It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => General Board => Topic started by: trapeze on April 18, 2011, 11:50:31 AM
-
Very long article. Most definitely vindicates Mark Levin in everything he has ever said about Beck.
A number of conservative activists and bloggers say they’re furious at media magnate Glenn Beck for what they call content theft. Over the past several years, Beck has relied on video, audio and written content from others to fill his radio and television shows, as well as his websites. Often he has credited his fellow conservatives for their work. Yet in many other instances say dozens of conservative journalists who spoke to The Daily Caller, he has not, often taking elaborate steps to cloak the origins of the material.
Publisher Andrew Breitbart has seen a number of his stories surface on various Beck media properties over the past few years. While he describes himself as “grateful for the many times he has credited me and my sites,” Breitbart says that “sometimes he also uses other peoples’ work without crediting them, making it appear as though it were his own. But especially since adopting ‘The Truth Has No Agenda’ slogan – and trying to deliberately re-position himself as the pious conscience and judge of many of those he took content from – he has exposed himself to his new motto’s unforgiving standard.”
From The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/18/thedc-exclusive-conservatives-hit-beck-for-taking-content-without-attribution/)
-
I like Beck.
Listen to him almost every day (replay) on the radio show
Occasionally TV.
If true, pretty serious charges, at least to his credibility.
Breitbart is definitely one of the good guys and I would trust what he says
-
Overt? Or does his format and the info he's trying to show get him caught up in the moment where he neglects to credit sources? If infrequent and innocent that's one thing...but he should have more discipline and credit his sources fully.
-
My 2 cents at Daily Caller:
How much time would it take to run a crawl at the program’s end crediting those hard working conservatives who work just as hard as you do “for the cause.” It’s not like it makes you look smaller that you used other writer’s work. You do look smaller when you do not give credit where credit is due.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/18/thedc-exclusive-conservatives-hit-beck-for-taking-content-without-attribution/#ixzz1JtpW1qdO (http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/18/thedc-exclusive-conservatives-hit-beck-for-taking-content-without-attribution/#ixzz1JtpW1qdO)
-
My 2 cents at Daily Caller:
How much time would it take to run a crawl at the program’s end crediting those hard working conservatives who work just as hard as you do “for the cause.” It’s not like it makes you look smaller that you used other writer’s work. You do look smaller when you do not give credit where credit is due.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/18/thedc-exclusive-conservatives-hit-beck-for-taking-content-without-attribution/#ixzz1JtpW1qdO (http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/18/thedc-exclusive-conservatives-hit-beck-for-taking-content-without-attribution/#ixzz1JtpW1qdO)
Exactly.
-
That's it...Beck is a heel. ::doh:: ::slapfight::
Pass the salt and ketchup.
-
For me, the money quote in this article was this one:
In an interview with TheDC, Roger L. Simon, CEO of Pajamas Media, suggested that Beck has committed the journalistic equivalent of a notorious crime. “It is not a question of just doing it right the majority of the time. It is a question of doing it right always,” Simon said. “Doris Kearns Goodwin is forever a fraud in my estimation because she has been caught plagiarizing once. If you rob a bank once, you still robbed a bank.”
-
The response
http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2011/04/18/why-are-some-bloggers-accusing-glenn-of-using-taking-content-without-attribution/ (http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2011/04/18/why-are-some-bloggers-accusing-glenn-of-using-taking-content-without-attribution/)
I am Editor-in-Chief of The Blaze today in large part because I was a blogger who did stories that Glenn Beck featured on his radio and TV shows.
Before joining the Beck team I always found, of all the shows and sites in the wide world of web news, that Glenn was the most generous in terms of saying thank you, of giving credit, and of making mention on air when possible. He’s promoted (and even hired) an amazing number of bloggers and writers.
So it’s through that lens that I look at the claims in a new story posted by The Daily Caller that is a collection of accusations that Glenn gives insufficient credit to stories turned up by a variety of bloggers and websites.
