NBC issues apology on Zimmerman tape screw-up

page: 1
6

log in

join

posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Washington Post





During our investigation it became evident that there was an error made in the production process that we deeply regret. We will be taking the necessary steps to prevent this from happening in the future and apologize to our viewers.

That apology addresses the “Today” show’s failure to abridge accurately the conversation between Zimmerman and the dispatcher in this high-profile case. This is how the program portrayed a segment of that conversation:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.
And here is how it actually went down:

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.


So now there is an apology. But it is blatantly obvious the network is attempting to stir the racial issue, and all they do is issue an apology... I don't know what I'd expect them to do other than that, however, I wish there was some way of holding them more responsible, because it is obvious that they knew what they were doing.

What do you guys think?

EDIT: I am aware that there is a plethora of threads about this situation, but I am focusing on the fact that they now acknowlede the "mistake" and are issuing an apology.

edit on 4/5/2012 by IanPaul because: note.




posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by IanPaul
 


Blatant, indeed. This was obviously done on purpose, the sound recording edited in order to stir up the racial debate again, as they know that attracts viewers and gets people all riled up.

This whole Zimmerman affair is obviously a distraction blown up in order to shift focus from something else...



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
NBC is as bad as the rest in that they stopped merely reporting the news and made deliberate decisions to help MAKE it where it's to their benefit. I think this was just such a case. Oh, nothing as obvious as a written policy of course...I imagine it's more a tolerance for somethings and not of others in those news rooms that make the lines very clear to everyone in short order.

How can they make a GOOD apology when they are only sorry they got called on it...and the other media actually made something of it? For that I am sure they ARE sorry...but that isn't what they were "apologizing" for. Boo on NBC.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by IanPaul
 


Not good enough. They need to show that they fired whoever is responsible, no matter how high up the ladder. Nobody is going to believe it was a simple error.

They were not investigating, they were hoping it would go away. They knew all the facts within moments of it happening.

NBC and NBC News Products (MSNBC) is the only News source I pretend does not exist. I watch all the others. Nobody was fooled when their boss the head of GE was calling all the shots at NBC and at the same time advising Obama. He sold it off as a cover up, but only those who want to be fooled were fooled.

Clear Channel claimed heads would roll and they would clean up NBC News and MSNBC. Yeah sure


Sad too. I miss the old days when the big three all had extremely honest News Divisions and could be trusted. Not any more.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by IanPaul
 


Most people won't even know it was a "mistake" and never know about the apology. This should be bigger news than it is. NBC is sorry.......sorry they got busted.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


I agree, somebody needs to be held responsible, and made an example of. If I distorted the facts at my job and someone was incorrectly held responsible for whatever happened, I would for sure lose my job. It sickens me that they probably would have gotten away scot free if no-one called them on it, and when someone does, they give a "whoops our bad", and that's that.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


I have a similar feeling... Just what is the destraction for? Trust me I don't want any bloodshed, especially innocent, but the whole media bandwagon has jumped on this... When they do that, I try to look around and see what they are truly wanting us to NOT see or be outraged over.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   
It's never actually yelling fire that's the crime. It's inciting the panic and being held responsible for any damages.

So when a national news outlet shouts "fire" then proceeds to reinforce that claim night after night week after week who is held responsible for the damages?



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Exactly.. I know other threads have been written about "activists" protesting, and being violent either to other people or looting. So since the network technically incited the rage, they should be held somewhat responsible financially. I believe if the facts were presented straightforward, yeah some could make a racist claim, but the way they wrote it was to piss people off.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Why isn't there more outrage over this? Imagine Fox had done it? ATS would already have a special forum for the outrage over it. Where are the protests over the Democrat mass media purposely editing audio in order to produce racial tension and violence? They even went as far as to call an obviously Latino guy in to a white person. The whole ting just blown my mind.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by PvtHudson
 


Yeah that caught me off guard too... I mean there is one thing to call a white guy white, but when he is obviously hispanic, or even mixed, they definitely go all on board with the white side.

I've seen some people write that if he had any white in him that makes him white 100%, but when I go to fill out government paperwork it says "caucasian" or "hispanic"... I guess they get to pick which side fits their agenda best.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by IanPaul
 


"an error" my ass. You don't make that kind of "error" without it being done on purpose for a specific reason.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
YEah, if Fox had done this the liberals would be all over it calling for resignation. Hypocrites, much?



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by IanPaul
 


All they did was have a write-up in a newspaper?
Two days ago?

This had to be in other papers too.

I'm waiting for a nationwide apology broadcast "live" on Dateline NBC at 6:30 pm.
When every comatose zombie in the nation is watching.

To me, it's no longer freedom of press when you incite riots.
That's exactly what this kind of press will stir up.
Riots.

A citizen can get arrested for yelling racial comments or starting a riot...
...but a news corporation that edited tapes to "appear like racial comments" can't.

I agree with Blaine91555 on this one:


Not good enough. They need to show that they fired whoever is responsible, no matter how high up the ladder. Nobody is going to believe it was a simple error.

They need to do more than that.
This is a clear cut manipulation of evidence.
To suit an agenda.









new topics
 
6

log in

join