|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:40 am Post subject: ACORN Videos Editted |
 |
|
I don't remember this being mentioned here.
| Quote: |
[Update: Andrew Breitbart raises objections to this and other coverage in an interview here.] You may recall the ACORN video scandal, whereby agents of Andrew Breitbart's Big Government site went out dressed as a prostitute and a pimp to con ACORN employees of into giving them advice on how to launder their illicit earnings for tax purposes, and taped the proceedings. This led to massive coverage, as well as accusations of media blackout, government defunding, and cheerful predictions of ACORN's death.
As it happens, an independent prosecutor, former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger, has found that while the ACORN workers' counsel was "inappropriate and unprofessional," there was no evidence of criminal activity in it.
And TPM notices a interesting sidelight: it appears the videos that caused all the hubbub were fudged.
"The videos that have been released," says Harshbarger's report, "appear to have been edited, in some cases substantially, including the insertion of a substitute voiceover for significant portions of Mr. O'Keefe's and Ms. Giles's comments, which makes it difficult to determine the questions to which ACORN employees are responding."
Also: "The released videos offer no evidence of a pattern of illegal conduct by ACORN employees. In fact, out of the three videos involving ACORN employees, at least two involve extenuating circumstances... The ACORN employees captured on video were members or part-time staff. They were not organizers or supervisory level employees."
Schadenfreude commences. You can scroll through Big Government -- for the next several days, we imagine -- to read the many accusations of whitewash, as well as a brief admission that "ACORN did in fact engage in no criminal wrongdoing...." Oh well, we'll always have #acornfacts, both humorous and not so ("ACORN gave to us a walking embarrassment in the U.S Senate named Al Franken. Becuase of their illegal election activities we're all stuck").
For our part, we're pleased to know that we can have an honest discussion with our non-profit financial advisors without having to worry about the hand of the Law. |
So not only did this fellow get arrested for trying to bug the office of a United States Senator, but he actually editted the ACORN tapes as well. Hope the Republicans are happy with how this witch hunt turned out. One would imagine this story would be all over the place in the "liberal" media, but strangely, it doesn't seem to be. It's almost like the liberal media isn't actually all that liberal, but has just been falsely portrayed as such by the extreme right that has taken near total control of our national political dialogue, which is why reasonable suggestions like publically provided health care options become socialist death panels, and totally ridiculous wars of discretion become fine, well thought out ideas. It's why so many people genuinely believe that an organization like ACORN could even hypothetically steal elections. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kimbop
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 7:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nobody cares about the criminality of the case. Do you really expect the public to believe, even with your so-called legal "evidence" posted above, that Acorn is a legitimate, honorable entity manned by responsible employees? These new revelations will not be reported because Acorn is already considered to be laughworthy---the damage is done.
The public knows that facts and has already made up its mind. The videos speak for themselves, criminal actions or not. BTW: Editted ≠ edited. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 8:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kimbop wrote: |
Nobody cares about the criminality of the case. Do you really expect the public to believe, even with your so-called legal "evidence" posted above, that Acorn is a legitimate, honorable entity manned by responsible employees? These new revelations will not be reported because Acorn is already considered to be laughworthy---the damage is done.
The public knows that facts and has already made up its mind. The videos speak for themselves, criminal actions or not. BTW: Editted ≠ edited. |
Except that when that video was released, I doubt too many Republicans or right-wing media commentators were saying "Ah, no big deal, nobody cares about the criminality of this case". And you can bet that if criminal behaviour by those ACORN employees had been confirmed, the GOP and their allies would be treating it as a very serious issue indeed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't see the "fudging," frankly. And the Washington Post is pretty silent about it as well. In fact, it quotes the report to the contrary:
"We did not find a pattern of intentional, illegal conduct by ACORN staff involved; in fact, no action, illegal or otherwise, was ever taken by any ACORN employee on behalf of the videographers," Harshbarger said in a statement. "Instead, the videos represent the byproduct of ACORN's long-standing management weaknesses, including a lack of training, a lack of procedures and a lack of onsite supervision."