I certainly understand the frustrations of any writer or blogger who feels their contributions are being slighted. It’s happened to me hundreds of times!
At The Blaze, we link and cite hundreds of news and blog sites each week. It’s been a major part of Glenn’s push to do just that.
Later today I’ll have a much more detailed response to the charges and what may be motivating them (is this connected to our review of James O‘Keefe’s NPR video?). Check back here in a few hours.
We are amused that Glenn is accused (in a factually-flawed way) of co-opting the phrase, “The Truth Has No Agenda” from his friend Mike Opelka. Mike is indeed a writer for The Blaze (as the article notes), but Glenn has worked collaboratively on projects with Mike since the 1980s — indeed Glenn was the best man in Mike’s wedding. More on that later, too!
-
Hey, great response. I see they are really taking it seriously. That should make everyone feel better.
I certainly understand the frustrations of any writer or blogger who feels their contributions are being slighted. It’s happened to me hundreds of times!
So really, it's no big deal because, hey, it's happened to the Editor-In-Chief hundreds of times.
Personally, if it had happened to me "hundreds of times" I would be damned good and sure that I wasn't doing it to anyone else. But it's all grins and giggles at The Blaze and The Glenn Beck Show so everyone who has had their work literally stolen just needs to chill out and get into the spirit of the thing. It's all about Beck, you know.
-
Maybe we should all start copying the material at The Blaze and pretend that it is our own original work. I wonder how long that would last before we got a friendly visit from Beck's attorneys?
-
I ain't defending it, Trap
Just stumbled across the response and thought it was a little weak, too
Getting ready to listen to the replay of today's radio show.
Heard he took an hour on this
-
(is this connected to our review of James O‘Keefe’s NPR video?)
-
(is this connected to our review of James O‘Keefe’s NPR video?)
i heard him say this during his show and i didn't know what he meant
-
(is this connected to our review of James O‘Keefe’s NPR video?)
i heard him say this during his show and i didn't know what he meant
TheBlaze.com called into question the veracity of James O'Keefe's expose of Planned Parenthood because he creatively edited the video to make it appear that the subjects were saying things they didn't say.
The blaze was factually correct. But in my opinion, they took their "the truth has no agenda" policy too far. What O'Keefe did offered no material contextual difference to the story. All the blaze did was to undermine the credibility of the O'Keefe hit. Of course the blaze would say that O'Keefe undermined it himself when he chose to creatively edit.
Point is, I think it is very possible that this piece questioning Glenn Beck's propriety in crediting sources is retribution for that action by theblaze. I'm not saying it is, just that it's possible.
-
Holy crap. Who knows where the truth falls.....But some blogger called him a thief, so lets throw him under the bus. I believe I'll wait to read more of the story or see if Beck is sued...if he is "stealng" this much info, surely someone will sue him.
Pass the mustard.
-
I still haven't figured out the point of theblaze...............
::confused::
-
(is this connected to our review of James O‘Keefe’s NPR video?)
i heard him say this during his show and i didn't know what he meant
TheBlaze.com called into question the veracity of James O'Keefe's expose of Planned Parenthood because he creatively edited the video to make it appear that the subjects were saying things they didn't say.
The blaze was factually correct. But in my opinion, they took their "the truth has no agenda" policy too far. What O'Keefe did offered no material contextual difference to the story. All the blaze did was to undermine the credibility of the O'Keefe hit. Of course the blaze would say that O'Keefe undermined it himself when he chose to creatively edit.
Point is, I think it is very possible that this piece questioning Glenn Beck's propriety in crediting sources is retribution for that action by theblaze. I'm not saying it is, just that it's possible.
Our side does not need this infighting, gotcha, SH!T, if that's what's going on.
I'm not saying not to call someone out on wrongdoing, but fer cryin' out loud.....
