Two television news programs edited videos of the presidential candidates. Was it misleading? – Pointer

The editing of Fox News and CBS News presidential candidate videos has sparked a debate: where is the line between honest editing and misleading the audience?

Last week, former President Donald Trump visited a barber shop in the Bronx along with “Fox & Friends” co-host Lawrence Jones. Trump and Jones sat in front of a flag draped over a beverage cooler and answered questions from visitors and staff gathered to speak with the former president. Fox News aired segments of that conversation on “Fox & Friends” earlier this week.

On Thursday morning, CNN reported on the newly released footage Fox News’ coverage of Trump’s responses was harsh.

One of the hair stylists recorded much of Trump’s Q&A session with people in the salon. The more raw, full footage shows Trump taking one of his usual circuitous and joke-filled routes to answer one of the patron’s questions.

From those shots published by the hairdresser InstagramCNN found that “Fox and Friends” aired clips that avoided Trump’s unrelated stories and exaggerations.

“Participants repeatedly had to respond when Trump deviated from the original intent of their questions,” CNN’s Brian Stelter and Liam Reilly wrote.

Notably, when an audience member asked if Trump would consider eliminating federal taxes entirely, the Fox and Friends editor immediately responded, “There is a way.”

But unearthed footage shows the former president had a more tortuous path to that answer, one that included references to the “death tax” and its effects on small businesses, as well as, as CNN mentions, “the Keystone pipeline, Ronald Reagan.” , Russia and transgender athletes”.

This is in stark contrast to Trump’s recent claims that a CBS “60 Minutes” interview with his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris, could be a “serious campaign finance violation.” (This was assessed by PolitiFact Falsehood.)

Trump pointed to Harris’ responses in clips that CBS shared on social media to promote an appearance that differed from what was broadcast on air. Trump specifically took aim at Harris’ response to a question about US-Israel relations.

He said the discrepancy was evidence that CBS edited the interview to make Harris appear “more presidential.”

Some social media users claimed that the interview was an “in-kind contribution,” meaning a non-monetary donation to a political candidate. Dan Weiner, director of the program on elections and government at the Brennan Center for Justice, told PolitiFact that the argument is far-fetched.

CBS News reported that the full interview lasted 45 minutes and was edited down to 20 minutes.

Kelly McBride, Poynter Senior Vice President and Chair of the Craig Newmark Center for Ethics and Leadership, told PolitiFact that this type of editing is typical of television news and often due to time constraints.

In fact, news outlets in all media – print, digital, video, etc. – are regularly edited for brevity, clarity, and a host of other factors. This is a standard, long-established practice. Unedited videos or transcripts of conversations rarely make it to publication outside of places like C-Span, in part because audiences simply expect a more refined product.

In this light, the outrage partly reflects a broader trend to denigrate standard journalistic practices. For example, in 2022, social media users exploded when journalist Taylor Lorenz knocked on doors to track down an anonymous A TikTok user who spread hate towards LGBTQ+ people. Door-knocking to fact-check or gather information is one of the most fundamental techniques in journalism, but it has been portrayed as aggressive or unethical by critics who were either unfamiliar with the practice or theatrically clutching pearls to smear reporters.

In most cases, McBride told PolitiFact, broadcasters edit videos “to make the product more palatable to the audience, not to mislead by making a candidate look better or worse.”

It certainly seems like the edits 60 Minutes made fall into that category, at least based on what CBS released but didn’t televise. It’s not so clear cut for “Fox & Friends.”

While Fox News’ editing certainly made for brevity and digestibility, Trump’s serpentine statements became a major theme of the election. With President Joe Biden out of the race, the 78-year-old Trump, if elected, would become the oldest sworn-in president in US history. It raised interest in his health and well-being — and drew attention to his tortuous method of public speaking.

Even as Fox News strove for a smoother narrative, the “Fox & Friends” audience was misled about Trump’s edginess.

Because CBS News did not publish the unedited full interview with Harris, either in video or transcript form, Trump was able to question the integrity of the network. “If you’re questioning something, it’s up to the news organization to explain and demonstrate why it’s credible, and that shouldn’t be difficult to do,” McBride told PolitiFact.

So while CBS News may have been open to cutting the interview to fit television, it may be in the network’s best interest to release the video or transcript to address the issue.

Fox News, meanwhile, doesn’t really have that luxury. The full video of Trump’s barber shop interview on Instagram clearly shows that the network’s editing changed the content of Trump’s answers to make him appear more convincing. This is misleading.

