Thursday, July 14, 2022

More Proof That Mainstream Media Does NOT Accurately Report On Trials

Posted by Peter Quennell


Context

Main-media’s slow suicide by another name?

We recently quoted from some very ill-informed mainstream-media op-eds on the Depp-Heard case.

The NY Times’s and Washington Post’s OWN READERS in online comments below the op-eds almost universally said the opinion writers had NOT WATCHED THE CASE.

There are now literally thousands of comments under the numerous YouTube videos on the case arguing that social media did NOT affect the jury. It was hard facts that did.

Social media in fact simply reflected what many millions saw (except seemingly any mainstream media reporters) on the 20 or so live feeds from the court.

This video of a wildly biased NBC “news report” that aired last night was uploaded just a few hours ago.

Click through to the (at present 2600) comments here (scroll down) in effect almost all saying that, once again, mainstream media is lying to all of us on a grand scale.

Shades of the Meredith Kercher case and Danielle Redlick cases? You can find similar comments to these below under those biased media reports too. We have a lot of like-minded friends out there.

Betsy Packard 1 hour ago

Social Media did NOT determine this case. We watched Amber get caught lying time after time.

Jack White 7 hours ago

Wow NBC, this is how you treat information? Twist it to your will, you know as the public we see what you are doing and you are just loosing viewers.

Ashley Jordan 6 hours ago

This right here is why I refuse to watch MSM! They clearly did not watch the entire trial like most of us with common sense!

Matt Davis 10 hours ago

Really upsetting to see a big news media video like this completely disregard 90% of the trial and give a narrow, biased view on the trial discrediting the court and jury’s verdict, and humiliating Johnny depp, a surviver of amber heard. Both had huge evidence suppressed, Johnny couldn’t play the audio she admits to cutting his finger off.She was proven to be the abuser in a 6 week trial, and to watch this video is disgusting- this would not be happening had the roles been reversed

Gina Simmons 10 hours ago (edited)

I have never seen anything so biased in all my life. I watched the trial ! With an unbiased opinion and the truth slowly unfolded   that Amber Heard was the abuser,  based purely on fact.
I am a woman, and for my own reasons have always side with women about abuse - but this this trial changed my perspective- that men can be victims of abuse too. It sickened me that a woman could go to the depths she went to, to destroy a man that could no longer suffer her abuse.
It is saddening that something like this could be put together in such a way to discredit the verdict. I am sick of being called a Depp fan - I am a fan of truth and justice - something you have left out of this, people who know right from wrong - not fans. Though the right verdict was reached, you have tried to smear it and social media who have been far more truthful about the trial evidence than the MSM.
And as for Elaine Bredahoft- shameful, as she herself knows the lies her client has told and is still pushing them, she even told a few herself, I witnessed that - she should be disbarred.
Shameful that you have put a handful of people together so speedily who obviously never watched the whole trial,  trying to sway the audience to believe a person who constantly perjured herself and covered it over with theatrics - was the victim and treated unjustly.
Amber Heard is the calculating, manipulative,  narcissistic, physical and mental abuser of her former huband - why do you try to paint it as though this fact is not true - and because I have come to this conclusion after seeing it with my own eyes - I am described as Johnny Depp fan?
These are two people, the whole world is not split into two categories - either fans of Depp or Heard. Like me, as I said , just a fan of the truth and justice - for women and for men.

Kris 1 hour ago

This is actually appalling and insulting to everyone who watched this trial live. Insulting to all the fantastic Lawyers and law-workers commenting on this and cases similar to this for years to be smeared by wanna-be journalists who blatantly lie about them again and again. To give this stuff such a stage is unbelievable. Unquestioned biased opinions being presented as “facts”. As i can still see the dislikes this is getting rationed and rightfully so. When will the media finally get the message that they can NOT lie to their viewers any more? Its over. And imagine they would not have allowed cameras in there? News cannot be trusted, so called “experts” cannot be trusted. Thats what i learned from it. Because they lied to my face about stuff i was able to see first hand. This is just another idiotic try to change the “court of public opinion”.

barbde65 3 hours ago

And y’all at NBC and all other MSM’s wonder why we are all turned off? I recall the day she went and played the victim and the fallout… how I was so disappointed and had to believe her…then here comes this trial and I found a new community to follow and these attorneys didn’t believe he could win, the law was on her side… then JD puts on his part and I began to wonder… then AH takes the stand and I was angry… she showed herself as a liar and was fake…the way she kept trying to stare down the jury, the way she told stories that weren’t the same as her “witnesses”…then during both rebuttals, I changed my mind and realized how she’d used the metoo movement, women wanting to believe any claimant and the media to cancel JD… while he’s been all the things he said he was, I mean come on we all knew of his drinking and drug usage way back to the Viper Room and River Phoenix… but the way she described certain alleged abuses? She’d have needed IMMEDIATE treatment for sliced and bleeding feet and in Australia had he really committed SV with a “broken bottle” he would still be there in jail… you all owe JD the actual and fair truth which I highly doubt anyone of you has the decency to report… you’re nothing better than TMZ at this point! Shame on you for not reporting the ACTUAL facts and how disgusting she is as a person…