-
(is this connected to our review of James O‘Keefe’s NPR video?)
i heard him say this during his show and i didn't know what he meant
TheBlaze.com called into question the veracity of James O'Keefe's expose of Planned Parenthood because he creatively edited the video to make it appear that the subjects were saying things they didn't say.
The blaze was factually correct. But in my opinion, they took their "the truth has no agenda" policy too far. What O'Keefe did offered no material contextual difference to the story. All the blaze did was to undermine the credibility of the O'Keefe hit. Of course the blaze would say that O'Keefe undermined it himself when he chose to creatively edit.
Point is, I think it is very possible that this piece questioning Glenn Beck's propriety in crediting sources is retribution for that action by theblaze. I'm not saying it is, just that it's possible.
Our side does not need this infighting, gotcha, SH!T, if that's what's going on.
I'm not saying not to call someone out on wrongdoing, but fer cryin' out loud.....
That about sums it up for me too!
-
Our side does not need this infighting, gotcha, SH!T, if that's what's going on.
I'm not saying not to call someone out on wrongdoing, but fer cryin' out loud.....
I agree--
if Beck thinks piling on O'Keefe gets him credibility he's wrong
If the story about Beck is to get back at him, well, that's what happens when you call out on other people they look at you
And another thing why is Beck letting the lefties define what's credible video? We all know they selectively edit...
If he's got a beef with O'Keefe and his video let him air it without sounding like he's letting the lefties define the debate
I still remember that Dateline video where they blew up the car to "illustrate" the dangers of the car. I thought for sure when that piece of news came out the show would be cancelled. No such luck.
I like O'Keefe and if he makes some mistakes, well, that's what regular people do in the course of defining what's worth fighting for. We've let the MSM media define for us what's acceptable--if someone reveals their imperfections they are roasted. Michelle Malkin threw O'Keefe under the bus the next day after his arrest in Lousianna. Our hope is the citizen journalists as Breitbart calls them. Those people will be imperfect, untried in the arena but their efforts are no less worthwhile.
-
(is this connected to our review of James O‘Keefe’s NPR video?)
i heard him say this during his show and i didn't know what he meant
TheBlaze.com called into question the veracity of James O'Keefe's expose of Planned Parenthood because he creatively edited the video to make it appear that the subjects were saying things they didn't say.
The blaze was factually correct. But in my opinion, they took their "the truth has no agenda" policy too far. What O'Keefe did offered no material contextual difference to the story. All the blaze did was to undermine the credibility of the O'Keefe hit. Of course the blaze would say that O'Keefe undermined it himself when he chose to creatively edit.
Point is, I think it is very possible that this piece questioning Glenn Beck's propriety in crediting sources is retribution for that action by theblaze. I'm not saying it is, just that it's possible.
Our side does not need this infighting, gotcha, SH!T, if that's what's going on.
I'm not saying not to call someone out on wrongdoing, but fer cryin' out loud.....
I call it the "Bill O'Reilly Effect" ::stirpot::
-
What's that, the "holier than thou"?
I'd add nothing to what LV wrote, save to say that O'Keefe is young, still, and allowances need be made for lack of experience.
Beck should friggin know better on those grounds alone, on both counts.
I'm for throwing neither under the bus, as it stands now, but, folks, we've got egos on the field as the number one priority apparently.
That should be so comforting for whoever comes out on top .... of the bottom.
-
Attribution is important. Really important. And that's what this story is all about. Attribution and professionalism.
If Beck is using other peoples' material (and I think this story cited quite a few instances and some of them are less than obscure) then that is wrong. And it is unprofessional. Extremely unprofessional. If you do this for a living then you had damned well better do it right.
It really is nothing more than that. Ego stuff is irrelevant to the central issue.
-
Newp. Beg to differ. Ego is the point. IDP pointed to the potential reason and I believe he's on the money.
-
Well, following that line, Breitbart would be the one with an axe to grind instead of TheDailyCaller. I haven't gone back to look at the article but I seem to remember that Breitbart was taking Beck's side and saying that all of his stuff had been properly credited.