From: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/07/AR2009120703985.html
What this quote tells me: ACORN did not assist them in illegal activity, although it may or may not have encouraged illegal acts as a result of a lack of management.
ACORN stinks, it has a suspicious odor to it. Until it gives up its books for review it will always stink. No amount of bought-and-paid-for assessments will clear them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
No sympathy. Leftist groups have lived by the Alinsky code for decades:
| Quote: |
Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
...
Pick the Target, Freeze It, Personalize It and Polarize It. |
A new generation of right wingers is adopting the left's tactics. Suck it up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Street Magic
Joined: 23 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That kid bothered me from day one. Partially because I still don't understand how anyone could believe he was taken seriously as a pimp, but mostly because he reminds me of the "secret shoppers" from back in my super market cashier days.
| mises wrote: |
No sympathy. Leftist groups have lived by the Alinsky code for decades:
... |
I just looked up Alinsky and, knowing nothing else about him, I can safely say that I hate him for the fact that he compared his own writing to Machiavelli's alone. Most of us grow out of the whole "I'm going to be deceptive, greedy, and selfish because that's the best strategy!" phase some time a little before puberty kicks in. Is it really that much harder to get your way without ruining everyone else's business in the process? If the only way you can figure out how to achieve your goals involves thoroughly misrepresenting what your goals are, that's probably a decent indication that you should reevaluate why you have those goals in the first place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RufusW
Joined: 14 Jun 2008
Location: Busan
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Street Magic wrote: |
| I still don't understand how anyone could believe he was taken seriously as a pimp, |
He wasn't actually dressed as a pimp when he was videoing, that was a publicity stunt after the fact.
A public prosecutor tried to find criminal activity, they couldn't. Regardless, the video was used how it was meant to be used, to defund Acorn and stop them helping the poorest in society. Democrats probably don't care too much because they should have the majority in the future anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Except that when that video was released, I doubt too many Republicans or right-wing media commentators were saying "Ah, no big deal, nobody cares about the criminality of this case". |
Exactly so. The entire reason the video was treated the way it was is because it was used to "show" ACORN engaged in criminal behavior. The fact that not only did it show no criminal behavior, but that it was actually editted and voices were replaced in order to even be that damning shows exactly how weak the case against ACORN really is. Republicans -- and by extention, the Republican voting base -- hate ACORN because it enfranchises the poor and minority populations. That is the whole of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| .38 Special wrote: |
| I don't see the "fudging," frankly. |
You don't see replacing voices as fudging?
| Quote: |
| ... including the insertion of a substitute voiceover for significant portions of Mr. O'Keefe's and Ms. Giles's comments ... |
I guess you've made up your mind and you'll stick with it.
| .38 Special wrote: |
| ACORN stinks, it has a suspicious odor to it. |
So does the Republican Party. Hell, so does the Democrat Party. So does everything in politics. ACORN is singled out by Republicans not because of its "odor", but because it works to get poor and minority voters -- who generally vote Democrat -- involved in the political system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
No sympathy. Leftist groups have lived by the Alinsky code for decades:
| Quote: |
Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
...
Pick the Target, Freeze It, Personalize It and Polarize It. |
A new generation of right wingers is adopting the left's tactics. Suck it up. |
What do you mean by "a new generation" exactly? Nothing about those tactics has ever been unique to the left. This type of behavior has always been utilized by the more despicable politicians on either side of the aisle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RufusW wrote: |
| A public prosecutor tried to find criminal activity, they couldn't. Regardless, the video was used how it was meant to be used, to defund Acorn and stop them helping the poorest in society. |
Just so, and when exhoneration occurs, we hear nothing about it from the "liberal" media, and conservatives continue to say things like, "Well, it's still okay because something about ACORN just seem wrong," or, "Well, leftists have done things remotely similar to this in the past, so suck it up." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2010 6:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
No sympathy. Leftist groups have lived by the Alinsky code for decades:
| Quote: |
Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
...
