31 votes

Chip Reid of CBS says he has no opinions

Chip Reid CBS news correspondent first says he has no opinions, but later admits that he does have opinions. Apparently, he has to pretend he does not have an opinion in order to be considered neutral. Does having an opinion prevent you from being objective and neutral? If as everyone agrees having an opinion does not prevent you from being objective, why is it so many journalists believe it is necessary to pretend they have no opinion and when first asked lie about the fact that they do have opinions? Who do they think they are deceiving any way? Don't they know that their opinions are implied in the selection of their questions?

http://www.youtube.com/wa...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Study Clarence Darrow

Study Clarence Darrow (1857-1938) by Doug Linder (2004) A short biographical essay. Clarence Darrow, born the son of a coffin maker, Americus Darrow. ... Clarence Darrow read intently “from Nietzsche, Tolstoy, and Voltaire as his guests spread out on the Oriental carpet before him.” Tears might “roll down his cheeks as he reads Robert Burns poetry or bellows the powerful chants of Walt Whitman." The night might end with Darrow joining his guests in a rousing rendition of "The Road to Mandalay."

Use what Clarence Darrow exhibited to persuade folks to do right.

Lest the very one reviled as a wrong doer, might not grasp what wrong-headed notion you have revealed in him.

    In Austria an editor who can write well is valuable, but he is not likely to remain so unless he can handle a sabre with charm.
    - Europe and Elsewhere by Mark Twain

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

Pathetic interview.

These so-called interviews are getting worse. Helfeld has now resorted to badgering and interrupting bystanders.

Ignore the media's lies and propaganda.

He's Ron Burgundy. Finally

He's Ron Burgundy. Finally the media has become a parody of itself.

Suppression of opinion.

As we ALL know, the suppression of opinion is the primary objective of the "Old Media".

To control the opinions of others to such an extent that people are NOT willing to offer their opinions, and even to the extent that people are not willing to even THINK to a degree where they then HAVE an opinion ... is the goal of "Mass Media".

To intimate to another that their opinion matters, in such a way as to indicate to them that their opinion is valuable BECAUSE they have the ability to form one on their own, is very, VERY powerful.

People are taught that to have an opinion is bad, is wrong, is rude, is incorrect, that is goal of the controllers and those that wish to gain and continue domination over others ... opinions.

Ron Paul Billboards provides billboard and digital billboard designs for grassroots, PAC's and national and state level campaign organizations at no charge. Contact us at social@RonPaulBillboards.com to edit the design you choose with your "Paid for by:".

Don't be objective. Be passionate, yet unbiased!

I worked for a while as a reporter and I can say with assurance that the main bias is deciding what to cover and what to leave out. People say, "oh, you gotta be objective." I disagree. You must have passion, yet be unbiased. It's hard work. That's why it's considered a job, not just a position. I seem many newspersons treat it like a position, not a task requiring hard work.

For example, when covering a local meeting of government, if everyone looks bored or annoyed at a "weird" person, that person likely will not be covered. The opinions or statements of that person will not make it into the paper.

On the other hand, on the small scale reporting I was doing, it was amazing how you could stir up public interest just by being unbiased and reporting what was going on, whether you thought it was important or not.

Laziness plays a bigger part in lame media coverage than any other factor, in my opinion.

Be not objectionable; that is their role. Be passionate. Biased!

Yes, I too was a reporter... & a journalist.

    The difference between a reporter & a journalist is about 10¢ an hour.

When attempting to lead those that have gone astray, let 'em know where they should stand. When necessary, convince them their ridiculous position ain't good posture. Show 'em proper posture. Ask 'em to stand up straight... Face the issues square on... Get them to willingly follow you.

And... dare I mention? ... Always have a well planned escape route, in case of failure. Regards,

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

Jan Helfeld's picture

Where can they use the power of my Socratic interviews

Since you worked as a journalist, where do you think they can use the power of my Socratic interviews. They reveal contradictions in a politicians' thinking and also their true character. Furthermore, they are more dramatic than anything on TV. Sometimes politicians say and do things that are so outrageous that they could make the news.

Jan Helfeld

You have a wonder gift. Use it well.

There are many gifts in your satchel. Use them all. Give & take, as appropriate. The Socratic method of questioning to reveal reasoning is known to man around the world. By & by it is used to help man see reason... To see how reason applies to himself.

Imagine the result of your interviews if with a bit more polish, your questioning leads to self improvement of those that need it the most.

"The mark of a persuasive salesman is when he confronts you & tells you emphatically to go to hell, you look forward to going there."

"The remark of a good salesman is, 'Thank you for helping me. Let me know when I may return the favor.'"

Your interviews reveal the absurdity of many political positions. It will be wonderful to see positive changes in those you interview. Study Clarence Darrow (1857-1938) by Doug Linder (2004) A short biographical essay. Clarence Darrow, born the son of a coffin maker, Americus Darrow. ...