At any rate, the issue for me is attribution and professionalism. I am not a big fan of cheating and fraud. And whether there is any ego involved or not, if Beck is using other peoples' stuff and not giving them at least a hat tip of some kind, and profiting by it...that is wrong. No ifs, ands or buts about it.
-
Well, following that line, Breitbart would be the one with an axe to grind instead of TheDailyCaller. I haven't gone back to look at the article but I seem to remember that Breitbart was taking Beck's side and saying that all of his stuff had been properly credited.
At any rate, the issue for me is attribution and professionalism. I am not a big fan of cheating and fraud. And whether there is any ego involved or not, if Beck is using other peoples' stuff and not giving them at least a hat tip of some kind, and profiting by it...that is wrong. No ifs, ands or buts about it.
Hmmm. I must be having clarity issues tonight because, again as well as with Soup, you and I are on the same page.
Not so much what Breitbart said about what Beck said, but what Beck said about O'Keefe and Breitbart taking issue - the gotcha is on Beck this time around.
Despite your on-point issue, what's going on here, apparently, is what's going on between two egos jousting for primacy.
-
Okay, but if Beck was ethically pure in this situation there would be nothing they could throw at him. This is a big huge "glass houses and throwing stones" kind of thing and if I, as an uninterested observer (which I'm not), were forced to choose I would probably say that Beck is in the poorer light. O'Keefe made one tiny little error in judgement. Beck has, according to this apparently well researched story, been a serial abuser of attribution.
-
Well, following that line, Breitbart would be the one with an axe to grind instead of TheDailyCaller. I haven't gone back to look at the article but I seem to remember that Breitbart was taking Beck's side and saying that all of his stuff had been properly credited.
At any rate, the issue for me is attribution and professionalism. I am not a big fan of cheating and fraud. And whether there is any ego involved or not, if Beck is using other peoples' stuff and not giving them at least a hat tip of some kind, and profiting by it...that is wrong. No ifs, ands or buts about it.
Hmmm. I must be having clarity issues tonight because, again as well as with Soup, you and I are on the same page.
Not so much what Breitbart said about what Beck said, but what Beck said about O'Keefe and Breitbart taking issue - the gotcha is on Beck this time around.
Despite your on-point issue, what's going on here, apparently, is what's going on between two egos jousting for primacy.
Yep.
(howzat for concordance?!)
-
If Modo's or Krugman's work, or anyone's work at the NYSllimes for that matter, were as scrutinized as Beck's seems to be, we'd all be better off. But scrutiny is a one way street these days. A good example is the coverage of Bush and his golfing and his vacations in Crawford vs. Sir Golfsalot and his incessant and extravagant vacations worldwide, or the hysterical coverage of Bush's 5% unemployment rate (the end of the world!) and Obama's near 10% rate with it's ho-hum unexpectedness.
Remember, the Soros Machine is pissed at Beck for laying out on national tv their plans, their connections, their history. There is nothing angrier than a scorned wife or an exposed lefty.
-
I tune Beck out the moment I hear his voice . There's just something about the guy that I find irritating , not the least of which is the fact that he's a Johnny-come-lately know-it-all regarding government and American history .
-
I tune Beck out the moment I hear his voice . There's just something about the guy that I find irritating , not the least of which is the fact that he's a Johnny-come-lately know-it-all regarding government and American history .
I used to listen to his radio show quite frequently before he got onto the CNNHN channel. He was upbeat and damned funny.
I never saw him on CNN (I just will not watch CNN products) and have only seen a few moments of his FNC show. That is mainly due to its time of day slot, though, not because I have a big problem with him.
That said, I don't find him as enjoyable to listen to since the doom and gloom stuff started up. He has always had a teaching angle to his radio show as far as I could tell. I remember him doing a multi part expose of scientology that was both informative and funny. It was around that time that I learned he was a mormon and I did think that was a bit hypocritical going after the very obvious cult stuff in scientology and ignoring the very real and similar problems in the LDS church.
