A few weeks ago, the Center For Medical Progress started releasing undercover videos showing Planned Parenthood selling parts of aborted fetuses.
The Center for Medical Progress has released a series of videos, and each release follows a pattern. Two videos are released. One is a shorter, condensed video that is edited down to tell a coherrent narrative highlighting the big revelations that they've uncovered about Planned Parenthood. The second video is a usually very long and is just the full unedited footage so that you can contextualize the edited video for the sake of transparency. (Amazingly, the New York Times is still in denial regarding the fact the first two videos were released simultaneously.)
Even though this is an admirable amount of transparency, a Planned Parenthood talking point from the beginning has been that the videos have been unfairly edited. The media has, in turn, blindly parroted this talking point -- see today's write up on the Center for Medical Progress's latest video in the Washington Post. Note where I've added emphasis to these two paragraphs by reporter Carolyn Johnson:
The video, like previously ones released by the group, is highly edited. It shows Melissa Farrell, the director of research for Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast discussing providing fetal tissues to actors who were posing as representatives of a human biologics company. At the end of the video, the video shows graphic footage of the laboratory, including organs.
"The footage released today doesn’t show Planned Parenthood staff engaged in any wrongdoing or agreeing to violate any legal or medical standards. Instead, the latest tape shows an extremely offensive intrusion and lack of respect for women, with footage of medical tissue in a lab," Dawn Laguens, executive vice president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America said in a statement. "The latest tape has at least 20 substantial and unexplained edits. Previous tapes released by this extremist group were heavily edited in order to distort what the people on the tapes actually said. These videos are intended to shock and deceive the public."
Strange how Planned Parenthood and the Washington Post reporter are in sync here. But if there's concern that the videos are "highly edited" and that the edits are "unexplained," your role as a journalist should be to actually explain them! The Center for Medical Progress hasn't released the full footage of today's encounter yet, but I presume they will soon, or at least that's what they have done with the other videos. To date, there's been no damage to the credibility of the previous videos being released by the Center for Medical Progress by comparing the edited videos to the context of the unedited footage. And believe me, Planned Parenthood and their allies in the media have every incentive to expose any deceptive tactics. (Indeed, Planned Parenthood knows a thing or two about deceptive tactics.)
Further, this is a bizarre allegation to lob coming from journalists. Nearly every piece of broadcast news we watch is edited without an opportunity to see the raw footage. There's a default presumption of credibility, even though a great many news organizations haven't always earned it. Because the Center for Medical Progress is an activist group and not a news organization, it has taken admirable steps to be transparent beyond what news organizations do by releasing unedited footage. And yet Planned Parenthood and the media still insist on casting doubt on the videos merely for being edited, without attempting -- let alone demonstrating! -- that these edits are deceptive.
By contrast, Planned Parenthood's talking points are frequently given the benefit of the doubt by major media, even though news outlets are right to be wary of Planned Parenthood's spin. Alas, Johnson's entire report in the Post could be taught in journalism school as an example of selective sourcing and generally biased reporting. While Planned Parenthood is quoted at length, there's not a single expert quoted as saying what's revealed in today's video -- which features footage of fetal limbs being picked up and examined out of a pile of human parts -- is either disturbing, unethical, or possibly illegal. Surely there's plenty of credible voices willing to say so.
Given that both sides of the issue aren't presented, one might even ominously suggest Johnson's story was "highly edited" -- and not in a way that benefits the reader's pursuit of the truth.
One of the more frustrating things about the three years I lived in a “mixed” neighborhood in Northeast Washington, D.C., was the bus I was forced to rely on to get to work. The infamous X2, which promenades down H Street, not far from the U.S.
The Washington Post appears to be struggling a bit to cover today's blockbuster story about the undercover video of Planned Parenthood harvesting and selling organs from aborted fetuses. First, they changed the headline to something that's far more friendly to Planned Parenthood without noting the change.
If you’re searching for an explanation for Donald Trump’s relatively modest surge in the crowded Republican presidential field, look no further than this story from the Washington Post’s Philip Rucker:
A veteran Obama Mideast adviser is claiming President Obama's position on a Palestinian state is no different from that of President George W. Bush--and he has effectively rewritten a key Bush letter on Israel in order to prove his point.
“There’s not much Indian left in Bobby Jindal,” goes the story in the Washington Post, casting the worst of all possible lights on the steps that the two-term governor of Louisiana and current candidate for president has taken away from his immigrant past.
Fortunately for us, the middle-aged journalists-cum-anthropologists at the Washington Post are here to explain the psychological intricacies of those Americans who are roughly between the ages of 18 and 34. Indeed, it seems that just about every day, the Post publishes a new piece “explaining” those beguiling millennials to their grateful readers.
Summer means it's wedding season, and in Washington that means plenty of potential for conflicts of interest. Consider the wedding of one Hillary Clinton aide, attended by several members of the national political press covering Clinton and her rivals for the White House.
When it comes to beer, the craft connoisseurs say Americans just don’t get it. Right-thinking drinkers all know that bitter is better. But despite the explosion in the market for craft beers, which are often high-alcohol, hoppy ales, Americans still like their Bud Light. According to the Washington Post, there’s an explanation for our intransigence on IPAs: politics.
On MSNBC today, Washington Post reporter Janell Ross hinted that Jeb Bush was covering up a major family scandal -- but she offered no proof or explanation for her comments. Even the MSNBC host made an effort to distance herself and her network from the Post reporter's comments.
The Washington Post has never paid much attention to nearby Baltimore. Which is no great shock, of course: Downtown Baltimore is 40 miles from the Post newsroom, which tends to ignore the immediate Virginia and Maryland suburbs of Washington as well. The Scrapbook has always found this regrettable, and a little puzzling, too, since we would guess that the vast majority of Post subscribers live in those same Virginia and Maryland suburbs.
Over the weekend, Lally Weymouth, a senior associate editor at The Washington Post, interviewed Naftali Bennett, Israel's new education minister and a notable tech entrepreneur. Bennett wants to annex the part if the West Bank known as Area C and, in the words of the Post, "offer full Israeli citizenship to those Palestinians who live in Area C.
‘Skip the Bag, Save the River.” No, it’s not a line from The Godfather (that would be “Leave the gun, take the cannoli”). Rather, it was the District of Columbia’s motto for a 2009 initiative to clean up the Anacostia River by charging five cents for every plastic bag used by consumers in D.C. shops and supermarkets (anywhere food is sold). The idea was twofold—reduce the number of bags that end up in the Anacostia and generate revenue to clean up the river from folks who persist in using plastic instead of reusable totes.