HBO Documentary Gunfight: Anti-Gun Sandbag Job

[Hoopla Phil]

Well, I gave Oscar-winning documentarist Barbara Kopple the benefit of the doubt. After watching Gunfight on HBO, I can state without equivocation that it was a heavily tilted, barely disguised polemic presenting the argument for gun control. In fact, you could call it the Colin and Paul Show . . .

Nor was giving airtime to an academic’s (later) claim that the OFWG gun owners (representing the NRA) were angry about blacks and immigrants taking their country away from them, which gave birth to an insurrectionist Second Amendment movement, which unleashed Timothy McVeigh on the world. See? There’s the building. And McVeigh wanted to stop the ATF, with an office inside, from grabbing his gun.

Kopple’s use of news footage was, perhaps, her most blatantly biased technique. While we did get news clips of the Supreme Court gun rights rulings, Koppel sampled the media again and again to express the inexpressible (her bias against gun ownership). The threat of an armed militia MUST be real: Newsweek had it on the cover! Fox News, always good for a laugh, was notable by its absence.

http://thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/04/robert-farago/hbo-documentary-gunfight-sandbag-job/
______________________________________________________________________________________________

Is anyone really surprised about this?

[villager]

1. Surprised that some snarky, bitter self-absorbed guy didn't like the doc? Not really:

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f19/i-think-i-have-robert-farago-figured-out-42512/

[Hoopla Phil]

3. That would be about right for someone with a preconceived idea.

A person with an open mind however. . .

[PavePusher]

4. So based on someone elses' view of a person...

as seen through a flawed analysis of their personality based on third-hand assumptions of their beleifs in a subject totally unconnected to guns....

And you pan their review?

If you can explain the relevence, I still probably won't care. Good luck with that one....

[one-eyed fat man]

5. Cut and paste ambush journalism

Flip that coin and you have ACORN promoting child prostitutes. You expect that schlock from hacks. The techniques are the same. Does it matter if it's Breitbart airing the O'Keefe ACORN pimp tapes after some, um, creative editing or Ms. Kopple, showing images of white people talking and choosing which of their comments made the final cut?

Before you purse up and squeal, "...but... but... Thaaaat's DIFFERENT!"

Just how? Underhanded editing to promote an agenda is propaganda, not journalism. It makes no difference if it is crude or subtle, right wing, left wing, it is the manipulation and distortion of images and to fit an agenda.

Propaganda does not get to be journalism just because you like the agenda.

[rl6214]

2. I said in the thread yesterday that this was just going to be a hit piece

Doesn't surprise me one bit. As for the first response, that doesn't surprise me one bit either.

[jpak]

6. Sounds like Koppel turmed on the kitchen light - late at night - and some folks can't handle it

yup

:D

[Hoopla Phil]

7. Sounds like a heavily biased and tilted show disguised as news.

yep

[petronius]

10. Remind me never to eat anything that came out of jpak's kitchen...

[Logical]

8. That site is not unbiased anymore than the Brady site is! Except for...

Showing way too many radical gun owners, as a percent of the total, it was not too bad.

[Hoyt]

11. There are lots of "radical" gun owners. Manufacturers/marketeers pander to them and laugh to bank .

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

9. +1