I guess I am saying that I have had mixed feelings (hate that expression) since he broke away from radio only and started all of the television, book, live performance stuff. He has been spread thin and it has, IMO, taken away from what I originally found appealing about his radio presence. I have come to the point where I avoid listening to him on the radio.
At the same time I have grown to appreciate Mark Levin who makes no secret of his dislike of Beck. He also gives his reasons for not liking Beck and it has much to do with the subject matter of this thread. Levin has always been pissed off at other hosts who use the Levin show as show prep and Beck seems to be the one who does it the most.
I like Levin's unabashed anger at the left and the media. Beck doesn't seem to want to get angry. He gets all sad and weepy. There have been other things about Beck that have been weird...his medical issues are strange and sometimes seem invented (for publicity?).
I don't know...
But I have never liked people who cheat, defraud, con, lie and steal to advance themselves. To advance themselves on the backs of others. Levin has been accusing Beck of this for some time and the Daily Caller article seems to do a fairly good job of documenting this. So that's what gets me about all of this.
Beck is on the right side, obviously, but he needs to be ethically pure. If he is unwilling to do this and if he does not take this issue seriously as his editor in chief seemed to indicate, then I have a problem with that. An apology, a promise to clean up his act and the follow through on that promise is all that's really needed here.
-
Oh, and I'm done explaining my point of view on this. It's getting redundant. Sorry about that.
-
In Beck's defense re; his change in style... it would be pretty hard to observe the undermining of the country, make the connections he's made between Leftist power brokers, union activists, Marxists, radical Islam, and elements within our own government including the President and his administration - and then work feverishly day after day on radio and TV to bring the nation up to his level of passion and understanding the challenge - and still remain the upbeat, humorous, cheerful, etc person he used to be.
I find myself becoming increasingly pessimistic, and I've always been a pretty balanced person, willing to look at all things but at the end of the day, settle on focusing on the good. I find that more and more difficult, and my thoughts and words are increasingly void of optimism when it comes to politics and the future of this country. I'm still me, but I'm changed. How I interface with the world has changed as I've watched my government systematically push aside everything I believe in and everything I believe America has been and should be.
I yearn for optimism and lightheartedness. But I yearn more deeply for a restored nation, and I will not engage in any way undermining the credibility of people who are willing to stand and fight as Glenn Beck has. If he is shown to be a criminal or egregiously unethical, then prove it. Until then, he's got our backs on a national stage, and it is utterly illogical to allow seeds of division grow because some people have bruised egos.
Mark Levin and Andrew Breitbart are fellow warriors as well. They would be wise to keep their sights trained on the real enemies of freedom, and allow Glenn Beck to do his work.
-
In Beck's defense re; his change in style... it would be pretty hard to observe the undermining of the country, make the connections he's made between Leftist power brokers, union activists, Marxists, radical Islam, and elements within our own government including the President and his administration - and then work feverishly day after day on radio and TV to bring the nation up to his level of passion and understanding the challenge - and still remain the upbeat, humorous, cheerful, etc person he used to be.
I find myself becoming increasingly pessimistic, and I've always been a pretty balanced person, willing to look at all things but at the end of the day, settle on focusing on the good. I find that more and more difficult, and my thoughts and words are increasingly void of optimism when it comes to politics and the future of this country. I'm still me, but I'm changed. How I interface with the world has changed as I've watched my government systematically push aside everything I believe in and everything I believe America has been and should be.
I yearn for optimism and lightheartedness. But I yearn more deeply for a restored nation, and I will not engage in any way undermining the credibility of people who are willing to stand and fight as Glenn Beck has. If he is shown to be a criminal or egregiously unethical, then prove it. Until then, he's got our backs on a national stage, and it is utterly illogical to allow seeds of division grow because some people have bruised egos.
Mark Levin and Andrew Breitbart are fellow warriors as well. They would be wise to keep their sights trained on the real enemies of freedom, and allow Glenn Beck to do his work.
