They Report, We Decide

In case you missed this from The American Thinker, here is yet another example of PBS filtering the news, in this case removing a gaffe in the President's "American Jobs Act" speech to Congress.  The highlighted sentence was removed in the transcription published by PBS, something even the New York Times found fit to print:

"We all remember Abraham Lincoln as the leader who saved our Union.  Founder of the Republican Party.  But in the middle of a civil war, he was also a leader who looked to the future -- a Republican President who mobilized government to build the Transcontinental Railroad -- (applause) -- launch the National Academy of Sciences, set up the first land grant colleges.  (Applause.)  And leaders of both parties have followed the example he set."

As The American Thinker and PBS noticed, Abraham Lincoln did not found the Republican party.  Such a gaffe would have brought guffaws upon George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, or any of the GOP Presidential candidates.  But not President Obama.  It is better thinks PBS that we not dwell on an obvious staff mistake while considering the wise course the boss who hired them laid out before us.

End PBS funding now!  Liberals can afford their own media filters.

Comments

[Hiram]

I think if you will take a look at it, PBS changed nothing here. They published the text of the president's remarks as received from the White House. It was the president who made a slight departure from the previously submitted printed text, something that happens by the way, all the time.

We live in a world where a Congressman is comfortable in describing John Quincy Adams as a founder of the Republic despite the fact that he was living in France and nine years old at the time. You don't hear Lincoln described as a founder of the Republican Party very much, I suppose but who would be? John C. Fremont? I generally don't think of American political parties as being formed at a specific moment in time. They are in fact the result of a coalescence over time. As I recall, in Lincoln's part of the world, the Republican Party was created out of the shell of the former Whig party, and I have no detailed knowledge of Abe's activities during that time. I claim no But I am not willing to engage in quibbling over that point and am willing to accept the president made a mistake.

Bad, bad president.

[Hiram]

When the president gives a major speech, his press office gives copies of his printed remarks to the media ahead of time, allowing them to discuss what he has to say in general terms, and to be better prepared to comment on it in preparation for their various deadlines. The media does not employ stenographers to take down the president's words as he speaks them. Obviously, those pre-printed copies of the president's speech may not reflect last minute changes in the text or any remarks the president chooses to interpolate as he gives the speech.

[Hiram]

Something also to understand about the media is that they are really, really dumb. A lot dumber than the president. Remember when Sarah Palin made her little gaffe concerning the midnight ride of Paul Revere? Well, it's true, she did wander into the historical thickets a bit there, but remember how the media covered it? They examined her version of events not in terms of the actual contemporary historical record, but instead relied on Longfellow's 1860 poem as if it was or was intended to be an actual historical account.

[The Big Stink]

If it comes from the mainstream press, it's probably wrong, certainly suspect and if it is correct, it's probably an accident.

[Hiram]

In this case, the text came from the White House.

[Speed Gibson]

So what is the press then, mere stenographers that print official "what he meant to say" not reporters that print what he actually said?

[Hiram]

"So what is the press then, mere stenographers that print official "what he meant to say" not reporters that print what he actually said?"

If they had acted as stenographers, their "transcript" would have included the Lincoln founder reference. The press always has a conflict between speed and accuracy to contend with. What happens is that they are given a version of text prior to the speech. This is intended to give the press the chance to discuss the content of the speech in general terms prior to delivery, and to publish the text immediately once the speech is given. The downside of this is that the version of the speech given to the press might not include last minute changes, or interpolations. As a rule, in fact, presidents like to insert surprising things in their speeches. Guests usually fall within that category. After the speech, it seems, a stenographic version does appear, and that's what the Times had the next day.

There is no evidence at all from anything said here that either the Times or PBS took it upon themselves to change the text of the speech to what they as editors and reporters might have thought the president "meant to say". The accusation that PBS altered the text of his speech is utterly without foundation. That's a serious charge which "The American Thinker" can't back up.

[The Big Stink]

Mainstream media: Filters for the actual events of the day.

[Hiram]

In my day, I have both written and edited political documents. If Obama's speech with the Lincoln founder reference had been submitted to me as an editor for review, I would have flagged it, and suggested it be revised. But I have to say, if it had been submitted to me for publication by someone else, someone I didn't work for, it would not have occurred to me to change or even query the reference. It just wasn't far enough away from the truth. Politicians say vastly more dishonest things every day. I mean for gosh sakes, Rick Perry is saying that Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme, an outright lie, and Fox News presumably doesn't edit that out of his speeches.

[The Big Stink]

News flash: SS is a Ponzi scheme.