I certainly agree you can't do away with edits due to obvious time constraints.
With that said, when you start moving an answer to one question to make it appear as the answer to another question even if it is just phrased differently ...or when you remove 3 sentences from a 4 sentence question you've gone a bit farther than compressing things. You're changing the entire tone and texture of the interview.
Put simply its ok to cut some of the boring/slow parts and move straight to the interesting parts but when you have a candidate whose competence in foreign policy is the subject of heated debate, I find it completely ridiculous for them to edit out some 13 paragraphs worth of responses to foreign policy questions.
As nonname pointed out, you don't have to like the woman to see what was done here. It should outrage people a lot more than it seems to that the media is influencing things so heavily. I doubt many of the folks who are saying "no biggie" would be as dismissive if it was O'Reilly who had done this type of editing on Obama...no I think we all know the chants of "Down with Faux News" would have drowned the internet in a sea of outrage if that had happened...and I dare someone to tell me otherwise without bursting into laughter...
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