Randy Moog 3 hours ago (edited)

Three things.
1) NBC was caught replacing audio in the middle of the sentences Amber Heard was saying during their big interview.  They replaced words mid sentence because it was pointed out when the first teasers came out she was obviously lying about facts, and it was easy to prove she was lying.  So NBC removed parts of the video, and edited words mid sentence to make audio clips that were never said, but didn’t have the lies in them.  There are a number of videos that show the teaser clips versus the final clips where this is clear.
2) The trial influences social media, not the other way around.  People mocked AH lying and bizarre behavior AFTER they watched the trial, not the other way around.  People watched the trial with open minds and it was the trial that made them then go to social media and talk about what they saw. 
3) With social media it is easy to comment and fact check in real time.  It is harder with MSM like NBC.  NBC tries very hard to control the narrative and blocks and fact checking.  Luckily this is posted on YouTube were people can comment - something you CANNOT do on NBC’s sites.  And after watching them edit audio and change what people said, you can see why.

Keyyyyzzzz 8 hours ago

I recall a time when both the media AND online commentary were overwhelmingly in support of Amber ... which gradually turned around to support Johnny after the public release of two things: (1) the footage of Amber’s testimony in the UK, and; (2) the many hours of audio recordings - largely Amber’s own. So, as a ‘liberal’ minded (Australian) lawyer I made a point of following the entire six week trial, while deliberately blocking all commentary (both online and traditional media). My verdict was virtually identical with that of the Virginia jury. Not only was Amber’s testimony very contradictory, but there was simply no credible evidence to support her DA claims: and the little that there was ultimately seemed to emanate from Amber herself.
I have to say I’m really surprised at the traditional ‘liberal’ media commentaries - like this one - which appear to have rejected this verdict on the grounds that it will have a suppressing effect on victims of DA! Not only have you clearly NOT followed the evidence presented in this case itself, but you are ignoring the fact that the jury DID vindicate the DA survivor in this case: ie, Johnny Depp. As even your own expert commentators make clear in this video: men are extremely reluctant to come forward as DA victims! Its pretty clear that Johnny would NEVER have come forward ... if it weren’t for the fact that his entire reputation and career were at jeopardy! And yet you’re prepared to disregard both the bulk of the evidence AND the verdict of the jury; simply because it doesn’t conform to your outdated notion of what a DA survivor must look like. It seems to me that the traditional US ‘liberal’ media stands in very real danger of losing relevance in the News environment; a sad and frightening prospect in my opinion ... and in the opinion of hundreds of millions of fair and reasonably minded people around the world.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 07/14/22 at 03:51 PM in

Tweet This Post


Comments

Comments are close to reaching 5,000. I sorted them by newest first, and they continue to take NBC to task consistently.

See this below. The report was seriously weird for NBC (as was uploading it). NBC were one of those who streamed the trial!!  NBC themselves helped to cause thousands to grasp how it evolved, to favor Depp and really not favor Heard at all.

Saviour Kio 12 minutes ago

Someone else pointed it out, but NBC streamed the entire trial, covered it in the news, and interviewed the legal teams and got an exclusive amber heard interview, then made this awful documentary. You guys are making bank of this just like YouTubers. Only difference is most of the YouTubers covering this were honest and gave their opinion based on what was in front of them. A lot of them thought in the beginning Johnny would lose. Until they saw the evidence and facts. You and amber heard defenders are doing every attempt to rewrite history, and pinpoint any bit of misleading or out of context facts to smear Depp, a domestic abuse survivor who was defamed for 6 years. It’s honestly evil to protect amber and smear Johnny. Utterly vile.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 07/15/22 at 08:42 AM | #

Don’t tell anyone, but TJMK global headquarters is over there at the top of the tower to the right. This is the Hudson River, some 1200 yards wide at this point, and tidal upstream for 150 miles to about Albany, all navigable. A main fish: sturgeon.

http://truejustice.org/ee/images/perugia/frontpage116/11644.pdf

That popular cafe and marina, the 79th Street Boat Basin, the embarkment point of some megayachts each year, have been shut down, and I was curious to know why.

The timbers were rotting and storms had made the structure unsafe. A $90 million replacement will happen next year. Any park work the city does is usually of a quality and imagination beyond belief.

