@mrjuju,
I think it's a fair assessment to say we can't be certain this was bias. But given the reaction I've seen I think it's pretty conclusive that the edits were poorly handled regardless of the reasoning for them or lack thereof.
I'm no editor but I'm pretty sure when the subject of an interview expresses the same point multiple times and its a fundamental point that the subject and the audience both have a substantial interest in communicating you would tend to leave that one in, no? Things like "I hate war" and "we need to avoid another cold war" being cut while more aggressive hard line comments are left in seems, at the very least, a bit dubious, wouldn't you agree? I don't need to be an editor to know that such things being edited out significantly changes the impact of the interview and the impression viewers are left with.
Regardless of the circumstances it was edited in or the motivations behind any given edit, it was botched terribly in at least two instances, both of which were on foreign policy issues which were the most critical issues that people were looking at...call it a coincidence if you like, I can't prove otherwise, but for the folks downwind of the media in everydayville, we've caught a whiff of something that just doesn't smell right.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