Pick the Target, Freeze It, Personalize It and Polarize It. |
A new generation of right wingers is adopting the left's tactics. Suck it up. |
What do you mean by "a new generation" exactly? Nothing about those tactics has ever been unique to the left. This type of behavior has always been utilized by the more despicable politicians on either side of the aisle. |
When I say "new generation" I'm referring to Breibart and his minions (like the fake pimp/hooker) who are reading this leftist radical crap and applying it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2010 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| .38 Special wrote: |
| I don't see the "fudging," frankly. |
You don't see replacing voices as fudging?
| Quote: |
| ... including the insertion of a substitute voiceover for significant portions of Mr. O'Keefe's and Ms. Giles's comments ... |
I guess you've made up your mind and you'll stick with it.
| .38 Special wrote: |
| ACORN stinks, it has a suspicious odor to it. |
So does the Republican Party. Hell, so does the Democrat Party. So does everything in politics. ACORN is singled out by Republicans not because of its "odor", but because it works to get poor and minority voters -- who generally vote Democrat -- involved in the political system. |
Before you go off on another tirade about right-wing conspiracies, you might consider reading the actual report.
| Quote: |
We have described what we have been told were the specific circumstances of each visit
in narratives attached hereto as Appendix D, which stem from interviews of ACORN employees,
many of whom did not have direct knowledge of the events but who spoke with the individuals
captured on video, or with employees who had been approached by the videographers. We did
not interview the employees captured on video, since we were satisfied there was no question
that the visits occurred and the comments were made. In addition, we could not offer them � or
our notes � confidentiality or privileged communication status. Hence, all our knowledge about
the videos is largely circumstantial and secondhand. |
The blogger you cite is taking some seriously huge poetic license. The videos appear to be manipulated, yes. They were a compressed format (instead of dozens of hours of raw video footage unsuitable for propaganda).
The report does not negate that the video does not show precisely what is claimed: ACORN representatives advising someone on committing criminal activity. The report only states that there was "no question that the visits occurred and the comments were made."
| Quote: |
A comparison
of the publicly available transcripts2 to the released videos confirms that large portions of the
original video have been omitted from the released versions. |
There is no conspiracy here. The transcripts are available. The transcripts support that the dialogues have been edited. The transcripts do not, however, support that anything was "fudged." The report mentions no nefarious editing, only that the videos were in fact edited.
The scope and purpose of the report was to determine whether the practices believed to be in the video were actually happening in ACORN. This report is an internal audit, not an investigation, and its primary focus is on reviewing reform measures made after the videos and to recommend additional reform.
Of the 47 pages of the report, only 3 address the video directly. The remaining 44 pages discuss the mismanagement of ACORN that allowed those employees and volunteers to offer nefarious advise.
This isn't a conspiracy Fox, it's an explanation of what went wrong. It fully acknowledges what went wrong and explains to ACORN how it happened.
At no point does the report indicate that what was said on the video was not said, nor does it indicate that manipulation of the video delivered misleading information regarding the alleged advise about illegal activity.
In fact, the purpose of the report falls short of that. The auditor does not interview the employees who were caught on tape, intentionally. Refer to the above quote. He is clear that the scope of the report was not to refute the videos, although he does question the legality of secretly videotaping people in states where that is prohibited.
That's it. No conspiracy. The report finds that ACORN has serious management issues that allow inexperienced employees and volunteers to give the really bad advice found in the video.
(You can read the audit here: http://www.proskauer.com/files/uploads/report2.pdf) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2010 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| .38 Special wrote: |
| The blogger you cite is taking some seriously huge poetic license. The videos appear to be manipulated, yes. They were a compressed format (instead of dozens of hours of raw video footage unsuitable for propaganda). |
Are you saying the individual in question is lying about the substitute voice overs?
| .38 Special wrote: |
| The report does not negate that the video does not show precisely what is claimed: ACORN representatives advising someone on committing criminal activity. The report only states that there was "no question that the visits occurred and the comments were made." |
What I see low-level ACORN volunteers engaged in completely legal behavior in this film despite compression and -- unless you're saying it's a lie -- the inclusion of substitute voiceovers. In short: no where near the damning thing that the political right made it out to be when it came out, but rather, as you yourself say, propaganda. And the "liberal" media did nothing to resist said propaganda, which again comes back to my point that there really isn't a liberal media in this country, outside of a few opinion shows, some blogs, and a pair of comedy shows.