The Lincoln Tunnel is about level with the tower on the left. The road from here to there goes all the way along the top of the Palisades cliff. Manhattan is so spectacular at night that they run coaches of tourists over here to have a look.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 07/16/22 at 04:40 PM | #

Dr Mignini’s book is due out in Italian in September. We have not asked to see it yet. More soon.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 07/18/22 at 03:49 PM | #

Re the UK PM race the narrowing down to the final will take place wednesday. Though the odds are now against her, Penny Mordaunt seems to me the best shot of those 3 for faster growth, based on her book.

She seems to have a lack of confidence in talking about the book which actually is not right-wing (Tony Blair has commended it; Rees-Mogg etc not). I posted this review on Amazon USA (it wont show on Amazon UK) in case any of our UK readers are interested.

Really only the first 2 paras are specific to Mordaunt, the rest is rules of thumb for anyone in the UK - in fact for anyone in the EC or OECD. It would mostly look familiar in any fast-growth Asian economy.

From the United States
Peter M. Quennell
5.0 out of 5 stars
The UK Could Quite Easily Double Its Growth; Only Penny Mordaunt Has Hit On The First Step
This is SUPERB as a baseline take, the best I’ve seen from a political leader. Bravo Penny Mordaunt.
I’m in NYC and designed, managed & evaluated UN-assisted development programs and projects worldwide, including across Europe. The implementation knowhow this cries out for actually took us 30 years to fully get straight as new breakthroughs were factored in.
Success is a narrow target, and the process steps are critical-path and complex. Some parties may initially frustrate them. Absent this vital knowhow many visions fail in takeoff, and often increase frustration. But full realization of development possibilities on these lines is worth added trillions worldwide, and many billions to the UK. Here is a quick summary.
1. Three “knowhow universes”.
(1) Knowledge of systems is vital. All development is better systems. All self made billionaires (Bill Gates, Bezos, Musk) invented systems. Systems are hierarchical, like Russian dolls; we used 7 levels, and could thus see and plan them in “3D”. In a big program like Penny’s, there will be at least hundreds. Read Christensen The Innovators Dilemma as an eyeopening first move.
(2) Knowledge of value, aka free cash flow or economic profit, and vitally how the S curve works; this is needed to target the value that the systems will create. Narrow prospect; worldwide 20% of capacity is creating 80% of all value; much of the rest is parasitic and a net growth negative.
(3) Knowledge of change processes to action (1) and (2) especially forming high performance groups and creating networks; women are usually best at this as they lead from behind and are inclusive. Such processes can readily involve thousands. They must be bottom-up.
2. Various further tips.
(1) Going back into history such integrating functionalism was first imagined in the League of Nations in the 1930s, though too late to stop WWII and the Holocaust and Cold War.
(2) In 1970 the global UN development structure was reoriented by the General Assembly toward a giant systems enhancement machine intended to enable ALL nations to move up the ladder.
(3) In the 1990s American political appointees to the UN’s top layers for ideological reasons unilaterally chose to reverse this in part to clear a path for the transnationals (doing untold harm not least to the US; hence Trump).
(4) The EC as such is not far down this road at all, to its great cost. Instead of inventing systems and thus more value it tends to circumscribe them (hence Brexit).
(5) Such processes are highly bankable and should start to enhance financial inflows and growth prospects within a few months. (Stock markets and investment banks are essentially system-appraising devices.)
(6) Such processes if done bottom-up are very empowering. High performance work groups with visions can be the most addictive experience ever, especially with travel and other incentives. Major productivity boosters.
(7) Always run two similar processes at once, they will learn from one another. Both within the UK, or in this case one in the UK and one in Europe - Dutch, Danish, Swiss, Italian maybe.
Finally, right horses for the course are vital. Penny Mordaunt seems very promising. Make sure to keep economists & lawyers & quants at arms length; no offense, but time & again they have disrupted such bottom-up, lead-from-behind learning and inventing processes.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 07/19/22 at 07:40 PM | #

Footnote on the above. It’s not the knowhow that the UN’s politically appointed ideologues rejected although they never bothered to get a firm grasp.

What was overturned was the notion that nations other than the poorest should take part. And that “wicked governments” should somehow gain.

This didnt stop the East & South Asian countries, who essentially developed on these lines.

But it hurt Europe and North America a lot. Now there is too little systems enhancement anywhere, and large parts of their economies have ground to a halt.

Instead of inventing their way forward, the mature businesses corrupt the political process.

I’ve begun to think that maybe there was a point to Brexit: let the UK get it all properly figured out and show returns; and then decide what to do about Europe on even terms.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 07/24/22 at 08:34 AM | #

Tweet This Post


Post A Comment

Smileys



Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Mainstream Media Woes: NBC Takes Heat For Blatantly One-Sided Report

Or to previous entry Unsavory Knox & Sollecito Chums Are Taking Quite A Beating