Wren LaForme, managing editor of Poynter; and Josie Hollingsworth, director of audience engagement at PolitiFact

The TV networks aren’t just gearing up for election night this year — they’re gearing up for election night.

Cable and broadcasters are preparing for days to determine election results on Election Day and are planning their coverage accordingly. This was reported by Brian Steinberg of Variety. This means 24/7 coverage at some outlets, while others ensure that staff are ready to switch to normal programming at a moment’s notice to share important updates.

“I think you have to be prepared to go all week,” NewsNation president and managing news and politics editor Cheri Grzech told Variety. “We will make sure to provide coverage throughout the week, 24 hours a day if necessary.”

During the 2020 presidential election, the Associated Press took four days to announce the race for Joe Biden. Many voters decided to vote by mail due to the pandemic, and these ballots took longer to be counted, resulting in voting delays. While the vote-by-mail percentage this year may not reach the heights of 2020, the campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris and the campaigns of former President Donald Trump encouraged supporters vote early.

Delays in election results this year may coincide with the spread of misinformation. In 2020, Trump falsely stated that postal voting was susceptible to fraud, he claims repeated this year. Network executives told Variety that they are prepared to crack down on misinformation about the election in their coverage while viewers await the results.

When the results do come in, they will likely be announced by each network’s top anchors — such as Fox News’ Martha McCallum and Bret Baier or CNN’s Jake Tapper, Wolf Blitzer and Anderson Cooper. MSNBC president Rashida Jones told Variety that Steve Kornacki “has a window if he needs to wink a few times,” and during those lulls he will be filled in by other staffers.

“Kornacki will be on set when that big moment happens.”

By: Angela Fu, media business reporter

In case you missed it, Poynter’s Tom Jones spoke with Kornacki for episode three of The Poynter Report Podcast posted earlier this week. Consider this your 23-minute insider’s guide to what to look out for on election night. If you trust Kornacki’s judgment—and I do—you might be able to go into business a little earlier, on November 5th, with a pretty good idea of ​​who will be the next president of the United States.

Wren LaForme, Editor-in-Chief

• in yesterday’s edition of The Poynter ReportTom Jones wrote that the Los Angeles Times will not endorse a presidential candidate this year, a decision that appears to have been made by owner Patrick Sun-Shiong, and that the editorial editor has resigned in protest. Well, Kathy Robertson of The New York Times shared an email from managing editors Terry Tang and Hector Becerra to the staff of the Los Angeles Times that addresses the paper’s decision. “Approval is at the owner’s discretion,” Tan and Becerra wrote in part.
• A number of famous users of social networks, including actor Mark Hamillsaid they were canceling their subscriptions because of the Times decision. “I canceled our subscription to the LA Times because I want to make it clear that I do not agree with their silence. In dangerous times, honest people need to stand up,” Hamill wrote. But The LA Times Guild issued a statement urging readers to consider canceling. “This subscription guarantees the salaries of hundreds of journalists in our newsroom,” the statement said.
• Also in yesterday’s Poynter reportTom Jones has written about what presidential candidates can gain by appearing on podcasts, a relatively new method they are using to reach audiences. But David Boder of the Associated Press writes, “By turning to podcasts, Harris and Trump are abandoning legacy media to spread their messages.” Bauder notes, “Among the legacy news outlets that were unsuccessful in their efforts to interview Kamala Harris and Donald Trump during the general election campaign were NPR, The New York Times, PBS and The Washington Post.”
• Vice President Kamala Harris appeared at a Pennsylvania town hall on CNN Wednesday night. Brian Stelter writes about it the program averaged at least 3.2 million viewersaccording to preliminary data. Meanwhile, PolitiFact verified some of Harris’ claimsincluding her statement that “the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said (Trump) was a ‘fascist to the core.’
• Amanda Mull of Bloomberg writes about it “The Revival of the Print Magazine in 2024.” “More publishers are discovering that magazines are now a luxury,” Mull says.
• As host of WNYC’s All That, Alison Stewart has a gift for speaking. But one day last winter she discovered she could only speak gibberish. Julie Bezonen of the New York Times reports what happened next “Her job was to communicate on the radio. And suddenly the words did not come.”

Have feedback or advice? Email Poynter Senior Media Correspondent Tom Jones at [email protected].

The Poynter Report is our daily media newsletter. Sign up to get it delivered to your inbox Monday through Friday here.