On Wednesday, July 24, 2013 7:37:07 AM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message news:mbGdnR4zJ-

"Robert Green" wrote:



Edited for time. Done every day by NBC, Fox and dozens of others. He

didn't say "he's wearing a hoodie, he's 6' tall." He said what he said.

Let's see how far Zimmerman's lawsuit against NBC goes for accurately

reporting what he said. I'd guess nowhere but stranger things have

happened. Take OJ's acquittal, for instance.



Yeah, it would take so much more time to include the part about the cops

asking the question.



WTF would adding that question change??



See, this is an example of where, unable to take any more
of this nonsense, I apply a term like imbecile. You're trying
to tell us that you see no difference in these two exchanges:

What NBC edited:

Zimmerman: “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about. He looks black”

What really took place:


Zimmerman: “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.

Dispatcher: “OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?”

Zimmerman: “He looks black.”





Things are edited for so much more than time.



As I recall, you were involved with print media, a different animal than

what we are discussing now. I spent a summer interning at WABC news HQ in

DC so I have some real experience in national TV news production. Line

producers are willing to throw down over an extra 10 secs on a 60 second

story on the evening news because they're competing with other stories and

other producers for a very small slice of the evening broadcast. More than

a three minute story is very, very rare and I doubt unless you've tried to

edit down hours of footage into two minutes you realize what has to be

eliminated as "not moving the story forward." Nightly news editors don't

just count every second, they count every single frame looking to fit as

much information is as possible.

And on with the drivel. Even NBC acknowledges that what was
done was clearly wrong. They fired the producer and apologized.







What NBC did was trivial compared to how Breibart edited the *crucial* part

of Sherrod's speech to make her look absolutely racist. We'll see who

prevails in Zimmerman's lawsuit. I seriously doubt GZ will because he said

what he said, not that TM was 5'11", or wearing a hoodie or any other

descriptor. Had he uttered and they edited out other descriptive words he

used to home in on "black" you might have a point, but they didn't. GZ

chose he words, no one else did.

Home in on black? What the hell are you even talking about?
He answered a direct question from the dispatcher.
You really are an imbecile. Happy now?





NBC didn't say "he's a racist" and to

*normal* people, they didn't imply it.

LOL. You're unbelievable.




These charges only seem to resonate

with people who have an axe to grind for whatever reason.



BS. They resonate with anyone with a sense of fairness
and decency that don't want to see a lib media destroy someone
with lies.





I certainly don't believe that NBC substantially changed anything factual,

Of course you wouldn't, because you're a leftist loon.






as Bill O'Reilly has on a number of well-documented occasions,

Yawn... We're talking about NBC, not Fox. But since you want
to go there, I'd be happy to see these alleged cases where
O'Reilly changed facts.





nor do I

think a jury will find NBC did (if the case even survives a motion to

dismiss) because it's what Zimmerman said. The question "What did he look

like?" is almost implied in the answer he gave so it's really redundant to

anyone except real nit pickers who don't understand the pressures involved.



A true imbecile. Editing out that one short sentence, put the
whole quote into an entirely different context.




Given how much other ground they had to cover in the telecast, it's

completely in line with standard editing practices.

Good grief. NBC FIRED THE PRODUCER.





It didn't make him look

racist when he wasn't, it accurately portrayed what Zimmerman thought was

the most important factor about his quarry. That he was black.

And now you're adding your own lies to the mix. Either that or
you're beyond imbecile. The dispatcher asked Z if the suspect
looked white, Hispanic or black. It was what was important to
the DISPATCHER, not Z. How the hell would you libs answer that
question? What's the politically correct answer, "Sir, I refuse
to answer that question because I will be accused of being a racist?"

Rest of irrelevant nonsense deleted.