Then read: Clarence Darrow for the defense.

Clarence Darrow's biographies are heavily laden with Evolution vs Creation. That is much too narrow a view. Darrow championed many that were hopelessly wronged. To help him persuade others what was a right & proper course, he read extensively. He used reason in public court to defend others...

Clarence Darrow defended those that might otherwise have soon been a customer of his father's coffin making business.

You have skills & resources to do even more... better.

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

Chip is right

Pay attention to his words.

He says that reporters (a specific profession with specific ethical codes of conduct) can have personal opinions but must not express them on air and must work to eliminate bias in their questions.

He says that commentators (another profession) air their opinions publicly.

It's a matter of professional definition.

+ Follow the Cooperative principle
+ Civility first
+ Constructive comments

Jan Helfeld's picture

He does offer his opinions in other safe venues

He does offer his opinions in other safe venues.

Jan Helfeld

Will Roger, humorist, yet another profession, didn't make it up!

Will Rogers stuck to the facts. Oft on staqe for all to see, he would read current newspapers... lamenting folks refused to believe him. As his audiance laughed at what he presented, he would back up stated claims with newspaper citations. To his audience, Will Rogers was an astonishment.

He figured folks would be more interested in learning rope tricks. He continually taught them rope tricks on stage, few picked up his knack. Most remembered him as if he was telling jokes. Actually, he was mostly reading newspapers & adding perspective. His rope tricks were much better than the news he was reading. He was a rope trick artisan, belovedly remembered as a wit... An American cowboy icon.

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

"I haven't got a brain." -Scarecrow, Wizard of Oz

Don't a lot of people do a lot of talking that haven't got a brain?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7Lod6Oiro4 - 1 minute casting call. Are you ready for the part?

This video is a short documentary about the casting of Ray Bolger as The Scarecrow in the MGM classic film 'The Wizard Of Oz (1939)' Bolger had originally been cast as The Tin Man, but faught and won his dream role he played in the movie.

Narrated by Angela Lansbury

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

I have to say I think you

I have to say I think you came across a little bit bad here Jan. Firstly, I think it is ok to express an opinion and be unbias as long as the other side of the coin is explored as well. The guy is right though, if he expresses opinions then he does become somewhat of a commentator. I really don't like him, he comes off as a total sleaze, but that is my opinion :)

Secondly cutting off the women who you were asking the question to, to force through your point really didn't look good. It definitely showed them (and everyone else) that you had an agenda. Which really turns me off a reporter. I know sometimes you have to battle to get them to tell the truth and sometimes making them feel uncomfortable is the right thing, but here it did not feel like the correct method.

that was...

uncomfortably repetitive.

that was...

uncomfortable repetitive.

Jan I think you are dancing around a larger issue

in that any news is inherently and unavoidably biased. This is because choosing what stories to cover and what stories not to is a constant decision for every reporter, even those within niches. How often have we remarked that a huge Ron Paul-related story is not being covered at all by the MSM? Is that what makes something newsworthy? Or is it that censorship and bias takes the form of a cartel of a few media conglomerates collectively ignoring that which they consider a threat?

Jan Helfeld's picture

his opinions determine the questions he asks

That was one of my points, his opinions determine the questions he asks and think are important.

Jan Helfeld

SteveMT's picture

Opinions frame the questions asked.

You better believe that these reporters are asked their opinions when interviewing for their respective jobs. If their opinions do not match their employers opinions, they are not hired, period. If they are flip-foppers and go whichever way the winds blows like Romney and Gingrich, then that also works.

I was gonna weigh in...

about how Jan is absolutely right to make these people uncomfortable with their own contradictions, in response to some of the "why are you doing this" comments below. Then I saw he already responded to them.

So: What Jan said. :)

I believe it. They're all

I believe it. They're all just Ron Burgundy's now. Guys with good hair and hot women who don't think too much.

At 35 seconds in

that totally looks like Tasha Reign in the back....

I was wonderin who in the world is Tasha Reign,

Then I googled the name, clicked on Images and got a bunch of O faces, need I say more? Thanks for that.lol

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

First off, let me say that I

First off, let me say that I appreciate you going out there and trying to influence the public discourse in the Ron Paul direction. That's great.

However, let me address your line of reasoning.

Everyone has opinions, but not everyone is free to voice them publicly.

A judge presiding over a trial might have a hunch about whether the defendant is guilty, but cannot speak publicly. That would be a mistrial.

A teacher can have an opinion about who the smartest kid in the class is. But he/she won't voice that opinion in an interview. It would compromise the classroom social dynamic.

A marriage counselor might think the husband is an asshole and the wife is a sweetheart, but he/she won't say that out loud. The therapy would be ruined.

