It is (or it should be) surprising that a former Jerusalem bureau chief for the @nytimes missed the documentary's flagrantly manipulated quote, which prompted a PBS review. jta.org/2021/03/30/uni…
https://twitter.com/PatrickKingsley/status/1365891106983059460
I'm actually just catching up on the details of this, and am pretty stunned by the degree to which the quote in Zinshtein's documentary was spliced and glued together. It's brazen. The word "including" is taken from the top to splice together two faraway passages. 
Further details from @dextervanzile here: camera.org/article/docume…
What's troubling, aside from the flagrant deception by the filmmakers, is that the response by journalists and others is so politically driven.
If another documentary about another group falsified the words of another president, a swath of Twitter would rightly be up in arms.
If another documentary about another group falsified the words of another president, a swath of Twitter would rightly be up in arms.
In this case? Silence from that same swath. The journalists who gave sympathetic coverage to the piece refrain from comment. They avoid updating their readers on the scandalous behavior, instead allowing them to watch the doc. the plugged and believe the misquote.
And they seem to think their silence—this sudden absolution of responsibility—is somehow necessary.
Of course it's not. One can thoroughly despise Trump and still recognize that a filmmaker/"journalist" who breaches the trust so egregiously deserves to be called out.
Alas.
Of course it's not. One can thoroughly despise Trump and still recognize that a filmmaker/"journalist" who breaches the trust so egregiously deserves to be called out.
Alas.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
