(thread follows) I am not a journalism professor or legal scholar, but I must take issue with the arguments raised in this @MediaEthicsGuy column denouncing calls from @clairecmc to investigate hidden-camera "sting" outfits like @Project_Veritas 1/ dailycaller.com/2018/10/30/mcc…
It seems @MediaEthicsGuy is very concerned that folks who'd ordinarily raise the First-Amendment-in-danger alarm if a politician wanted a probe into a media outlet's practices or if a judge blocked the release of a news organization's hidden-camera video aren't similarly up...2/
...in arms when the organizations in question are conservative ones like @Project_Veritas or @CtrMedProgress (the anti-abortion group that had its video blocked). He asserts there is no difference between what those groups do and what many TV stations do regularly, and that... 3/
...the reason most first amendment advocates are silent in those cases is that the organizations are avowedly conservative. I can't speak to why a person or entity chooses not to speak up, but he's wrong about Veritas and CMP being no different from other media organizations...4/
...and he's wrong about the threat to journalism and the First Amendment.
The difference between hidden-camera work by other media outlets and what folks like @project_veritas & @jamesokeefeiii do is *not* that O'Keefe & his compatriots are partisans. The difference IS...5/
The difference between hidden-camera work by other media outlets and what folks like @project_veritas & @jamesokeefeiii do is *not* that O'Keefe & his compatriots are partisans. The difference IS...5/
...that legitimate investigative journalists don't go into an undercover situation without having a concrete allegation to investigate and knowing what they are looking to find. They observe and report.
By contrast, O'Keefe and his acolytes begin with an a priori assumption...6/
By contrast, O'Keefe and his acolytes begin with an a priori assumption...6/
...like Democratic candidates/organizations are corrupt, The Washington Post runs made-up stories, social media companies are engaged in a coordinated conspiracy to censor conservatives, or any number of similar theories. Instead of observing and reporting, whatever wrong...7/
...doing they happen to passively observe, they embed themselves in their targets and do what it takes to provoke a statement that can be used to embarrass the target, no matter the context. There's a big difference between going into a business and recording the proprietor...8/
...overcharging customers or committing fraud and spending days, weeks or months egging people on to make provocative statements, often while under influence of alcohol. Have you ever noticed that many Project Veritas videos are recorded in bars? Perhaps Mr. O'Keefe should...9/
...rename his organization Project In Vino Veritas.
The problem with the suggestion that a look at an organization like Veritas is akin to cracking down on all hidden camera journalism is that it assumes that O'Keefe and company are operating in good faith, but they're not. 10/
The problem with the suggestion that a look at an organization like Veritas is akin to cracking down on all hidden camera journalism is that it assumes that O'Keefe and company are operating in good faith, but they're not. 10/
There is a real danger to the FIrst Amendment, however. That danger comes from allowing bad-faith-actors to cloak themselves in the mantle of journalism and blur the difference between those who are trying to follow in the footsteps of pioneers like Nellie Bly by exposing 11/
real, honest-to-god wrongdoing and serving the public interest, and those who would appropriate and pervert the tactics of investigative reporters to hurt their chosen political party's enemies. 12/12.