Yes, this has to do with perception of objectivity, rather than the sterile, philosophically pure objectivity which you seem to think exists in the world. Nonetheless, perception is important, because people respect a process that is FAIR, one that allows many perspectives to be voiced, even ones that disagree with you.

If the "referee", the person who is mediating such meetings of viewpoints, is himself viewed to be biased, the whole discussion is compromised.

Jan Helfeld's picture

Are you going to answer the questions that I asked?

Are you going to answer the questions I asked or not? My questions are not rhetorical, I want to know what you think. Do you think it would harm you answer them or just reveal the contradictions in your thinking?

I have not argued that everyone has to answer every question in every context. These are questions about public policy, not personal issues or information. It is good for citizens to discuss their views and the reasoning, that support them.
As far as your your views, I assume you think they are not objective, since you say pure objectivity does not exist.

Jan Helfeld

Good Interviews

I enjoy the interviews. I think it's good to examine the main stream media reporters. They are almost always interjecting an idea or opinion in their messages, despite most believing they are objective.

horrible interviews

Stop posting this guys stupid interviews. They aren't good. He's always asking loaded questions of people who interview others, they know the trick, why would they expose themselves to such a stupid line of questions? Geez, why do people think he's doing a good job when he's clearly pissing people off while trying to get a gotcha moment that's just not coming.

I disagree

The questions he is asking are actually real, unlike typical journalists. He is trying to get to the root of principles that the politicians/pundits have and pointing out there hypocrisy when applying their own principles against their opinions. His interviews are intellectually stimulating..and I am sure you and I would actually like to be interviewed this way as we would learn something about ourselves. The sad thing is when challenging someone that is pandering, whether its a reporter or politician, they get terrified when they realize that they are going to have to give a rigid answer on a question that divides people in voting, viewership, etc.

The problem is that you are so used to MSM type interviews. The one's that are very easy and lame towards establishment tools. However, when they interview a Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Peter Schiff, etc. they continue to ask the same inane questions about third parties, droppping out, newsletters, etc. to elicit a sensational headline. That is badgering. Our guy just happens to be a gentleman and an expert in turing the same stupid questions into an educational answer when he gets the chance.

I say that Jan is providing a refreshing way of interviewing. From one interview with Jan, a politician that has been interviewed 100 times by others, can be completely exposed with disruptions in their platform, ideology, and rhetoric. This is something that must be done in order for the Press to help the public once again, not the gov't/elite.

I agree

This is just badgering.

Ignore the media's lies and propaganda.

Jan Helfeld's picture

What do you mean by loaded questions?

What do you mean by loaded questions?

Jan Helfeld

Dude. You really should

Dude. You really should start taking a different line of questioning. You can't continue to ask news reporters if they have personal opinions about the issues they cover. It's Journalism 101 to be "objective," and they're not going to break their silence for you. It's conventional wisdom that reporters don't offer opinions on political stories, if they are professionally involved in reporting those stories.

Your Socratic method is very contrived, and don't think the people you interview don't see through it and know exactly what you are driving at.

I think you'd be doing the world a greater service if you interviewed the decision makers, not the chattering class, and demand that THEY explain their opinions about important issues.

Jan Helfeld's picture

Why do you think the Socratic method is contrived?

Do you think two contradictory conclusions can both be true? If a reporter says he has no opinions, and then says he does have opinions has he contradicted himself? Isn't he necessarily mistaken?

Have you ever heard these so-called reporters give their opinions? I certainly have. Some of them only put forth their opinions in safe venues where their opinions cannot be examined.

If reporters don't give their opinions, their reasoning to support these opinions cannot be examined. The result is that the nonsense in their head never comes out and influences the questions that they ask. The end result is that they do not reveal the contradictions in the political leaders thinking and the flaws in their public policies. Who pays? The citizens that have to live with the bad policies. This is why I interviewed them. Capiche.

Jan Helfeld

It's OK to see these people squirm a little.

I disagree. Jan's question is maybe not to get a response about their opinions but to get them to think about how their opinions slant their questions as a reporter. If, for example, Chip Reid has an opinion that Iran is full of crazy lunatics ready to set of a nuke and disintegrate the planet then his questions might be aimed at getting others to agree with his opinion. I once ask a TV reporter why he didn't ask questions about a subject he personally considered controversial and said he couldn't go there on that subject it was “too far out there”. I think it really has to do a lot with a fear of criticism from co workers, the boss or the public in general. If people like Chip Reid reported on the UC Berkeley rally he might get a lot of flack from many “professional” corners. There is nothing wrong with reporting on the reporters. It is like checking up on the overseers or in government the Inspector Generals. We are the overseer of last resort and this is our duty.
Jan's questions are interesting. It's OK to see these people squirm a little.