Twitchy.com has been all over this non-issue that ballooned into an issue (more here and here) yesterday, and the Washington Post’s Erik Wemple provides a comprehensive write-up:
MSNBC is reviewing its portrayal of the testimony of Neil Heslin, the father of a Sandy Hook victim, at a legislative hearing in Hartford on Monday. The 33-second video clip in question, embedded above, features a graphics box saying “Mocked and Loaded. Sandy Hook Victim’s Father Heckled by Gun Rights Advocates.”
Smart move, considering that Heslin wasn’t, in fact, heckled. Audience members merely answered a challenge that Heslin posed from the microphone. Here’s a transcript of how things unfolded:
Heslin: “I don’t know how many people have young children or children. But just try putting yourself in the place that I’m in or these other parents that are here. Having a child that you lost. It’s not a good feeling; not a good feeling to look at your child laying in a casket or looking at your child with a bullet wound to the forehead. I ask if there’s anybody in this room that can give me one reason or challenge this question: Why anybody in this room needs to have an, one of these assault-style weapons or military weapons or high-capacity clips…..Not one person can answer that question.”
Crowd/Alleged Hecklers: “Second Amendment shall not be infringed”
Public official: “Please no comments while Mr. Heslin is speaking. Or we’ll clear the room. Mr. Heslin, please continue.”
That transcript comes from a look at the session’s full, 17-minute video, which is below. MSNBC excerpted a short bite that starts with Heslin saying, “Why anybody in this room…” and ends with the appeal from officialdom to “clear the room.” Accordingly, it skips over Heslin’s initial challenge to the public seated behind him: “I ask if there’s anybody in this room that can give me one reason or challenge this question…”
Those 18 words of context are crucial to the alleged heckling. They show that Heslin made a pointed attempt to rope in members of the Hartford crowd. His was apparently not an idle or rhetorical question.
MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell votes in favor of the “heckling” interpretation. He said on last night’s show, “Heckling’s when you say something stupid from the audience. And when a speaker rhetorically or directly asks an audience why you need 30-round magazines and assault weapons, and you yell a response which is basically ‘I think the Second Amendment says I can have them,’ you have not answered the question about why you need them.”
Clever thing that O’Donnell has done here — redefine the term “heckling” to apply narrowly to what happened in that hearing room. In doing so, he bypasses a more common definition, one that doesn’t help his case quite as much.
What was it I said yesterday about liberals and the redefining of words? Toldjah So.
The article goes on to note that Heslin, who Piers Morgan had on last night in an attempt to once again create a false characterization of gun rights advocates as “violent extremists”, didn’t even view the incident as “heckling.” Oops.
What MSDNC did here is absolutely sickening, but should surprise no one, considering the fallout from NBC’s deceptive edit of the 911 call George Zimmerman made about Trayvon Martin that they edited to make him look like a racist (Zimmerman is suing the network), and also considering how, in the summer of 2009 when the opposition to ObamaCare was being broadcast loud and clear at town hall meetings across the country, MSNDC showed an edited video of a man openly packing heat at one such gathering but only gave you the neck-down view so as to give the impression the “potential assassin” was white (and therefore raaaacist) when in fact the guy was black.
Remember the Shirley Sherrod videos where the mainstream media tried to discredit Andrew Breitbart by bogusly accusing him of “selectively editing” the initial video to make her look like a racist towards whites? The national media repeated the false allegation against him and hammered him over and over again, basically saying that “at this point forward we will not take anything you broadcast seriously anymore” (not that they really ever did) yet MSNBC has actually done deliberate selective editing over and over that COMPLETELY distorts and changes what happened in a video clip and yet they are respected by their MSM peers and are rarely, if ever, called out.
Kinda shows you where the real allegiances of many in the MSM are, right? Hint: It’s not with honest journalism, but instead with their narrative-creating allies at like-minded, left wing pro-Obama “news” organizations. By any means necessary, and all that.