Politics, fears, and videotape (UPDATED x 2)

Feeling extreme pressure from the public as well as the McCain campaign, the L.A. Times is still refusing to release the videotape it has of a Palestinian banquet/Israel Hate Fest held in 2003 and attended by Barack Obama. One can only imagine what is on this video that the L.A. Times is so willing to give up the last bit of journalistic integrity it has to keep it suppressed. Yesterday the newspaper offered up a feeble excuse for not releasing the video; they claimed that they had promised the confidential source that provided them with the tape that they would not release it publicly. Besides, they tried to reassure its readers, there is nothing on the tape they did not report on.

“More than six months ago the Los Angeles Times published a detailed account of the events shown on the videotape. The Times is not suppressing anything. Just the opposite — the L.A. Times brought the matter to light.”

Instead of putting the matter to rest, however, this statement causes the critical reader to question why, if a detailed account of the events shown on the tape was reported by their paper, what difference would it make then to release the videotape? Why would their confidential source have no issue with them publishing a detailed account of the events on the tape and yet object to having the historical video record of those events released? The only reason could be that either the L.A. Times did not give a detailed account of the events as they say they did, or, they fear something much greater than the sensibilities of their confidential source.
What could it be that has the L.A. Times so terrified and so frightened that it is willing to give up the last few shreds of credibility it may posses to keep this video suppressed?
Considering the pattern we have all seen during this presidential campaign, one explanation seems to rise above all others: the L.A. Times fears the Interview Nazis more than they fear public opinion.
Come to think of it, if I were them, I would be scared, too.


UPDATE #1: From HotAir: “The LA Times should either release the videotape, or write a complete transcript of the contents and publish it immediately, with at least one independent source verifying its accuracy. The event has obvious news and electoral value, and given Obama’s extremely thin record of public leadership, the electorate needs as much information about Obama’s public work as possible. The reticence of the Times to publish source material in its possession indicates some intent to obfuscate or deceive.”
Indeed.


UPDATE #2: Check this out.

8 thoughts on “Politics, fears, and videotape (UPDATED x 2)”

  1. Why would someone provide a “news” agency with compromising evidence about a person (or persons) and then ask for that “evidence” not to be made public? What would be the point? Why bother giving the L.A. Times the video at all?
    Sorry, L.A. Times. Better come up with a better excuse. I think the Obama campaign has your “BALLS” in a vice grip.

  2. But of course there’s absolutely no bias involved. Nope. Not a bit. The fact this video would have been released instantly if it made McCain look half as bad as it would make Obama look only SEEMS like bias. It’s just journalistic prudence and, uh, restraint, that’s all.
    Besides, this is indisputably standard practice for the MSM, so what’s the big deal?

  3. Seriously, the reasoning here is obvious. A picture, after all, is truly worth a thousand words. The full impact of this thing can only come through if people can SEE for themselves, not just hear or read about it. The LA Times knows this perfectly well, and they’re not about to hurt Obama’s chances and (the horror!) look bad to their colleagues. They can live with being despicable hypocrites, but they can’t bear to be out of step with MSM orthodoxy. Besides, what would all those trendy Hollywood celebs say?

  4. The LA Times will refuse the offer, if they know what’s good for them.
    But I wish they would accept it soon so America gets a chance to see it before they go to vote.

  5. I’m all for the tape released so it can be viewed in its entirety. I don’t want pulled excerpts so they can be used by “the sides”. I want to see the whole thing. Then I can decide what to think.

Comments are closed.