-Edit: to be clear, this particular text from the report is what I'm referring to:
| Quote: |
| The unedited videos have never been made public. The videos that have been released appear to have been edited, in some cases substantially, including the insertion of a substitute voiceover for significant portions of Mr. O�Keefe�s and Ms.Giles�s comments, which makes it difficult to determine the questions to which ACORN employees are responding. |
Obscuring commentary with voiceovers seems to me to go beyond simple compression. Here's another example:
| Quote: |
It is difficult to determine what this employee is responding to because the videographers statements are obscured by a voiceover inserted later. At one point during the meeting, the ACORN employee
attempted to call the police. At other points, he attempted to take pictures of the videographers with his cell phone. |
Here we have an ACORN employee not only having the commentary he's responding to obscured with voiceovers (you say we can see the text in the publically released transcript, but given the men who produced these films have been arrested on criminal charges, I see no reason to take their word at face value), but actually tried to call the police in response to these individuals. Things like that not being included in the tape is ridiculous.
As you've admitted, these tapes are pure propaganda. They don't include illegal activity. The conservative media response to them was pure hysterics, and so was the Republican response.
Last edited by Fox on Thu Mar 04, 2010 6:11 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2010 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| .38 Special wrote: |
| The blogger you cite is taking some seriously huge poetic license. The videos appear to be manipulated, yes. They were a compressed format (instead of dozens of hours of raw video footage unsuitable for propaganda). |
Are you saying the individual in question is lying about the substitute voice overs? |
I'm claiming nothing, unlike your blog-source. I am, however, reiterating what the report actually said.
| Quote: |
The videos that have been released
appear to have been edited, in some cases substantially, including the insertion of a substitute voiceover for significant portions of Mr. O�Keefe�s and Ms.Giles�s comments, which makes it
difficult to determine the questions to which ACORN employees are responding. |
The substitute voice-over is not of the ACORN employees but of the interviewers. Their statements, as far as this audit reports, did not receive substitute voice-overs. Therefore, the question asked is "difficult to determine," but the audit does not find that the question in the voice over is different from the question in the video. The audit has a right to raise that question because the original video is not available. It chooses not to because the auditor does not believe that there was a misrepresentation.
This is all in the report. Read the original material. The blogger is misrepresenting the report.
| Quote: |
| What I see low-level ACORN volunteers engaged in completely legal behavior in this film despite compression and -- unless you're saying it's a lie -- the inclusion of substitute voiceovers. In short: no where near the damning thing that the political right made it out to be when it came out, but rather, as you yourself say, propaganda. And the "liberal" media did nothing to resist said propaganda, which again comes back to my point that there really isn't a liberal media in this country, outside of a few opinion shows, some blogs, and a pair of comedy shows. |
No doubt ACORN got thrown under the bus. The videos were propaganda, not an official journalistic endeavor. If they were intended as such then they failed. It served a political purpose of de-funding ACORN.
Nevertheless, there is no evidence that the comments made in the video have been misrepresented. The audit finds that the comments did occur and they are damning. The purpose of the audit was to show how these comments were allowed to be made and to show what type of employees were likely to make these comments.
The videos still stand as true in the form that they are presented. How you should interpret the videos, however, is your prerogative. If you rely on the media to make-up your mind for you then, yes, you will have an unreasonable, knee-jerk reaction born of ignorance. That's how the media get's ratings: overreaction.
And the blog you cite is apparently no different as it creatively interprets the report to indicate that the videographers misrepresented the ACORN videos. The report does not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
