Journalism, CNN No Bias

Journalism, unbiased reporting of news, events, incidents and note worthy topics. I am not including opinion pieces, as opinion and editorial pieces do not necessarily fall under the ethics of true journalism.

Opinions, well everyone has an opinion, everyone has the right to voice their opinion and opinions are not regulated by what use to be the teachings of journalistic ethics and standards.

Ethics and standards of journalism

The basic teachings (and seem to be most forgotten of late) include fairness, integrity, truthfulness, accuracy, and objectivity.  Through in accountability and professionalism to round off how a journalist is suppose to act.

CNN

Apparently, some at CNN feels they have the right to put words in someone’s mouth, I.e., Donald Trump.  Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump stated there is a need for profiling, such as Israel profiles when there is suspicious behavior. At no time did Donald Trump say anything about race, religion or sexual orientation.

However, CNN reported not only in an article but also in headlines using the word “racial” in his comments. Trump did not at anytime use the word racial or any word hinting at race or anything particular type of profiling other than saying to do it like Israel.

So did CNN stick to the standard of journalistic ethics? Was CNN’s reporting truthful? Accurate? Fair? Objective? No to all of these questions.

Once again the media did not represent unbiased reporting.  Once again the media openly supporting Hillary Clinton for president, throws out the race card. Again, as with the “Make America Great Again”, media jumps on a band wagon promoting false statements in an attempt to make someone out as a racist or their statements promoting racism.

CNN showed poor journalistic skills, flat out lied. CNN needs to report the truth, not insinuate or make it appear a person’s comment needs to be taken a particular way when it is not what the person said.

CNN is intentionally making false statements, reporting them as truths in the attempt to rally people against Donald Trump.

Why can’t the  media just do their job the way they are suppose to? Just give us the truth, unbiased, accurate and objective. If it’s going to be an opinion piece, fine, but state it as an opinion piece, not as fact.

R martin

Katie Couric, In Trouble…. Again

Long time anti-gun advocate.

Katie Couric news (reporter?) is in trouble again, because of her “Under the Gun” documentary. Just as with her bias reporting, so was her editing and approval of the UG documentary. Miss Couric admits “it was misleading and misrepresented” Virginians Citizens Defense League (VCDL) who’s representatives were interviewed during the “documentary”.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/09/13/katie-couric-faces-12-million-defamation-suit-for-misleading-gun-documentary-edits.html

http://thefederalist.com/2016/06/03/katie-courics-anti-gun-producers-repeatedly-violated-federal-gun-laws/

Documentary issues.

In one instance, questioned directed to the VCDL were edited to include a delay before the questions were answered.  However in reality, the was no delay in answering.  The delay was meant as a way to make VCDL reps appear to be unsure or not clear of their position or to make it appear the reps maybe re-thinking their stance to possible agree with Miss Couric. As stated, the delay was edited into the documentary.  The same questions when posed to supporters of gun control/anti-gun were not edited to included a delay.

Katie Couric admits, in public, the circumstances were misleading and misrepresenting. Yet, the documentary was not re-edited to remove the added delay. Now Miss Katie Couric is being sued by the Virginians Citizens Defense League.

So why the was the delay edited into the piece? The director of the documentary, Stephanie Soechtig, stated it was to give views time to reflect, yet it was only done to the VCDL question/response. Originally, Miss Couric supported the statement given by the director of the film. Now, Miss Couric says “I regret that those eight seconds were misleading and that I did not raise my initial concerns more vigorously”.

More Editing.

The production team also edited the conversations with gun owners they interviewed, which is normal. But to take excerpts from the gun owners answers, not the full answers, to make the answers and gun owners look silly, unprofessional, “stupid”.

Conclusion – My Opinion

As she has done in the past, Katie Couric and her team have show less to be less than professional, honest and unbiased. Instead of documenting the facts, Team Couric has twisted the answers to fit their point of view, their opinion and to their benefit. And Katie Couric calls herself a reporter?

If the film is suppose to be a documentary based on fact, not an opinion piece based on Team Couric views and opinions, Katie Couric has done what she tends to do with her news reporting, not report just the facts, but includes personal opinion, twisted statements pointing to her views with all disregard for true journalism and ethical reporting.

R martin