Amen!
-
Well said IDP!
::thumbsup::
-
I find myself becoming increasingly pessimistic, and I've always been a pretty balanced person, willing to look at all things but at the end of the day, settle on focusing on the good. I find that more and more difficult, and my thoughts and words are increasingly void of optimism when it comes to politics and the future of this country. I'm still me, but I'm changed. How I interface with the world has changed as I've watched my government systematically push aside everything I believe in and everything I believe America has been and should be.
Pessimism is a valuable tool. Part of the reason we're in the mess that we're in is because so many people in positions of power -- whether in power over public policy or the family budget -- have preferred to blow sunshine up our (and their own) rears. Then you have the variation of this mentality, which is the ephemeral "live in the now!" type who think it's foolish to deny yourself enjoyment now just because of abstract future hypotheticals. This describes a lot of what Thomas Sowell calls the "first order thinking" of liberals.
You might find a recent short book by British author/academic Roger Scruton interesting. It's called "The Uses of Pessimism: And the Danger of False Hope"
Amazon's brief description:
Ranging widely over human history and culture, from ancient Greece to the current global economic downturn, Scruton makes a counterintuitive yet persuasive case that optimists and idealists -- with their ignorance about the truths of human nature and human society, and their naive hopes about what can be changed -- have wrought havoc for centuries. Scruton's argument is nuanced, however, and his preference for pessimism is not a dark view of human nature; rather his is a 'hopeful pessimism' which urges that instead of utopian efforts to reform human society or human nature, we focus on the only reform that we can truly master -- the improvement of ourselves through the cultivation of our better instincts. Written in Scruton's trademark style-- erudite, sweeping in scope across centuries and cultures, and unafraid to offend-- this book is sure to intrigue and provoke readers concerned with the state of Western culture, the nature of human beings, and the question of whether social progress is truly possible.
-
Pessimism is a valuable tool.
And like most everything else it's never used correctly!
-
Pessimism is a valuable tool.
And like most everything else it's never used correctly!
I am an expert wielder of it myself, a veritable black belt in pessimism. To me the glass is not merely half empty, more like "well, it's going to be completely empty." :D
-
Pessimism is a valuable tool.
And like most everything else it's never used correctly!
I am an expert wielder of it myself, a veritable black belt in pessimism. To me the glass is not merely half empty, more like "well, it's going to be completely empty." :D
::rolllaughing::
-
Pessimism is a valuable tool.
And like most everything else it's never used correctly!
I am an expert wielder of it myself, a veritable black belt in pessimism. To me the glass is not merely half empty, more like "well, it's going to be completely empty." :D
You have a glass?!!
-
Pessimism is a valuable tool.
And like most everything else it's never used correctly!
I am an expert wielder of it myself, a veritable black belt in pessimism. To me the glass is not merely half empty, more like "well, it's going to be completely empty." :D
You have a glass?!!
Uh-oh, I feel some Monty Python comin' on...
-
(is this connected to our review of James O‘Keefe’s NPR video?)
i heard him say this during his show and i didn't know what he meant
TheBlaze.com called into question the veracity of James O'Keefe's expose of Planned Parenthood because he creatively edited the video to make it appear that the subjects were saying things they didn't say.
The blaze was factually correct. But in my opinion, they took their "the truth has no agenda" policy too far. What O'Keefe did offered no material contextual difference to the story. All the blaze did was to undermine the credibility of the O'Keefe hit. Of course the blaze would say that O'Keefe undermined it himself when he chose to creatively edit.
Point is, I think it is very possible that this piece questioning Glenn Beck's propriety in crediting sources is retribution for that action by theblaze. I'm not saying it is, just that it's possible.
Our side does not need this infighting, gotcha, SH!T, if that's what's going on.
I'm not saying not to call someone out on wrongdoing, but fer cryin' out loud.....
That about sums it up for me too!
Ditto and at least he is getting out the message. ::bashing::