: “Edited videos…” See above. A rather neat way of saying the videos are doctored, without actually having to committ to the claim.

What’s the difference between the example I offered and the MSNBC version?

I made it plain which side I’m on. MSNBC is trying to maintain the appearance of impartiality (badly in my opinion) while telling you what you should think.

Another example from CBS NEWS Political Hotsheet.

James O’Keefe was riding high last year when he released a series of videos showing employees of community-organizing group ACORN offering advice to O’Keefe and a friend that seemed to endorse trafficking in children, among other illegal activities.

The undercover videos made O’Keefe a star in conservative circles and presumably helped him muster the courage for another high profile stunt – though this time, it seems, things went badly for the 25-year-old.

O’Keefe and three others – including the son of an acting U.S. Attorney, are accused of trying to manipulate the phones in Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu’s office in New Orleans. According to an release from the United States Attorney’s Office, witnesses say O’Keefe was in Landrieu’s office when two co-conspirators came in “dressed in blue denim pants, a blue work shirt, a light green fluorescent vest, a tool belt and a construction-style hard hat” and pretended to be there to repair the phones. (Here’s the affidavit.)

Better in some ways. They link to the affidavit for example. In the Internet age, when someone makes an allegation and doesn’t supply links to supporting documents – or the links lead to other news reports (i.e. secondary sources) one has to wonder if they are lazy, or want to edit the facts to suit themselves.

Noentheless, notice the “seemed to” and the right up front sneers.

And also, notice the other trick – and I’ve seen this done on the Right and the Left, it’s just too irresistable. James O’Keefe is not Adonis, but he’s not ugly either. Look at the picture. You take enough closeup snaps of anybody’s face and you’re going to find some extremely unflattering ones. Particularly among people who have habits of pursing their lips, squinting, etc.

True, some are better subjects than others. Photographers and videographers always seem to catch Hillary Clinton and Cherie Blair with that wide-open-eyed speed freak stare.

IMHO, not as bad as the MSNBC article. But again, does anyone doubt where the reporter leans?

But, I did learn something that kind of tickled me.

O’Keefe, a former Rutgers University student, has a history of stunts that predates his ACORN hidden-camera work: According to the Star-Ledger, he “mounted a satirical campaign to ban Lucky Charms cereal from campus dining halls on the premise the breakfast fare was offensive to Irish-Americans” as a student.

Which reminds me, I must tell you sometime about my campaign against the offensive stereotypical “Fighting Irish” mascot of Notre Dame…

This entry was posted in Media bias. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *